General > General Technical Chat

heartbroken that John Clauser seems to have joined climate change denial.

<< < (59/67) > >>

RAPo:

--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 06:39:54 pm ---
The consensus view that we are talking about is that expressed in the IPCC reports. In answer to your second question, no.

The IPCC reports include input from a large number of expert reviewers.  Anyone who is suitably qualified can apply to be an expert reviewer, even if they are sceptics, even if they are well known sceptics.  If any of those reviewers had spotted an error and had credible evidence to support them, then the error would have been corrected.

If any of those 1500 scholars had anything to contribute to the IPCC reports that they could back up with evidence, then I assume that they would have applied to be expert reviewers.  The opportunity was there.  If they didn't apply, then I think that speaks for itself.  In a petition, you can just state that you disagree, without the nuisance of actually having to provide any credible evidence to support that view.

--- End quote ---
Did you check all the names, read their work? Do you really think a noble Prize nominee would make a statement so lightly?

Would you be an expert reviewer with the context displayed in red if you think the wrong turn is choosen?

cbutlera:

--- Quote from: RAPo on August 10, 2023, 07:25:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 06:39:54 pm ---...
The IPCC reports include input from a large number of expert reviewers.  Anyone who is suitably qualified can apply to be an expert reviewer, even if they are sceptics, even if they are well known sceptics.  If any of those reviewers had spotted an error and had credible evidence to support them, then the error would have been corrected.

If any of those 1500 scholars had anything to contribute to the IPCC reports that they could back up with evidence, then I assume that they would have applied to be expert reviewers.  The opportunity was there.  If they didn't apply, then I think that speaks for itself.  In a petition, you can just state that you disagree, without the nuisance of actually having to provide any credible evidence to support that view.

--- End quote ---
Did you check all the names, read their work? Do you really think a noble Prize nominee would make a statement so lightly?

Would you be an expert reviewer with the context displayed in red if you think the wrong turn is choosen?

--- End quote ---

So what if they are Nobel prize nominees, that doesn't give them a free pass.  They still have to back up what they claim with evidence.  Merely signing a petition only shows what someone's opinion is.  It does not represent scientifically relevant evidence.

I have no idea what you are talking about regarding the context displayed in red, which refers to review editors.  I was talking about expert reviewers.

I wonder how many of those 1500 names appear among the list of Expert Reviewers of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.  If their names don't appear, then why not?  Too busy perhaps, or not suitably qualified, or couldn't be bothered, or perhaps they knew that they didn't have credible supporting evidence.

RAPo:

--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 08:11:35 pm ---So what if they are Nobel prize nominees, that doesn't give them a free pass.  They still have to back up what they claim with evidence.  Merely signing a petition only shows what someone's opinion is.  It does not represent scientifically relevant evidence.

--- End quote ---
Agreed no free pass, but they are less likely to sign this petition if they don't have info that corroborates their claim, the scientific community can be harsh.


--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 08:11:35 pm ---I have no idea what you are talking about regarding the context displayed in red, which refers to review editors.  I was talking about expert reviewers.

--- End quote ---
.
The expert reviewers have no say in the outline of the report and the review editors (not the expert reviewers) advise the lead editors if there is a controversial issue.
If I was an expert reviewer with a somewhat controversial opinion  I would like to state my opinion in full, not via the review editors.


--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 08:11:35 pm ---I wonder how many of those 1500 names appear among the list of Expert Reviewers of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.  If their names don't appear, then why not?  Too busy perhaps, or not suitably qualified, or couldn't be bothered, or perhaps they knew that they didn't have credible supporting evidence.

--- End quote ---
Well, if you have some time, you can do a crosscheck on both documents.
For the situation in the Netherlands one -not a scientist- stated: from all the 140 people in the Netherlands 140 where male, A totally unimportant statement.
He also argued that only 3 signees are still working, one is dead, and the others have a pension. That could be a reason: free of ties from their employer, they feel the freedom to speak up.

vk6zgo:

--- Quote from: RAPo on August 11, 2023, 12:51:23 pm ---
--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 08:11:35 pm ---So what if they are Nobel prize nominees, that doesn't give them a free pass.  They still have to back up what they claim with evidence.  Merely signing a petition only shows what someone's opinion is.  It does not represent scientifically relevant evidence.

--- End quote ---
Agreed no free pass, but they are less likely to sign this petition if they don't have info that corroborates their claim, the scientific community can be harsh.


--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 08:11:35 pm ---I have no idea what you are talking about regarding the context displayed in red, which refers to review editors.  I was talking about expert reviewers.

--- End quote ---
.
The expert reviewers have no say in the outline of the report and the review editors (not the expert reviewers) advise the lead editors if there is a controversial issue.
If I was an expert reviewer with a somewhat controversial opinion  I would like to state my opinion in full, not via the review editors.


--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 08:11:35 pm ---I wonder how many of those 1500 names appear among the list of Expert Reviewers of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.  If their names don't appear, then why not?  Too busy perhaps, or not suitably qualified, or couldn't be bothered, or perhaps they knew that they didn't have credible supporting evidence.

--- End quote ---
Well, if you have some time, you can do a crosscheck on both documents.
For the situation in the Netherlands one -not a scientist- stated: from all the 140 people in the Netherlands 140 where male, A totally unimportant statement.
He also argued that only 3 signees are still working, one is dead, and the others have a pension. That could be a reason: free of ties from their employer, they feel the freedom to speak up.

--- End quote ---

If the dead one could speak up, that is a much more earth-shattering event than any difference of opinion on climate science ;D

cbutlera:

--- Quote from: RAPo on August 11, 2023, 12:51:23 pm ---...
The expert reviewers have no say in the outline of the report and the review editors (not the expert reviewers) advise the lead editors if there is a controversial issue.
If I was an expert reviewer with a somewhat controversial opinion  I would like to state my opinion in full, not via the review editors.

--- End quote ---

You can't possibly expect every unfiltered comment from every expert reviewer to appear in the final assessment reports.  The comments they make still go on to the record and are available on request.  There is also nothing to stop them from being published independently.


--- Quote from: RAPo on August 11, 2023, 12:51:23 pm ---
--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 10, 2023, 08:11:35 pm ---I wonder how many of those 1500 names appear among the list of Expert Reviewers of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.  If their names don't appear, then why not?  Too busy perhaps, or not suitably qualified, or couldn't be bothered, or perhaps they knew that they didn't have credible supporting evidence.

--- End quote ---
Well, if you have some time, you can do a crosscheck on both documents.
For the situation in the Netherlands one -not a scientist- stated: from all the 140 people in the Netherlands 140 where male, A totally unimportant statement.
He also argued that only 3 signees are still working, one is dead, and the others have a pension. That could be a reason: free of ties from their employer, they feel the freedom to speak up.

--- End quote ---

There are plenty of climate scientists working for fossil fuel companies or AGW sceptical lobbying organisations who wouldn't be fearing for their jobs for expressing AGW sceptical opinions.  There are a number of scientists who are already well known as AGW sceptics so would have nothing to fear either.  I searched for a couple of dozen of the names from the CO2 Coalition website (which this thread was supposed to be about) before I got bored, but I found none that were listed as expert reviewers.  Why do so many of these AGW sceptics choose not to engage with the IPCC report process, but then spend so much time loudly complaining that the IPCC reports do not represent the current scientific consensus?  I think the answer is obvious.

Edit: Fixed spelling error.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod