The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Opening closed minds > Comments

Opening closed minds : Comments

By Des Moore, published 12/10/2010

The Royal Society, Britain’s top dog in science, has just published a report signalling the end of claims of a consensus by some climate scientists.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All
When the head of the Royal Society was interviewed originally, a Dr Rees, an astronomer, my impression was that he knew nothing about the debate. He seemed to think that there were no scientists at all opposed to the sceince, and there really was a consensus. Its nice to see someone has told him something about the debate, but basically the Royal Society shouldn't be involved at all. Since when do scientific bodies take positions on such matters? Its as if the society had declared itself for out of africa as opposed to the mult-regional model in the recent human origins debate?
The society should not have made its original declarations and they should not have issued the recent positiuon paper or whatever it is.
Posted by Curmudgeon, Tuesday, 12 October 2010 1:25:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ozandy.. trot yourself back to the foot of the socialist/green/progressive throne where you worship the compiled (barren)works of socialism and just let the truth be told.

The only reason the voice of responsible scientists have not been heard so much till now is that they have been systematically excluded for POLITICAL reasons.

The Fabian strategy for world income redistrubution using the 'Green global warming crisis' as the catelyst is doomed.

The Wood cutter is coming quickly and will soon CHOP down that ugly wolf (lves) who is/are trying to enslave the free world.

Red riding hood voters might not have tweaked to the true nature of that wolf...but remember one thing..when she finally DID..and it all seemed too late......that's when the hero entered and saved her.

You might like to reflect on the fate of the wolf too.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Tuesday, 12 October 2010 1:34:10 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a hoot. A propaganda hack writing for Quadrant magazine complaining or writing about "closed minds".
Posted by Ho Hum, Tuesday, 12 October 2010 2:15:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mark/Curmudgeon, you're joking, right?

'Sceptics' demanded the Royal Society investigate and clarify their position. Now they have, the 'sceptics' don't want to know about it, or they cry foul - this is just so typical of numerous investigations of late.

Now you're saying that scientific academies and institutions "should not take a position on such matters? Or that they should not have issued the recent position paper or whatever it is (sic)?"

Yeah, right - shut them up, censor them, shout down the science, dumb down the public - and you're some kind of scientific journo/writer/author?

In my opinion, it's media types with that same attitude that are deliberately damaging and misrepresenting the science, and are delaying much needed debate on what actions and policies need to be undertaken, or not.
Posted by bonmot, Tuesday, 12 October 2010 2:27:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
bonmot .."delaying much needed debate on what actions and policies need to be undertaken, or not."

So now you guys want a debate?

all we ever hear from the media, ABC Farfax is that the debate is over .. when we all know there never was a debate, just an eco led "consensus", now that it is swinging the other way .. you want a debate.

then there's the greenies type of debate, only believers can attend - or an ABC debate where everyone agrees with each other

make up your mind .. do you want an open debate, or just to shut up the disagreers?

I suspect you meant the debate is on what to tax, and how much, not whether we need to do anything at all ..myes?

I agree with the others, institutions shou.d not close their minds and "declare" a position .. though I suspect again it is all due to funding positions and reputations .. yes?
Posted by rpg, Tuesday, 12 October 2010 3:27:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes rpg, a debate - on a carbon price or an ETS, on land use management/practices, on catchment management/water resources, on local planning issues, on transportation and infrastructure needs, on energy efficiencies, on renewable energy alternatives/nuclear/geothermal/solarthermal/etc, on tariffs/subsidies, on government regulation/free market mechanisms, etc, etc (add to the list yourself).

Not a debate on the science rpg, the scientists can and do that well enough, through the scientific process and peer review - although I do find it amusing that everybody that is not a climate scientist (e.g. electricians, accountants, engineers, teachers, etc, etc) insist the experts have got it all wrong and the experts don't have a clue what they're talking about LOL.

Yes, a debate on how, when and what to do about global warming, rpg. That's what the UNFCCC have been doing, that's want industry leaders need, that's what progressive people want.

The others, well they appear to only want to debate or deny the science. It really is time to move on, that is my opinion anyway.

And please, don't take the statement "the science is settled" out of context - it is never settled, per se. That is why there is a process of "debating" the science - not by media columnists, shock-jocks or those pushing their own ideological agenda, as we've seen above.
Posted by bonmot, Tuesday, 12 October 2010 4:47:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy