tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post8217091502207003366..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: Snake-oil salesmen and their shonky "cures" at WUWTSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger57125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-3546786591309254522014-02-07T10:43:03.374+11:002014-02-07T10:43:03.374+11:00I have four brothers out of eight who are engineer...I have four brothers out of eight who are engineers at different fields or specializations. My aeronautical engineer brother told me years ago that to design an efficient aircraft, the usual engineering safety factors are pared to the bone. <br />Much careful inexact modelling is needed to get the design optimised.<br />I wonder what this sounds like? Bert<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-5546886787188336292014-02-05T21:14:14.060+11:002014-02-05T21:14:14.060+11:00Yes - rare as it is for me to agree with Greig, en...Yes - rare as it is for me to agree with Greig, engineer-bashing isn't accurate or productive. BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-79291462308072800312014-02-05T20:27:47.688+11:002014-02-05T20:27:47.688+11:00They [engineers] are not taught to think (really?)...<i>They [engineers] are not taught to think (really?) but use lookup tables to find a simple solution to complex problems. When designing a bridge throw in a factor of safety after careful theoretical design as they really do not know! These engineers think that all scientists are just as ignorant as themselves. </i><br /><br />Somebody who is not an engineer proving that they don't know anything about engineering. = "hand waving drivel".Greighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14845487134006948830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-66001763600952699492014-02-05T19:30:46.278+11:002014-02-05T19:30:46.278+11:00Woops. Collateral damage :)Woops. Collateral damage :)cRR Kampenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07571285063752477448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-49273228279590730312014-02-05T14:45:10.160+11:002014-02-05T14:45:10.160+11:00As someone who has worked in science for over fort...As someone who has worked in science for over forty years I can see why a perfectly sane engineer can fall for what passes as science but is in fact hand waving drivel. They are not taught to think but use lookup tables to find a simple solution to complex problems. <br />When designing a bridge throw in a factor of safety after careful theoretical design as they really do not know!<br />These engineers think that all scientists are just as ignorant as themselves. Sad but true.<br />Bert from Eltham.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-11962907017651627842014-02-05T11:49:42.216+11:002014-02-05T11:49:42.216+11:00"It's all based on models and models are ..."It's all based on models and models are no good" - that's sooooooo 20th Century. It's as if the last 15 years of events have gone right past poor old Bob.<br /><br />Such signs of senility are everywhere you look in the denier world these days. They're coming up with nothing new apart from ice-bound squirrels and the like, and there's no new blood coming through. It must be quite dispiriting for them - well, I like to think so, anyway.Cugelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-70466770122964232992014-02-05T08:43:33.168+11:002014-02-05T08:43:33.168+11:00cRR, I believe lolwot was using sarcasm :)cRR, I believe lolwot was using sarcasm :)Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-59312977816129838472014-02-05T06:54:06.737+11:002014-02-05T06:54:06.737+11:00"...the range of possible feedbacks will incr..."...the range of possible feedbacks will increase, and chaotic climates might ensue."<br /><br />Oh dear. Now you have worried me. Here's to hoping the complex models don't work. <br /><br />Jammy Dodgernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-77666097787546902462014-02-05T02:09:57.702+11:002014-02-05T02:09:57.702+11:00"... And as mentioned previously, I am tertia..."... And as mentioned previously, I am tertiary qualified in pure and applied maths and physics, fluid and thermo-dynamics, and environmental engineering."<br /><br />As Hitchens put it: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Griegs posts tell us a lot more about his competance to assess the evidence than his claimed expertise. Perhaps this is meant to be some special <i>argumentum ab auctoritate ipso</i> (argument from his own authority)?<br /><br />Grieg has shown no evidence of understanding how science works. But he's certainly eaten a lot of Curry.FrankDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-28345400621418403682014-02-04T23:27:21.893+11:002014-02-04T23:27:21.893+11:00Sou: "Lindzen stopped being a scientist a lon...Sou: "Lindzen stopped being a scientist a long time ago." when he became an iridologist.George Montgomeryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07042191140401441348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-26051150971303404612014-02-04T23:24:14.541+11:002014-02-04T23:24:14.541+11:00Grieg: "My elderly mother was recently diagno...Grieg: "My elderly mother was recently diagnosed with a rare form of blood cancer. She went to 3 doctors, and got 3 answers, and in the end did her own research and went with the doctor who most closely aligned with her conclusions. She was treated, is now in remission and the prognosis is very good." (I am pleased at the outcome for her and for you) "When it comes to a difficult problem, nothing beats human ingenuity, and access to collective expertise. And a dose of healthy scepticism, because sometimes even the experts are wrong."