"Matt Barrow" wrote:


Just so you know, _consensus_ is a political term, not a scientific one.
(IOW, your ass is showing...oh, get real indignant now!!!)

Oh, please, Matt. I ain't Green Peace.

Politics vs. Science:

Science Method
1) Gather all pertinent FACTS
2) Analyze
3) Reach conclusions

Political Method
1) Establish pre-ordained conclusions
2) Cherry pick "facts" that (maybe) pertain to predetermined conclusion
(or spin the hell out of them)
3) Draft press release or Congressional testimony
4) (Optional) Loudly and shrilly condemn critics as fascists an racists.
5) (Optional) Bury data sources and data streams

I have no argument with any of that. The former is what real scientists do;
the latter is what I hear on talk radio and TV every day. But I am a layman
with a business to run; at some point, I have to decide: shall I return to
university and become thoroughly educated on climatology, or shall I judge
by what the preponderance of peer-reviewed science has concluded?

What do you conclude about the issue of anthropogenic climate change? Why?

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM