Global Warning/Climate Change

Things that are not part of politics happening presently and how we approach or address it as Anabaptists.
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8522
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Robert »

Bootstrap wrote:And really, an awful lot of my energy on this thread has been about one question: how do we identify reliable sources of scientific information like scientific journals, scientific associations, literature reviews done by scientists, etc.
A lot of your energy has been spent on this. 8-)

I jut like to post things the bring the established beliefs into question.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

Robert wrote:
Bootstrap wrote:And really, an awful lot of my energy on this thread has been about one question: how do we identify reliable sources of scientific information like scientific journals, scientific associations, literature reviews done by scientists, etc.
A lot of your energy has been spent on this. 8-)

I just like to post things that bring the established beliefs into question.
Beliefs? On a scientific level, I think most of this is about data and how to measure and interpret it. Both in individual experiments and as a larger scientific community.

These days, you can find anything you want on the Internet, and that can sometimes give the impression that facts no longer exist, everything is just a matter of opinion, your beliefs versus my beliefs. That's very different from the academic world I have lived in. Some things are just matters of opinion, but for matters of fact, we try to look carefully at the facts together, over time, and let the facts form our opinions instead of the other way around. Of course, we are only human, we are influenced by our opinions, our grasp of facts is limited, some special interests are trying to put their thumbs on the scales, and we always know only in part ... but the scientific community knows all that, and tries to take that into account.

Here's something that troubles me on both the extreme right and the extreme left: there is often an attitude that "we" are the people who know the truth, "they" are just victims of groupthink, "they" are distorting science in pursuit of their own opinions, etc. It is no longer a question of facts, it's tribal groupthink on both sides. It's people willingly buying into propaganda instead of careful pursuit of facts. And the main solution I see is to remind ourselves constantly that facts exist and we can look at them, carefully, together.

But that's best done by leaning on sources that scientists would accept as reliable. There is just so much hogwash on the Internet that there is no value in discussing every graphic or website that confirms a particular opinion. And because the time and expertise required to do this well is enormous, for most of us, this is something we can do best by reading summaries that the scientific community provides for us. The alternative is to really get down into the weeds. For instance, John Christy claims that the scientific community, as a whole, overstates global warming. The basis for his claim is satellite temperatures. There are two main scientific groups working with satellite temperatures, the Huntsville group and the RSS group, and they disagree. Their disagreement centers on how this data is interpreted - neither group "simply measures" the temperature, they each apply the same corrections, but they disagree on exactly how to do that. The RSS results largely agree with the other measures we have of warming, the Huntsville results say global warming is much less than that. So who is right? That depends on some very technical things like the right value of the NOAA-9 variable used in the correction formula. And even having that discussion requires a level of depth that is probably not going to happen on MN. Even if we were capable of it, it would drive everyone else nuts.

But if you are curious, here is a paper written by members of both groups, explaining where they differ on interpreting satellite data: Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere - Understanding and Reconciling Differences. Christy leads the Huntsville group, Mears leads the RSS group. One particularly important part is this section: "What measures can be taken to improve the understanding of observed changes?" This is how science should work - get the people who disagree together in one room, make them look carefully at the data and think about what it would take to come up with answers both would accept as reliable.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8522
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Robert »

Bootstrap wrote:Beliefs? On a scientific level, I think most of this is about data and how to measure and interpret it.
Yes, you do and using a statement of "I think" means it is a belief.

I think there is a exaggerated push and paranoia of climate change. I believe that there is much that is not known and most all are making projections ignoring this ignorance. I have reasons for believing this. I have and will continue to present information that supports my belief. I am happy to hear new information, but have a deep distrust of top down control of governing bodies and manipulation of facts so the elites can control more. I distrust any scientist or person in control that says the science is "settled" because anyone who truly knows science knows nothing is settled. I see it as a way to shut down alternative thinking and investigation. I ask, why would even crazy ideas be shut down unless there is another reason, political, to shut it down. Yes, this is what "I think" is going on. This makes me distrust the process even more, since scientific exploration and evaluation is all about new information.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Hats Off »

It is certainly good that all this hot air between Robert and Bootstrap is web based. think of how much climate change would be created if they talked orally or put everything down on paper.


learned a trick from Robert - increasing my post count
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

Robert wrote:I am happy to hear new information, but have a deep distrust of top down control of governing bodies and manipulation of facts so the elites can control more. I distrust any scientist or person in control that says the science is "settled" because anyone who truly knows science knows nothing is settled. I see it as a way to shut down alternative thinking and investigation. I ask, why would even crazy ideas be shut down unless there is another reason, political, to shut it down. Yes, this is what "I think" is going on. This makes me distrust the process even more, since scientific exploration and evaluation is all about new information.
But how do you know what is information and what is propaganda? How do you link things back to facts that people can come to agree on?

