tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 It doesn't matter how important or visible he is. Errors of judgment in one area do not equate to a lack of integrity or undermine rigorous peer-reviewed research. The logical leap from Hansen making poor ENSO forecasts to Hansen having no integrity and his peer-reviewed research being flawed is absurd. I never made that leap. The fact that you keep putting words in my mouth demonstrates your desperation in this discussion. Let's stick to what has actually been said, ok? I have clearly explained how his "errors in judgement" compromise his scientific integrity. They simply aren't things a good scientist would do, because they aren't reasonable and they aren't scientific. And I'm not talking about making toast in the morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I never made that leap. The fact that you keep putting words in my mouth demonstrates your desperation in this discussion. Let's stick to what has actually been said, ok? I have clearly explained how his "errors in judgement" compromise his scientific integrity. They simply aren't things a good scientist would do, because they aren't reasonable and they aren't scientific. And I'm not talking about making toast in the morning. As you learn more about science in your life, I think you will find that most scientists make similarly poor predictions at times. To say that this compromises their scientific integrity is a little silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I do indeed make the assumption that some posters are secular and some religious. If there's any alternative, please fill me in. That said, in no way did I single anyone out - because that would of course be impossible for me to do. I would suggest though, that if I placed a wager on every poster in the climate section, I could win more than 50% of my bets. I haven't been an analyst much of my life for nothing. My opening line: "Your post and the many similar to it that I come across on the internet highlight the thinking levels we humans have when it comes to what's probable, what's plausible, what's possible, what's improbable, what's implausible, and what's impossible." led into my discussion of how people think. Perhaps you believe psychologists and neuroscientists are fools; I don't know. But in my recent studies, science today knows very well just how we think. And if you think my discussion was nonsense, then you're just revealing how little you know about the current state of human science. My hypocrisy? I don't know where you get that, but I guess it just sounds good eh? And as for "getting used to it", spare me, I've been on internet boards since the '90s; it's why I so seldom reply. (Heck, so many boards are so predictable I doubt I read more than half the replies to my own posts.) Is there any alternative to assuming some posters are "religious" and others "secular"? Why yes...stick to science on a climate change forum instead of silly assumptions about the beliefs of other posters. Discussions on religion or psychology, as interesting as they may be, detract from the intended content of this board. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 As you learn more about science in your life, I think you will find that most scientists make similarly poor predictions at times. To say that this compromises their scientific integrity is a little silly. It's not just about getting predictions wrong. It's about making predictions to the public about things you apparently aren't even qualified to comment on. And it really looks bad when your predictions clearly favor your bias. I have asked Phillip to point out other scientists who have made decisions or predictions like Hansen has. None of the ones he listed have (of course, he was just listing all of the "denialists" he could think of, I guess in an attempt to even the score or something). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 It's not just about getting predictions wrong. It's about making predictions to the public about things you apparently aren't even qualified to comment on. And it really looks bad when your predictions clearly favor your bias. I have asked Phillip to point out other scientists who have made decisions or predictions like Hansen has. None of the ones he listed have (of course, he was just listing all of the "denialists" he could think of, I guess in an attempt to even the score or something). To just touch on the tip of the iceberg.. there are numerous nobel winning and other prominent scientists who have publicly commented on their denial of AGW and present themselves as qualified to comment even though they have zero expertise in the area. Scientists comment on areas outside their area of expertise all the time.. overreaching arrogance and ego are normal for all humans including scientists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 To just touch on the tip of the iceberg.. there are numerous nobel winning and other prominent scientists who have publicly commented on their denial of AGW and present themselves as qualified to comment even though they have zero expertise in the area. Scientists comment on areas outside their area of expertise all the time.. overreaching arrogance and ego are normal for all humans including scientists. Well, if there are other scientists who have overreached themselves comparably to Hansen, then they have hurt their credibility as well. Doesn't let Hansen off the hook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Well, if there are other scientists who have overreached themselves comparably to Hansen, then they have hurt their credibility as well. Doesn't let Hansen off the hook. The point is ALL people including scientists make bad predictions, overreach, and have egos.. pointing it out is redundant .. and claiming it destroys an individuals integrity is major overreaching and pretty silly. I guess nobody has any integrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 The point is ALL people including scientists make bad predictions, overreach, and have egos.. pointing it out is redundant .. and claiming it destroys an individuals integrity is major overreaching and pretty silly. I guess nobody has any integrity. No, not all people or scienstists do what Hansen has done. Have some? Sure...doesn't diminish his actions. And because of his position, it is more of an embarrassment to science than it would be for the average Joe. And it just looks bad for climate science when one of the world's