Is more bad weather on the way?

[chamb0]

Originally Posted by Batman105E

It is worthwhile remembering that science is not determined by consensus, but rather by emperical data and observation. Computer models that make predictions which aren't supported by emperical evidence and observation, but instead driven by political motive do not constitute science.

I fully agree. Scientific theories are falsifiable, testable and accountable… pseudo-science is not. Alan Jones, Andrew Bolt and their ilk are not held accountable for their scientific statements in the way that scientists are held to high standards.

In the scientific community, the way to become famous has always been to prove your colleagues wrong. So if there is a consensus, then surely that tells us something...

We should also be able to separate the science from the associated public policy (policy which you may or may not agree with). Just because somebody thinks the Government's repsonse is rubbish does not change scientific reality. That is like saying that you don't like the way the doctor treated your cancer, so the cancer mustn't be real.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by chamb0

That is like saying that you don't like the way the doctor treated your cancer, so the cancer mustn't be real.

A VERY appropriate simile.

Ask the people of Bundaberg what happens when a Doctor makes a few oopses with diagnosis and treatment but is left to continue his actions as "he is an expert with peer support, he must be right"?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=patel+trial

[zdcol71]

WOW...What was the original post??? Those pesky little ants.