Quote:
Originally Posted by sounding
No ... follow-the-data only requires eyes, common sense, and logic. It's easier than you think. Relinquishing "science" to others is extremely dangerous, unless that scientist has a proven track record -- like Al Gore. He had no climate change track record -- and all his forecasts failed. There are many past examples of millions being killed based on corrupted science, which is often associated with the equally dangerous term Consensus ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1-FxwVkQ60 |
If you don't understand where the data came from, how it was collected, and what the limitations of the collection platform are then you cannot properly interpret it. This was easy to see with the COVID denials.
I don't know which side of this debate is correct but it is not convincing to hear someone with no proven climate change track record telling me they are right and the other experts are wrong. Confirmation bias and emphatic assertion do not make convincing arguments.
__________________
Why do people insist on making claims without looking them up first, do they really think no one will check? Proof by emphatic assertion rarely works.
Confirmation bias is real; I can find any number of articles that say so.
Victor, NY - Randallstown, MD - Yakima, WA - Stevensville, MD - Village of Hillsborough
|