On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 8:31 AM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Gar Lipow <[email protected]> wrote: >> But if the Newton / Royal Society mail scandal is true, it is a blow >> to the Renaissance lobby’s credibility which is never likely to >> recover.
> > That won't do. Over the last 3 centuries since Newton, we have > developed a certain code of ethics that anyone doing scientific work > is supposed to abide by. The climate scientists fail by any acceptable > ethical standard. You can argue that they are just a few bad apples if > you want, but please don't try and justify their behavior as somehow > acceptable. It is not. > -raghu. Acceptability of behavior is not the point. The point is that behavior on the part of climate scientists no more reflects the truth or falsity of their data and analysis, than bad behavior on the part of Newton reflects on the truth or falsity of gravity or calculus. It is the classic ad hominem fallacy; "this is false because of your character flaws". Separately, some of this cherry picked, misinterperted and taken out of context. Some of it may be legitamately contemptible. I'll wait and see on that. But the main point is that is that this is irrevelevent to any debate over climate change. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
