Questioning "Science"? - Starting Strength Radio Clips

[Mark Rippetoe]

Linking human activity to climate change must be hugely complex, and beyond scientists who are not trained in the field (like myself). But when a huge consensus of scientists and reputable organisations advocate the theory I would tend to believe them. I hope I’m wrong.

Remember back when the earth was flat? That was the consensus of scientists and reputable organizations.

[Jdcuth]

Remember back when the earth was flat? That was the consensus of scientists and reputable organizations.

True. However it isn’t practical to research everything first hand yourself so sometimes you defer to experts- I’m happy that aviation engineers design my plane according to their expertise (although aerodynamics is obviously a more reproducible and understood field of study). However I think the premise that no theory is beyond criticism (including man made climate change) is essential to human society. The inability to participate critically in discussions around certain topics (gender identity, climate change) without being subject to harassment and abuse is a real problem in society.

[ltomo]

Linking human activity to climate change must be hugely complex, and beyond scientists who are not trained in the field (like myself). But when a huge consensus of scientists and reputable organisations advocate the theory I would tend to believe them. I hope I’m wrong.

Like the "consensus" of scientists who told us Covid-19 would be the next bubonic plague.

[Mark D]

True. However it isn’t practical to research everything first hand yourself so sometimes you defer to experts- I’m happy that aviation engineers design my plane according to their expertise (although aerodynamics is obviously a more reproducible and understood field of study). However I think the premise that no theory is beyond criticism (including man made climate change) is essential to human society. The inability to participate critically in discussions around certain topics (gender identity, climate change) without being subject to harassment and abuse is a real problem in society.

The problem comes when anyone says "The science is settled", because science is NEVER settled. See my example of Einstein above. The best you can ever say is that the observations are consistent with the theory (as is done with Relativity over and over again), but if you find a set of observations that disagree with the theory the theory MUST be adjusted. You don't get to compare the map with the coastline, note that they differ, and declare the coastline wrong.

This also requires transparency, if you're working from a model you put the inner workings (as assumptions) of the model out there, you let people run their own data thru it and see what happens. You don't get to treat your model as a black box from which Revelations is emitted, and brand anyone who disagrees a Heretic.

So I, not being a climatologist, don't have the expertise to evaluate the models. But even if I did, I wouldn't be given access to the models, and if I developed my own models which disagreed with the narrative, AND made full disclosure of the models, the powers that be wouldn't even bother looking at them but would brand me a climate-change-denier. Because their goal is not science, it's politics, it's to make sure YOU give up your car (while they of course will keep flying everywhere).

[Mark Rippetoe]

The Phenomenology of Barbell Training | Mark Rippetoe