premier climate scientist is repeatedly wrong with his predictions. Maybe ENSO isn't his specialty, but the general public doesn't know that. You accused me of being obsessed, but why are you so intent on downplaying his failings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 No, not all people or scienstists do what Hansen has done. Have some? Sure...doesn't diminish his actions. And because of his position, it is more of an embarrassment to science than it would be for the average Joe. And it just looks bad for climate science when one of the world's premier climate scientist is repeatedly wrong with his predictions. Maybe ENSO isn't his specialty, but the general public doesn't know that. You accused me of being obsessed, but why are you so intent on downplaying his failings? I guess all the people (ORH, HM, etc.) who have busted ENSO predictions in the past also lack integrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I guess all the people (ORH, HM, etc.) who have busted ENSO predictions in the past also lack integrity. They aren't climate scientists, and they aren't in Hansen's position. Why are you so intent on defending Hansen? You continue to blindly do so while ignoring my clear points about why what Hansen has done has compromised his scientific integrity and hurt his reputation as a scientist. Or try to excuse him by saying every scientist has made similar errors in judgement (not the case by any stretch of the imagination). The funny thing is that none of them busted as bad as Hansen has this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 They aren't climate scientists, and they aren't in Hansen's position. Why are you so intent on defending Hansen? The funny thing is that none of them busted as bad as Hansen has this year. The same principle applies. Busted predictions doesn't mean a scientist lacks integrity or undermine the rest of their work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 The same principle applies. Busted predictions doesn't mean a scientist lacks integrity or undermine the rest of their work. As I said already... Busted predictions should not be confused with ethical issues (which I don't see any glaring ones with Hansen, though I think he has made some poor decisions for someone in his position). However, whether his staunch supporters like to admit it or not, they do reflect on him as a scientist. Either the science is letting him down, or he is making predictions in areas where he is not qualified...which is not very smart or scientific. And the nature of his predictions always over-favor warming, which leads one to question how much he allows bias to enter his scientific analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 As I said already... Busted predictions should not be confused with ethical issues (which I don't see any glaring ones with Hansen, though I think he has made some poor decisions for someone in his position). However, whether his staunch supporters like to admit it or not, they do reflect on him as a scientist. Either the science is letting him down, or he is making predictions in areas where he is not qualified...which is not very smart or scientific. And the nature of his predictions always over-favor warming, which leads one to question how much he allows bias to enter his scientific analysis. It is a big step from saying it shows poor judgment in that instance to saying it indicates a lack of integrity in general. That is a huge logical leap which you seem determined to make even though you would not make the same logical leap for any other scientist making similar kinds of predictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 It is a big step from saying it shows poor judgment in that instance to saying it indicates a lack of integrity in general. That is a huge logical leap which you seem determined to make even though you would not make the same logical leap for any other scientist making similar kinds of predictions. 1. You continue to put words in my mouth. I never said he "lacks integrity in general". Do you understand what scientific integrity means? You have no real defense for Hansen, so instead you just change my words and don't actually address the WHYS that I have outlined. 2. What other scientist like Hansen has been so foolish as to make predictions outside his/her area of expertise? Why does Hansen think he is qualified to make these predictions? He has repeatedly over-estimated warm ENSO events, has repeatedly over-estimated warming, and has proven to be an activist/scientist - which undermines any claims of objectivity. Again, what comparable scientist is out there? All you have proven is that you don't have any real defense or answers, just counter-accusations and downplaying. For some reason, you can't handle criticism of James Hansen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 1. You continue to put words in my mouth. I never said he "lacks integrity in general". Do you understand what scientific integrity means? You have no real defense for Hansen, so instead you just change my words and don't actually address the WHYS that I have outlined. 2. What other scientist like Hansen has been so foolish as to make predictions outside his/her area of expertise? Why does Hansen think he is qualified to make these predictions? He has repeatedly over-estimated warm ENSO events, has repeatedly over-estimated warming, and has proven to be an activist/scientist - which undermines any claims of objectivity. Again, what comparable scientist is out there? All you have proven is that you don't have any real defense or answers, just counter-accusations and downplaying. For some reason, you can't handle criticism of James Hansen. 1. Yes you did. You said that he has 'compromised his integrity." DIRECT QUOTE. It is a huge leap to go from someone overreaching on occasion and busting forecasts to saying they lack scientific integrity. 2. Ummm pretty much all scientists. I have already provided example of many. 3. Not only can I 'handle' criticism of Hansen, I have leveled many criticisms against him myself. I'm just not going to make reckless accusations that he 'lacks integrity as a scientist' or claim that some errors in judgment destroy his credibility in general. Or claim that it 'calls into question the rest of his work.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 1. Yes you did. You said that he has 'compromised his integrity." DIRECT QUOTE. It is a huge leap to go from someone overreaching on occasion and busting forecasts to saying they lack scientific integrity. 