Michael Tobis wrote:
> Oog. This is coming up pretty high in Google searches for me. That
> could turn out to be awkward.
>
> Let me add, in the interests of being perceived as an honest and fair
> person, that I have equally little patience for people who have made up
> their mind and use science selectively to advocate the other "side" of
> this question. They tend to be a little less sophisticated and less
> funded on this particular issue, but they are equally unhelpful.
Do you think that this description applies to (m)any climate scientists?
> Advocacy isn't science. That's the problem.
IMO and IME plenty of scientists (in all fields) advocate their beliefs
pretty much as strongly as they can. In a perfect world perhaps they
would all spend their time looking for the weakest points in their own
theories rather than criticising their opponents, but that's not the way
the world works.
James
--
s
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
