[ExI] Phil Jones acknowledging that climate science isn'tsettled
max at maxmore.com
Tue Feb 16 21:11:23 UTC 2010
>I'll continue to rely mainly on what peer-reviewed science has to
>say on the matter, not the IPCC or the BBC.
The peer-reviewed science (which, as has been clear for some time, is
not always a guarantee of accuracy), does not all agree. So that
doesn't settle the issue.
>I do find it sad that suddenly, after months of having his character
>shat upon, there's a great rush to take something Phil Jones has
>said as unquestioningly accurate.
Which of the things Jones is saying do you think are inaccurate?
What I thought was a little encouraging was some small sign of
uncertainty from one of those representing apparent certainty
concerning a matter revolving around unreliable models. Perhaps, one
day, more economists and risk managers will also become a little more
modest and less dogmatic regarding their clearly non-scientific discipline.
More information about the extropy-chat