2. Ummm pretty much all scientists. I have already provided example of many. 3. Not only can I 'handle' criticism of Hansen, I have leveled many criticisms against him myself. I'm just not going to make reckless accusations that he 'lacks integrity as a scientist' or claim that some errors in judgment destroy his credibility in general. Or claim that it 'calls into question the rest of his work.' 1. No, it's not a huge leap. I already explained why. You have had no answer. 2. That's a complete copout. You have provided no comparable examples to Hansen. If there are other scientists who have done what he has, show me. They deserve the same criticism. But you aren't fooling anyone if you claim that Hansen's behavior is normal for a scientist. Professionally, what he has done reflects poorly on him. There is no denying that. And his profession is as a scientist. 3. I did not say he lacks integrity, I said he has compromised his scientific integrity. And I'm clearly not alone in that assessment. There is nothing reckless about my criticism, it is perfectly reasonable. You are simply overreacting to it. And you continue to put words in my mouth. Nowhere have I said that it "calls into question the rest of his work." Again, the fact that you feel the need to twist and change my words only demonstrates the weakness of your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I will, of course he is in it for the money at this point.... He does not have the skills to be a football coach so I'm not sure how your analogy is relevant. If you think he is not interested in making the money he is, imo you are being delusional. He will like anyone else in his postion milk it for all it is worth, you should not underestimate the power of the dollar. http://www.americanw...ng-this-summer/ He was arrested earlier this year during a protest. He is 70 years old and he went out and ended up arrested during a protest hoping Barack Obama(D) would stand by the ideal of his political party. Which he hasn't so far in his Presidency. You are going to tell me a Man willing to face arrest and possibly serve Jail Time is just in this for the money? He might be influenced by his convictions and has have made some bad forecasts from personal bias. Like every forum poster here and more like the so called Men running the blogs you surely read to get your climate info. FYI he protested a new pipe line that would help oil production for fuel which means our carbon dumping each year will increase. Therefore by PROVEN PHYSICS we know adding GHG's to the atmosphere we will see temperatures increase. That is honorable for him to do so....but yet he is just in it for the money huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 [/url] Frivolousz21, on 30 September 2011 - 04:13 AM, said: What led him to such a horrible prediction. ? ORH_wxman He's old and wants to see a huge jump in global temps before he's gone. That's my guess. Most of his stuff is just jibberish these days. I took this from another thread. But I agree. Now ORH's reasoning might be different than mine. Mr. Hansen IMO believes deeply that AGW is going to hurt our planet and our species.... He clearly is desperate now that he is at the age where it can all end at a snap of a finger to see us take this more serious. Blame him for that more than his busted forecasts.. Need I remind you of many forum posters heroes predictions? And how horrible the are compared to how good this posters predictions are....being so helpless and all. Lets see some objectively, I plead for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 He was arrested earlier this year during a protest. He is 70 years old and he went out and ended up arrested during a protest hoping Barack Obama(D) would stand by the ideal of his political party. Which he hasn't so far in his Presidency. You are going to tell me a Man willing to face arrest and possibly serve Jail Time is just in this for the money? He might be influenced by his convictions and has have made some bad forecasts from personal bias. Like every forum poster here and more like the so called Men running the blogs you surely read to get your climate info. FYI he protested a new pipe line that would help oil production for fuel which means our carbon dumping each year will increase. Therefore by PROVEN PHYSICS we know adding GHG's to the atmosphere we will see temperatures increase. That is honorable for him to do so....but yet he is just in it for the money huh? And that would be poor science. But according to skiier, every scientist is like that, so I guess the state of science in general now is pretty sad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 And that would be poor science. But according to skiier, every scientist is like that, so I guess the state of science in general now is pretty sad! It is poor science...and I think every scientists has a bias on what they want to see or what they expect to see. James has recently taken this to the extreme, so I don't think it;s the norm...I think it's Handson getting old and while his hearts in the right place. He may no not be fit to hold any govt position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aslkahuna Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 The issue is NOT bad predictions or anything like that but whether or not Hansen is in violation of the rules governing Federal Employment which prohibit one from using their position in the Government to advocate a given political position or agenda. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 The issue is NOT bad predictions or anything like that but whether or not Hansen is in violation of the rules governing Federal Employment which prohibit one from using their position in the Government to advocate a given political position or agenda. Steve Well, they are separate issues. Making poor predictions outside of your realm of expertise makes you look bad, and it makes science look bad. It obviously doesn't mean he's violating any federal laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 1. No, it's not a huge leap. I already explained why. You have had no answer. 2. That's a complete copout. You have provided no comparable examples to Hansen. If there are other scientists who have done what he has, show me. They deserve the same criticism. But you aren't fooling anyone if you claim that Hansen's behavior is normal for a scientist. Professionally, what he has done reflects poorly on him. There is no denying that. And his profession is as a scientist. 