An article by David Biello in Scientific American’s online page starts off prejudicially: the CRU files are “stolen”. Actually they might have been, or might not have been. But this is an editorial, not a science piece, as becomes obvious.
Next, Biello points to the continuing warming such as the reduction in Arctic ice, never mind that Antarctic ice is increasing and the overall ice pack is larger now than in 1980, as I have shown before.
Biello says that the green house effect still happens, that glaciers are shrinking etc etc, and goes directly from there into the argument from authority: there is a consensus of authorities that proves the science is settled, it’s human contribution that’s doing it, and he quotes Michael Mann.
In fact, he quotes Michael Mann as an expert on peer review. And Mann is quoted frequently throughout the article. It’s as if the sole defense in a murder case is the testimony of the suspect that – he didn’t do it.
I think that it is possible here that SciAm is caught in the same intellectual integrity snare that has trapped the CRU perps. They have not yet defended science and the scientific method; rather they defend their lapse by defending the CRU crew with unsound and even demonstrably false statements.
No comments:
Post a Comment