Climate change skepticism: you're doing it wrong

http://www.jgc.org/blog/2010/02/climate-change-skepticism-youre-doing.html

by jgrahamc • 16 years ago

18 18 16 years ago

rimantas• 16 years ago

I did not know that all skepticism relied on one picture. Actually I never saw that picture before…

epochwolf2• 16 years ago

According to the article it was a picture in two british newspapers. Hardly a basis to claim all skeptics are doing this. In fact the claim makes the exact same errors the newspapers did: looking at data out of context.

It's two newspapers in the UK that could very possibly be using a single reporter's work and reviewed by editors that don't understand proper research. It's happened before at many other newspapers.

astine• 16 years ago

"One picture does not a systematic investigation make."

No, but it makes a great polemical tool, like polar bears sitting on melting ice and so-forth.

vixen99• 16 years ago

I hope there are stronger rejoinders in the pipeline than this one. Evidence of crumbling (if not collapse) of stout party comes with the final retort 'And even if it was ....'.

Thermometers located adjacent to aircraft parking areas? Sounds eminently sensible!

And which serious sceptic is claiming that 'one bad thermometer doesn't mean climate change can be thrown out the window.'?

Tichy• 16 years ago

Just the other day a story about the percentage of the Netherlands below sea levels being wrong in some article got a lot of upvotes on hacker news...

CapitalistCartr• 16 years ago

Yeah this is what is commonly known as a straw man argument. Actual climate skepticism is at least as complex as climate theory, and one newspaper's incompetence in reporting isn't even news. If anything, this would make a good anecdote regarding current mainstream press' sloppy reporting.

ZeroGravitas• 16 years ago

This reminded me of the "one way hash" rhetorical technique. I'd actually forgotten that the term was coined in relation to climate change discussions.

http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/04/06/climate-change-and-a...

DanielBMarkham• 16 years ago

John,

I have a bit of cognitive dissonance going on here. I scanned this and have no idea what you're trying to do.

Is it to take one picture used by some skeptics and try to base an entire case of what climate science is like?

If so, that's clearly using a straw man argument.

Of course, in lots of dimensions climate change is a political/religious discussion, and you've every right to use all sorts of rhetorical tools to persuade us. But since your point is about science, logic, and reasoning, why the heavy-handed format? You're actually making the case that you're not so good at the science end of things, and that certainly can't be what you wanted, right?

jgrahamc4• 16 years ago

Probably not one of my best blog posts, I was just mad about the way in which two newspapers in the UK have reported the Rome airport situation as part of larger stories about how climate change apparently isn't happening.

epochwolf2• 16 years ago

I just find it ironic that you're making the same error in judgement that the newspapers did.

moron4hire3• 16 years ago

8% of weather stations are rated as "poor" (>= 2C error) and 61% of stations are rated as "worst" (>= 5C error). It's not just "one bad thermometer". It's the vast majority of thermometers that are bad. http://www.surfacestations.org/

jgrahamc4• 16 years ago

I agree that those are the claims made by Surface Stations. Do you know if their raw data is available for download? I see their report on what they are doing, but I would be great to see the raw, uninterpreted data about their findings.

moron4hire3• 16 years ago

They're hidden in an obscure, non-standard UI element known as the "left side bar menu", with cryptically named links "Online Database" and "Resources".

http://gallery.surfacestations.org/main.php http://www.surfacestations.org/resources.htm

mml• 16 years ago

yeah, um, but they've recorded a couple of hundred even worse situations (next to ac exhaust, in asphalt lots etc)

azgolfer• 16 years ago

I would say it's the proponents that are doing it wrong. The supposedly independent and objective inquiry into the climategate scandal has already had one member forced to resign (the editor of Nature, btw) http://climateaudit.org/2010/02/11/the-team-that-cant-shoot-...

and now another member looks very questionable

http://climateaudit.org/2010/02/15/more-tricks-from-boulton-...

Climate change skepticism: you're doing it wrong

Related Stories