Climatology and Conspiracy Theorists

If you’re a person who prefers intelligent analysis over conspiracy theorizing, then check out this blog post about quote mining code

Let me be straight about the facts. 

The e-mails were supposedly stolen by hackers, but all of the e-mails haven’t yet been confirmed as authentic.  There is an investigation in determining their authenticity.  Assuming they’re authentic, the investigation will also determine precisely what was written in what context and what was the intended meaning of the comments (see above linked post for some preliminary analysis).  As such, the scientists in question are innocent until proven guilty.  Libelous attacks by climate change contrarians (what some call ‘denialists’) should be ignored.

Furthermore, I’ve so far seen no evidence that anything stated in the e-mailes contradicts or undermines the entire field of climatology.  The allegations are directed at a small number of scientists and all of the e-mails came from just one organization.  Assuming the allegations are true, it would be conspiracy theorizing to assume that these few scientists have enough control of the entire climatology field to alter all of the data in the world or that there is a secret cabal of climatologists controlling all research and publications. 

It is only fair and rational to ignore the conspiracy theories, but let us consider the implications of the more reasonable allegations against the specific scientists in question.  Even if we dismiss the data from these few scientists, there still is plenty of data from other sources that confirms the exact same conclusions of these scientists.  The consensus of climatologists includes scientists from all over the world including many highly respected scientists.  If anyone plans on trying to attack every climatologist in the world and dismiss all climatology research ever done, I’d love to see them try.

I think it’s time that people look at the facts instead of trying to run away from them.  Just my humble opinion.

3 thoughts on “Climatology and Conspiracy Theorists

  1. First of all, you are writing about backwards Europe, therefore they are guilty until prven innocent. Secondly, the emails point to a high degree of collusion and unscientific communications amongst the liberal scientific community. Any scientist will tell you that the way these people were discussing statistics and methodology ditrectly contrdicts the ver core principle of the scientific method, therefore all the experiments associated with this community should be disregarded and new experiments should be conducted.

    You guys need to wake up. Liberals want there to be “global warming” so badly that it is hard for the rational thinking person to comprehend.

    • I have strong opinions on the matter, but at present I’m not in the mood to argue about it with you.

      You start off with an unsubstantiated claim. Europe is backwards? Share some data to support your claim. Otherwise, it’s just meaningless opinonating to me.

      Cite precise sources and point out the specific research that proves Europe is backwards. Heck, simply define what backwards means in this context other than a generalized dismissal. Europe consists of many nations with many political viewpoints.

      “Any scientist” is just another unsubstantiated generalization. Give me a list of leading scientists and prove to me that their opinion represents most scientists. Prove to me that the alleged faults of a few scientists justifies the dismissal of all of the research of an entire field including thousands of scientists and hundreds of organizations.

      As for climatology, I don’t think of myself as either liberal or conservative. I simply trust science more than I trust those who seem anti-scientific in the same way that I trust scientists more than I trust Christian Creationists.

      Climatologists represents the most knowledgeable experts in a particular field. If we can’t trust the study of scientists despite the failings of a few scientists, then we should just give up as the human race and commit mass suicide. However, I prefer to trust that science isn’t as pathetically weak and incompetent as you contrarians portray it.

      If you wish to be so absolutely cynical, then it is your right to express your opinion. I just hope the anti-intellectuals such as yourself don’t become so loud that they scare the politicians into policies that are counter-productive to problems we need to be trying to understand using the best minds we have available to us (i.e., the scientific experts).

      I’m all for intelligent criticisms. My point is that the climatological contrarians aren’t offering any intelligent criticisms.

Please read Comment Policy before commenting.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s