It is deeply saddening that the anti-science attitude has become so entrenched on the right and in the government. However, it is nice to find all your targets standing in a row.
- Vox Day announces that “modern science is non-science” http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2017/03/modern-science-is-non-science.html and links to…
- Breitbart, which announces ‘Fewer Than 1 Percent Of Papers in Scientific Journals Follow Scientific Method’ http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/03/29/j-scott-armstrong-fraction-1-papers-scientific-journals-follow-scientific-method/ and cites…
- Climate-denial ‘think’ tank, The Heartland Institute’s International Conference on Climate Change https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0i3HnA0TI4 specifically…
- “Wharton School professor and forecasting expert” J. Scott Armstrong’s and Kesten C Green’s presentation “Are Forecasts of Dangerous Global Warming Scientific?”
The minor good news is that watching the presentation and recognising the names, I’d already debunked this nonsense. https://camestrosfelapton.wordpress.com/2016/08/22/dont-forget-climate-change-chapter-12-climate-science-venus-market-researchers/
Yes, this is the same warmed over nonsense I tackled when I went through a climate change denial book last year.
From the presentation:
What I found then was that Armstrong and Green, to reach a conclusion that a forecast of global cooling was more ‘accurate’ than global warming, had to make the following errors:
- Use only ONE warming scenario
- Use a cooling scenario smaller in magnitude to the warming scenario
- Use a retroactive forecast using the warming scenario that does not actually correspond with the warming hypothesis (specifically using modern rates of warming for the mid 19th century)
- Ignore more recent data (specifically from 1975)
What was even more notable was that some of these problematic steps were in violation of their own ‘principles of forecasting’.
There’s more, but I’ll come back to it later.