Quiggin on junk science

Posted by Tim Lambert on April 18, 2004
(2)
More »

John Quiggin has an interesting post putting the disinformation peddled by folks like Steve Milloy and Iain Murray in a broader context:

But at some point, it must be necessary to abandon the case-by-case approach and adopt a summary judgement about people like Milloy and sites like TCS. Nothing they say can be trusted. Even if you can check their factual claims (by no means always the case) it’s a safe bet that they’ve failed to mention relevant information that would undermine their case. So unless you have expert knowledge of the topic in question, they’re misleading, and if you have the knowledge, they’re redundant.

Of course, there’s nothing surprising about paid lobbyists twisting the truth. What’s more disturbing is the fact that the same approach dominates the Bush Administration. Admittedly, governments have never had a perfectly pure approach to science, but the distortion of the process under Bush is unparalleled, to the extent that it has produced unprecedented protests from the scientific community. Natural scientists aren’t alone in this. Economists, social scientists and even military and intelligence experts are horrified by the way in which processes that are supposed to produce expert advice have been politicised.

(2)
More »

Comments

  1. #1 Ed Snack
    April 23, 2004

    Cuts both ways, you can’t trust the warmers at all either. They always fail to mention the gross uncertainties that taint their data. Or, like Mann, simply twist the data to suit their own ends. Do your own research into the data and judge for yourself.

    Ed

  2. #2 Mark Bahner
    May 23, 2004

    Ed Snack writes, “Cuts both ways, you can’t trust the warmers at all either.”

    Yes, that’s the absolutely hilarious thing about “global warmers” (e.g., the IPCC). It’s not like THEIR reports have any balance.

    I challenge anyone to find chapters in IPCC reports titled, “The benefits of global warming” that lay out all the positive changes that can realistically be expected from global warming (e.g. greater agricultural productivity, less people dying from extreme cold).

    The reality is: Trust No One. Be skeptical of everything. That’s a hallmark of true science.

    P.S. Which leads me to the observation of the hilarious situation that “global warmers” actually **deride** their opponents as “global warming skeptics.” Of course they are! So should everyone be!