[Osx-nutters] Denial

[David Cake]

At 4:57 PM +0100 16/8/07, Stefano Mori wrote:
>Do you really think that the only alternatives regarding one of the 
>most complex systems ever studied by science are all wild baseless 
>hypothesis?

	Actually, I think there are several different detailed 
hypotheses floating around in the world of climate science. The 
problem is, they are all quite similar as far as this debate goes, 
because they all basically now include the same role for CO2, and 
differ on other factors.
	Just as there are several different variants on evolutionary 
theory floating around inside the scientific community - but they are 
all similar as far as the politics goes, because they all basically 
say that natural selection is what shapes organisms.
	I do think that the theories beloved of denialists, like 
increased solar radiation, natural cycles, etc have been considered, 
and have been rejected, based on evidence. Anyone now promoting them 
is, for some reason, ignoring that data (be it unfamiliarity with the 
research, craziness, or a paycheque). And scientists aren't ignoring 
them now because they are a closed minded cabal, they are ignoring 
them because they have been rejected based on the evidence, and there 
is no reason to look at them again unless better evidence for them 
turns up.

>If, as David suggests, the scientists have looked as the political 
>problem and decided to feign virtual certainty,

	I think you misrepresent my viewpoint absurdly. To the point 
that I think you actually just took your ideas and put my name on 
them.
	I don't think 'scientists' are, in general, feigning 
anything. I think they are mostly solidly confident in certain 
conclusions.
	Cheers
		David