No, I'm not claiming scientific authority at all. I hadn't heard about the beer story and haven't looked it up but I don't doubt that it is very possible that that research was a joke, and that there might be lots of other published research that is nonsense as well. My argument is that if a large majority of scientists claim that we are headed for destruction, it is wise to listen and act, especially if acting is easy. Unless you can prove that they are wrong. But that's not happening in this thread at all. You guys might be right and there is no such thing as global warming but if the world bases their acting on your opinion and you turn out to be wrong then we're all in big trouble. Maybe it's naive to go along with what the majority of scientists believe, but there are countless examples in life of this. So I asked, how do you choose which side to believe, why do you believe what a minority of scientists believe ? What are your arguments that there is no global warming ? Can you evaluate the scientific research that has been done and if so, have you done that and do you find it irrelevant (like the beer research) ? Obviously M&M can't and I can't either.tegirinenashi wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:47 pmSpeaking in kiting terms, your timing is off. This is not the best time to claim scientific authority over the issue. Witness the beer story making this week headlines. Tell me it is not a Barley Science.Pemba wrote:... Suposedly 97 % (well a high percentage anyway) of scientists believes in global warming, but you know better. Another bulshit detector, or if not how do you decide what to believe ?...
Let's examine their research. They fixed dozens (if not hundreds) of beer growing variables, except one: temperature. There is nothing wrong with it, that is what scientists routinely do in order to distill the dependency on individual factors. However, how much prediction power their model (experiment, whatever) has? Zero, because numerous other beer growing variables are more significant than temperature.
For me to justify not doing anything, you'd have to prove that there is no global warming. Obviously you're entitled to your opinion and I agree that there are some in the believers camp that appear to consider themselves superior in their majority opinion, but in ridiculing that opinion, you appear to be inclined the same way.