tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post6007052416386022016..comments2024-03-17T03:16:44.995-04:00Comments on BigCityLib Strikes Back: David Hull And The CRU Emailsbigcitylibhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05081538803991095825noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-81163523719048843472010-08-13T09:00:56.895-04:002010-08-13T09:00:56.895-04:00Rather, if you wish to criticize her, go to the su...<i>Rather, if you wish to criticize her, go to the substance of your criticism.</i><br /><br />Like they did <a href="http://climateprogress.org/2010/02/24/my-response-to-dr-judith-currys-unconstructive-essay/" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2010/04/curry.php" rel="nofollow">here.</a>sharonapple88https://www.blogger.com/profile/11149226422042041129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-27673291564141375042010-08-12T20:57:49.790-04:002010-08-12T20:57:49.790-04:00It's odd to think that people think that impor...It's odd to think that people think that important national and global policy decisions should be made by the mud-wrestling process that is politics. But, at the same time, unravelling the nature of the universe should be done by inhuman automatons who have absolutely no human emotions.<br /><br />There are some important differences, of course. Politics is conducted much more (particularly today vs. 40 years ago) as an adversarial debate, while science is conducted much more as a (sometimes adversarial) discussion -- in the sense of my <a href="http://moregrumbinescience.blogspot.com/2008/08/discussion-vs-debate.html" rel="nofollow">discussion vs. debate</a> article.<br /><br />Still, for better and worse, both scientists and politicians are humans. In science, that's why peer review actually is important. Humans are fallible, and review by people who aren't necessarily your pals is a way of protecting against that.<br /><br />Steve:<br />No need for talking about 'second rate science'. Plus, the American Meteorological society seems to disagree with you -- Judy has been made a fellow of the AMS, a fairly exclusive distinction: http://www.ametsoc.org/memdir/fellowslist/get_listoffellows.cfm and as a winner of the Houghton award (1992) http://www.ametsoc.org/getpastawards/get_allawards.cfm<br />an even more exclusive distinction.<br /><br />Rather, if you wish to criticize her, go to the substance of your criticism.Robert Grumbinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10783453972811796911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-52152596437685240802010-08-12T15:19:30.606-04:002010-08-12T15:19:30.606-04:00Second-rate science, the sort JC mostly engages in...Second-rate science, the sort JC mostly engages in, doesn't draw a lot of argument simply because it's not very interesting.Steve Bloomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12943109973917998380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-61116793809970217302010-08-12T13:38:14.764-04:002010-08-12T13:38:14.764-04:00Or read Watson's story of the discovery of DNA...Or read Watson's story of the discovery of DNA.<br />Or the American, Kenyan & South Africans arguing over whose fossil is in direct line to Homo sapiens.<br />At my university, a physics graduate student got beaten up at a post-conference party for having to vociferously defended some cosmological theory.<br />Objective science doesn't depend on objective scientists, rather on the method which incudes someone being willing to make his career on dismantling yours.dizzyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11245804855325027343noreply@blogger.com