[ExI] Phil Jones acknowledging that climate science isn'tsettled

[Max More]

>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.

Max