Unofficial Allis Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Other Topics > Politics
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Settled Science

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Bob D. (La) View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: Louisiana
Points: 21772
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bob D. (La) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Settled Science
    Posted: 13 Jul 2018 at 4:01pm
CFACT

Settled Science







Is there a more self-contradictory term than "settled science?"
Science should always be open to challenge and investigation. The scientific method demands that conclusions must follow facts. We must never adjust the facts to suit a conclusion.

Sadly, this is not always the case.
We posted an article at CFACT.org which highlights how "Stanford University medical professor John Ioannidis, in an interview with Agence France Presse (AFP), blew the lid off the trustworthiness of the peer-review process."

[W]hen studies are replicated, they rarely come up with the same results. Only a third of the 100 studies published in three top psychology journals could be successfully replicated in a large 2015 test,” AFP reported, summarizing Ioannidis’ findings...

According to Ioannidis, the peer-review process guarantees little in terms of trustworthiness even before political agendas compromise the issue.
When only a third of peer-reviewed studies reach the same results when they are replicated by outside authors, this is a serious problem. Regarding climate change papers, the peer-reviewed papers are likely even less reliable – before even considering the inescapably political nature of the topic – because many papers address predictions and models for which it is impossible to test the paper’s conclusions against objective evidence. For example, when a scientist invents a climate model predicting rapid global warming or seriously negative future climate impacts, and when a paper summarizing the results of his or her model appears in a peer-reviewed journal, there is no way at the time of publication to compare the climate predictions against real-world observations. This adds an additional level of doubt to the accuracy of global warming predictions published in peer-reviewed science journals. And this is before taking into consideration the inherently political nature of the global warming debate and the political agendas of journal editors and their carefully selected article reviewers.
When science is sound its results hold up. Repeated experiments reach the same conclusions. There must be no “politicized” or "secret science." Data must be made available for all to scrutinize and there should be no coercion in terms of outcome. The scientific method must never be compromised.

Politics and rent-seeking greed have sadly infected the scientific process, particularly on the issue of climate. Global warming campaigners have treated peer-reviewed academic literature like sacred texts. However, the Climategate scandal revealed warming researchers were working diligently to exclude any science that contradicted their carefully honed, alarmist narrative from the literature.   

We should expect more from the scientific community.

Science is too important to accept less.
For nature and people too,



Craig Rucker
President





Read the facts and end secret science

Buy you copy today!


When you find yourself in a hole,PUT DOWN THE SHOVEL!!!
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
steve(ill) View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level
Avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: illinois
Points: 46633
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote steve(ill) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Jul 2018 at 5:25pm
Most of the TARDIES remind me of Chicken Little........... "The sky is falling " !!
Trump Is Not A Lib or Conserv, He's a "Pragmatist." (someone who is practical and focused on reaching a goal. Has a straightforward, matter-of-fact approach and doesn't let emotion distract him or her
Back to Top
DMiller View Drop Down
Orange Level
Orange Level


Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Location: Hermann, Mo
Points: 10891
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DMiller Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Jul 2018 at 5:59pm
On another board I asked of the Data Streams on CC Modeling, how much was discounted or thrown out as there is So Much data to input. Got the response expected, they ONLY input those data points the Scientific community considers as viable to produce a Good Model, too many data points and the processors lock up so no true picture based on ALL evidence has EVER been modeled or ever will be as the machinery at present cannot handle all the variables and potential variables to a phenomena as Weather. Was told "Would be as stating Earthquakes are predictable to within 100 miles to a given fault within a 24 hour period and reciting the Magnitude". Weather and cascading Climatologic manifestations are just as limited as to guessing what where or when.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.


Help Support the
Unofficial Allis Forum