What the denial movement has wrought: the collapse of public trust in science

I had the following conversation at http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2010/04/27/what-the-denial-movement-has-wrought-the-collapse-of-public-trust-in-science/

rogerthesurf (02:22:05) :

With all due respect I would submit that the IPCC associated scientists have brought the public distrust upon themselves.




27 04 2010
Watching the Deniers (02:43:52) :

I’m curious Roger… how so? They’ve been cleared by two inquiries so far. Conspiracy? Fraud? Mann cleared by Penn state. Head of IPCC cleared by KPMG of any charges of monetary fraud.

Sadly I think you read the article and missed the point: people discount the science when it clashes with their personal worldviews.

The creationists claim that evolutionary scientists are engaged in a conspiracy to silence them.


“What can we do? Criminal prosecution of scientists who manipulate data would be a good start. Scientists who fake data and manipulate peer review to advance their agenda are no different than corporate executives who manipulate stock prices or lawyers who tamper with juries. Ultimately, perhaps massive defunding of organized science, and a new system of support for research that demands utter transparency and maximal accommodation of debate, may be the only way to defend ourselves from an utterly corrupt scientific elite…”

So speak the creationists. Let’s destroy science because we don’t like it’s results. Which is why the denial movement and creationists are linking hands.

One can’t pick and choose the results of science. Can I ask:

1) can you back up your statement with evidence, not blog posts or op-ed peices from WUWT and other sites?
2) do you accept the evidence for evolution, the big bang and an earth <4bn years old?

I strive to provide evidence in every statement I make and use reason. Can you?

Have a nice day!

27 04 2010
rogerthesurf (03:00:20) :

I think everyone has to use their own reasoning for deciding on what they believe in this case.

I was in this case actually refering to the list of clangers and the evidence of poor sources and peer reviewing emerging from the latest IPCC report.



PS yes I can justify every statement I make. And I always look beyond the IPCC.
The big bang theory or evolution theory are not going to hit me in my pocket and possibly starve me and my family so they dont worry me too much.
Why not visit http://www.globalwarmingsupporter.wordpress.com where my position is more clearly described.

27 04 2010
Watching the Deniers (05:23:34) :


Actually evolution hits your pocket and your well being, given how medicine now uses evolutionary theory for designing medicine:



Indeed your health, and the health of your loved ones is dependent on our basic understanding of evolutionary biology.

Evolutionary concepts are also now used in engineering:


I think when the effects of climate change start to happening you will be paying a lot more. Do you really base all your decisions on your hip pocket? Is that not a rather limited view of the world? A little solipsistic perhaps?

I agree with you to a point, it’s up to the individual to decide their position: however, that is no guarantee they are right. Whether the earth is round or flat is not a matter of public opinion.

It just is.

Again, I think you miss the point of the article. It’s about how the public’s trust in science is being deliberately undermined. Indeed, you confirm the studies main finding:

>> People will reject the scientific consensus if it does not accord with their personal beliefs.

You think AGW is a scam to rip you off. Erog, it *must* be a scam. Can you not see the cognitive dissonance there?

P.S. I note you seem to be a believer in UN conspiracy theories. My answer: ho hum.

Have a nice day!

I think engineering generally relies on mathematics and rigorous testing to find the truth.

I think the IPCC is unreliable as I said before because of the series of clangers emerging and the lack of common sense about many of the conclusions.
I would hasten to add though that the IPCC is a political organisation and no doubt influences the result of a lot of scientific research.

The most certain thing is though is, a fact that is obvious to any economist, that the IPCC Carbon Emission reduction requirements will break world economies and cause poverty and even starvation in western countries including yours and mine. Its just a little more than ones back pocket actually. Therefore if we are going to do these reductions, we better require a very high standard of proof from AGW theorists!

Conspiracy theories? Well reluctantly I have to conclude that AGW is a scam because it doesnt even begin to meet any criteria for fact at all and as I said, some of it doesn’t even make common sense. Check out this blog which is about the Club of Rome. http://green-agenda.com/index.html
Go to the Club of Rome website and check out the members then read some of their publications. Remember the Club of Rome site is not a blog and is dead serious.

If you want a referenced discussion I suggest you visit my blog at http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

You might be offended by the lampooning but if you can read past that, you will see how the unproven “Anthropogenic CO2 causes Global Warming” hypothesis actually suffers a measure of disproof.

Check out the links as well if you are interested.

You are welcome to disagree with me and tell me some facts if you have them because my mind is always open. However we should mutually agree to refrain from any name calling.



ps these comments will be posted at http://www.globalwarmingsupporter.wordpress.com 
The readers there enjoy a good discussion


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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

%d bloggers like this: