| Re: "Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 15:18:17 +0900, Bernd Felsche
<bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>Joe Fischer <joe@westpointracing.com> writes:
>>On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 10:34:02 +0900, Bernd Felsche
>><bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>Sequence is not proof of causality.
>
>>Right logic, wrong words, "causality" in science only means the
>>proper sequence, the cause must precede the effect.
>
>Causality in physical sciences doesn't require sequence. e.g.
>gravity of the Moon and Sun cause tides on Earth. The "events" are
>simultaneous and appear concurrent to observers in the same frame.
>
>Causality requires that things are linked by a physical
>relationship, according to the laws of nature.
>[snip]
But how can all scientists in a working group
supported agree, yet there are obviously scientists,
even climatologists with data analysis training that
are unsure, skeptical, or strongly disagree?
It seems to me that some that disagree with
the stories told by Al Gore are "former" office or
chair holders, could there be some preference
in hiring or pressures to conform or hit the road?
I would expect a certain amount of agreement
amongst professionals to at least marginally support
each other to uphold the dignity of science, but how
can there be polarized science opinions from the
same data?
Joe Fischer
|