Deniers and Believers
Posted by Jeff Id on February 12, 2010
Just a quick blog on some interesting observations today. When this machine’s harddrive went down, I lost a ton of data. Very oddly, the hd is partially bootable and I just at this moment realized that despite the fact that the laptop has only one drive bay, the SATA interface can be plugged into my primary machine at work. Perhaps I can recover my data after all. Anyway, that’s slowing down my messing around with temp data but I have a really cool post from NicL where he used regularized regression with UAH and ground data to create a global trend. He asked me to wait until the morning for that though.
From this link.
Skepticism is an honest search for knowledge. It is an approach to claims akin to the scientific method. It is a powerful and positive methodology (a collection of methods of inquiry) that is used to evaluate claims and make decisions. It is used to search for the (provisional) truth in matters and to make decisions that are based on sound reasoning, logic, and evidence. Skepticism is based on a simple method: doubt and inquiry. The idea is to neither initially accept claims nor dismiss them; it’s about questioning them and testing them for validity. Only after inquiry does a skeptic take a stance on an issue.
Today, I was thinking about skeptics. After all, there are many writings around the internet discussing how climate sceptics are disorganized and don’t have a central point of belief, or consensus of message about which they congregate. It’s a beautiful argument for those who don’t understand what makes a skeptic but as a questioning skeptical person, the answer is pretty obvious. Ya’ can’t force a natural skeptic into a consensus (thus the URL), however, you can convince them of your position once you’ve laid out your case in complete enough detail.
Earlier, a fellow blogger pointed to an internet article titled ‘How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic’. One paragraph with a bunch of links, which will presumably convince people like me that I should give up any skepticism on climate, is shown below.
In what I hope is an improvement on the original categorization, they have been divided and subdivided along 4 seperate lines: Stages of Denial, Scientific Topics, Types of Argument, Levels of Sophistication. This should facilitate quick retrieval of specific entries. Individual articles will appear under multiple headings and may even appear in multiple subcategories in the same heading.
I’ve become jaded enough in the last three months about climate, that I haven’t read several of the links. The correct way to talk to a skeptic is to EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION AND GIVE CLEAR ANSWERS. That’s it. So simple, no guides required, but from the link’s I did read, the blog linked above should have said – how to talk to a denier.
A denier is a different beast, cut from the same cloth as a believer. A denier knows that a position is flatly wrong. A denier of man made global warming knows intuitively that any argument for climate change by man is absolutely false. A denier has the same mentality as a believer but doesn’t admit it.
Two sides of the same coin.