And how do you know that the people funding the things you are finding aren't elites working for some multinational and simply trying to increase their profit margins? How do you even know what process they used to create the sources you are quoting?

Nobody is "shutting down" these ideas, you can find them all over the Internet, and some of them are very well funded - with budgets much larger than the budget of the IPCC. But I would like to see them disclose their funding sources, tell us who they are, and provide their data in transparent ways so that the scientific community can examine it. If they do that, their work becomes part of the debate, gets quoted by the IPCC, and has to be taken into account.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
ohio jones
Posts: 5222
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: undisclosed
Affiliation: Rosedale Network

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by ohio jones »

Bootstrap wrote:Even if we were capable of it, it would drive everyone else nuts.
Those of us not in macademia may be driven to consider the distorted-thread locknut. :geek:
0 x
I grew up around Indiana, You grew up around Galilee; And if I ever really do grow up, I wanna grow up to be just like You -- Rich Mullins

I am a Christian and my name is Pilgram; I'm on a journey, but I'm not alone -- NewSong, slightly edited
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8522
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Robert »

Bootstrap wrote:But how do you know what is information and what is propaganda?
I don't always. Again, I enjoy posting things that bring question to the established view that I think is built on a house of cards.

(*) No world leaders are reading MennoNet.
Bootstrap wrote:How do you link things back to facts that people can come to agree on?
I post what I think sounds reasonable. I use my judgement. If I am wrong, so be it. See *
Bootstrap wrote:And how do you know that the people funding the things you are finding aren't elites working for some multinational and simply trying to increase their profit margins?
I don't. See *
Bootstrap wrote:How do you even know what process they used to create the sources you are quoting?
I try to evaluate and balance it from other things I have learned. See *
Bootstrap wrote:Nobody is "shutting down" these ideas
I have heard calls that deniers be silenced, not allowed to hold public office and removed from any place of authority. How is that not shutting down new input?
Bootstrap wrote:their work becomes part of the debate, gets quoted by the IPCC, and has to be taken into account.
When that happens, I will be sure to post it in here too.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

Robert wrote:
Bootstrap wrote:But how do you know what is information and what is propaganda?
I don't always. Again, I enjoy posting things that bring question to the established view that I think is built on a house of cards.
Have you actually read the IPCC report? How familiar are you with the level of evidence and the procedures they use?
Robert wrote:
Bootstrap wrote:Nobody is "shutting down" these ideas
I have heard calls that deniers be silenced, not allowed to hold public office and removed from any place of authority. How is that not shutting down new input?
For what it's worth, I am against all of those things. And I really think the vast majority of Americans are too, this is still a democracy.

On the other hand, I might well take a candidate's ability to absorb science into account when choosing who to vote for.
Last edited by Bootstrap on Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8522
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Robert »

Bootstrap wrote: Have you actually read the IPCC report? How familiar are you with the level of evidence and the procedures they use?
Not lately. I have little trust in them.

How much have you read from the Heritage Foundation? How familiar are you with the level of evidence and the procedures they use?
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

Robert wrote:
Bootstrap wrote: Have you actually read the IPCC report? How familiar are you with the level of evidence and the procedures they use?
Not lately. I have little trust in them.

How much have you read from the Heritage Foundation? How familiar are you with the level of evidence and the procedures they use?
Reasonably familiar, actually. Largely because I have frequently tried to track things down when someone posts something here. I have read quite a few things they have written. It's a Washington think tank, it exists to promote certain views, not to explore things scientifically and see where the data leads.
The mission of The Heritage Foundation is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.
They aren't even pretending to be a scientific research institute. Some of their policy papers are quite good, but whenever your read stuff written by a Washington think tank on any part of the political spectrum, special interests are probably funding and influencing it.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Post Reply