L
lynnvinc
Guest
Also, I’ve been very critical of climate science and scientists myself – but in an oppositve direction. Scientists strive to avoid the FALSE POSITIVE (see my earlier post); they cannot afford to make false claims or their reputations will be harmed – they will be like the boy who called wolf. So they require .05 signficance (95% confidence) that there is an association, that AGW is happening. They are exceedingly conservative in their claims and if you read their peer-reviewed articles, you will see a bunch of caveats, etc. I call this the SCIENTIFIC MODEL.
Potential victims, policy-makers, and those concerned about life on planet earth, however, would be seeking to avoid the FALSE NEGATIVE, of doing nothing to mitigate global warming when it is actually happening. I call this the MEDICAL MODEL. For example, a doctor won’t tell his/her patient, “the test came back and there is only 94% confidence your lump is cancerous, so we won’t operate. Come back in a few years to see if it gets up to 95% confident.” This is also call the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE. Or, in religious terms it’s called PRUDENCE, a word used in the U.S. Bishops’ 2001 statement on global warming – see usccb.org/sdwp/international/globalclimate.shtm. The other part of “the boy who called wolf” story is the villagers who failed to heed the warning and got eaten up.
When I came to understand I was contributing to AGW in 1990, even though science had not yet reached 95% confidence, I started mitigating. That same year JPII said it is everyone’s responsibility to mitigate AGW in his “Peace with All Creation” (1/1/90). He is a man I truly love and admire, as is BXVI.
Sometimes obedience is very difficult – some religious will tell you it is more difficult than celibacy or poverty.
Potential victims, policy-makers, and those concerned about life on planet earth, however, would be seeking to avoid the FALSE NEGATIVE, of doing nothing to mitigate global warming when it is actually happening. I call this the MEDICAL MODEL. For example, a doctor won’t tell his/her patient, “the test came back and there is only 94% confidence your lump is cancerous, so we won’t operate. Come back in a few years to see if it gets up to 95% confident.” This is also call the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE. Or, in religious terms it’s called PRUDENCE, a word used in the U.S. Bishops’ 2001 statement on global warming – see usccb.org/sdwp/international/globalclimate.shtm. The other part of “the boy who called wolf” story is the villagers who failed to heed the warning and got eaten up.
When I came to understand I was contributing to AGW in 1990, even though science had not yet reached 95% confidence, I started mitigating. That same year JPII said it is everyone’s responsibility to mitigate AGW in his “Peace with All Creation” (1/1/90). He is a man I truly love and admire, as is BXVI.
Sometimes obedience is very difficult – some religious will tell you it is more difficult than celibacy or poverty.
This was espoused by the IPCC scientist who worked for the U.N. and now says that even though he fudged the data there really is global warming. :ehh: I think he goes whichever way the wind blows.