3. I did not say he lacks integrity, I said he has compromised his scientific integrity. And I'm clearly not alone in that assessment. There is nothing reckless about my criticism, it is perfectly reasonable. You are simply overreacting to it. And you continue to put words in my mouth. Nowhere have I said that it "calls into question the rest of his work." Again, the fact that you feel the need to twist and change my words only demonstrates the weakness of your position. All I can say if you thinking busting forecasts and overreaching on occasion makes you think Hansen lacks scientific integrity you're incredibly naive or you're just trying to stick it to Hansen. All scientists bust and overreach on occasion. It is human nature. It doesn't mean they lack scientific integrity. Forgive me, as much as I dislike him, I just can't get worked up into a froth over Hansen busting an ENSO forecast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 All I can say if you thinking busting forecasts and overreaching on occasion makes you think Hansen lacks scientific integrity you're incredibly naive or you're just trying to stick it to Hansen. All scientists bust and overreach on occasion. It is human nature. It doesn't mean they lack scientific integrity. Forgive me, as much as I dislike him, I just can't get worked up into a froth over Hansen busting an ENSO forecast. With Hansen, it's a combination of issues. 1. He's been a political figure and activist for a cause that is directly related to his scientific research. 2. He has clearly let his bias influence his forecasts. There is really no other way to interpret why he continually busts warm. We all have biases, but scientists are at least supposed to strive towards objectivity. 3. He has demonstrated a poor grasp on how ENSO works, a pretty basic element of modern climate science. Many others have proven more adept at predicting ENSO - myself included, and that's not to brag. 4. In every way, he has overreached more than any other scientist of his stature. He has used his position with the U.S. government to attract attention to his cause and helped the media sensationalize global warming. Does all of this invalidate his research? No, but it all hurts his reputation as a scientist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strongbad Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I do indeed make the assumption that some posters are secular and some religious. If there's any alternative, please fill me in. That said, in no way did I single anyone out - because that would of course be impossible for me to do. I would suggest though, that if I placed a wager on every poster in the climate section, I could win more than 50% of my bets. I haven't been an analyst much of my life for nothing. My opening line: "Your post and the many similar to it that I come across on the internet highlight the thinking levels we humans have when it comes to what's probable, what's plausible, what's possible, what's improbable, what's implausible, and what's impossible." led into my discussion of how people think. Perhaps you believe psychologists and neuroscientists are fools; I don't know. But in my recent studies, science today knows very well just how we think. And if you think my discussion was nonsense, then you're just revealing how little you know about the current state of human science. My hypocrisy? I don't know where you get that, but I guess it just sounds good eh? And as for "getting used to it", spare me, I've been on internet boards since the '90s; it's why I so seldom reply. (Heck, so many boards are so predictable I doubt I read more than half the replies to my own posts.) Your recent studies? Let me guess: you used a box of crayola crayons, a toothpick, some pretty stickers perhaps? The only crime is responding to your utter nonsense. Yet you really think you are all that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunny and Warm Posted October 6, 2011 Author Share Posted October 6, 2011 Your recent studies? Let me guess: you used a box of crayola crayons, a toothpick, some pretty stickers perhaps? The only crime is responding to your utter nonsense. Yet you really think you are all that? don't waste your time Strongbad. The internet boards are full of nutjobs and self important people who in reality are just trying to run from their real lives. This guy sucks your time away without providing anything in return. He's a nobody and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strongbad Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 don't waste your time Strongbad. The internet boards are full of nutjobs and self important people who in reality are just trying to run from their real lives. This guy sucks your time away without providing anything in return. He's a nobody and should be treated as such. Yeah, you are spot on as usual. It just saddens me to think that poor Mr. Hansen has the likes of that guy defending him. How far he continues to fall! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunny and Warm Posted October 6, 2011 Author Share Posted October 6, 2011 Yeah, you are spot on as usual. It just saddens me to think that poor Mr. Hansen has the likes of that guy defending him. How far he continues to fall! well, don't feel too sorry for Jimmy Hansen. He'll just land on that big old bed of money Skier, Friv, and Munchkin Man continue to throw at him. That's the real hoot. They've been had by Jimmy and they still defend him like he was a close relative. At least responsible posters like Rusty don't sink to this level of name calling. He's about the only person with science knowledge among that entire crew. Too bad he can't see past his ideology that AGW may be just a business venture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mencken_Fan Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 That people obsess over Hansen is itself weird. Who gives a rat's ass? Does Hansen define the world of climatology? Does Bastardi define the world of meteorology? Perhaps we should pay more attention to the climatalogical and meteorological forests than the single tallest trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunny and Warm Posted October 6, 2011 Author Share Posted October 6, 2011 Does Hansen define the world of climatology? Does Bastardi define the world of meteorology? In some ways, the answers are YES and YES, so your premise fails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.