<br />Where to begin? This is not a very good analogy/exemplar and here's why. Firstly, it's a generalisation; the fact that your mother could do her own research doesn't mean that everyone can. I am assuming you mean that she self-diagnosed rather than selected the regimen of her treatment; either way it's still a generalisation. Secondly, there is no way of knowing that the same result would not ultimately have been achieved with the other two doctors i.e. the 'experiment' cannot be repeated to see what the outcomes would be. Thirdly, rare forms of blood cancer like MDS, and other associated rare blood disorders such as MPNs, APL, etc are detectable through routine blood tests. So the "went to 3 doctors, and got 3 answers" is unusual to say the least with respect to GPs and in the case of haematologists would be unusual beyond belief.<br />The "nothing beats human ingenuity" applies as much to "the doctor who closely aligned with her conclusions" and who didn't have to do his own research. What you are suggesting is that your mother doesn't have to rely upon doctors for a diagnosis of any current and future medical conditions as they arise. All she has to do is to carry out her own research into her symptoms, by-pass the doctor and go straight to the nearest pharmacy or hospital. And applying this principle universally, there is no need for doctors other than surgeons, although these could be replaced by internet-savvy butchers, abattoir workers and seamstresses who have access to Youtube, etc. In other words, in the context of an extension of the elderly patient analogy, "access to collective expertise" doesn't work in solving problems unless the ones accessing the information can comprehend and apply it. Which provision is comparable to any standard economic model that begins with a qualifying "assuming consumers have perfect knowledge'.<br />"And a dose of healthy scepticism" doesn't transfer from the case cited to cynical Bob Tisdale who is not an expert because he is almost always wrong rather than "sometimes ... wrong". George Montgomeryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07042191140401441348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-32664324010615006362014-02-04T22:42:59.640+11:002014-02-04T22:42:59.640+11:00"Millicent, you forgot to post a reference to..."Millicent, you forgot to post a reference to your assertion of corruption, I don't even know who you are referring to."<br /><br />Greig. Stop what you are doing, get in a taxi (don't try and drive yourself) and head to the nearest hospital and ask for a brain scan. Tell them you are suffering from marked memory loss. Because what you are denying knowledge of is so well documented that anyone without recurring amnesia will know all about it.<br /><br />The other explanation - already suggested by other posters - is that you are a lying troll.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-45749756334088711082014-02-04T21:37:14.646+11:002014-02-04T21:37:14.646+11:00'increased'. Look it up.'increased'. Look it up.cRR Kampenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07571285063752477448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-84458194307102092442014-02-04T21:35:54.330+11:002014-02-04T21:35:54.330+11:00"... And as mentioned previously, I am terti..."... And as mentioned previously, I am tertiary qualified in pure and applied maths and physics, fluid and thermo-dynamics, and environmental engineering."<br /><br />Good to know. A confessed lying troll we have here. Those qualifications are wasted on you and you are a shame to science. But Curry is worse of a waste, no worries.cRR Kampenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07571285063752477448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-90051790211310169472014-02-04T20:52:49.321+11:002014-02-04T20:52:49.321+11:00you boast how you reject climate science.
Do I? ...<i> you boast how you reject climate science. </i><br /><br />Do I? I hadn't noticed, I was too busy correcting your misunderstandings on climate change.Greighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14845487134006948830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-29159981940192641832014-02-04T20:35:11.685+11:002014-02-04T20:35:11.685+11:00Huh? Greig? You think that pointing to the evidenc...Huh? Greig? You think that <a href="http://archive.is/iEBvY" rel="nofollow">pointing to the evidence</a> is something 'credible scientists' don't do? No wonder you have trouble understanding science. <br /><br />All the "credible scientists" I know of point to evidence, as I did. Show me conflicting evidence if you like, but it's not my "opinion" it's cold hard data. <br /><br />You might not like the evidence though I can't think why you wouldn't. You claim engineering and you boast how you reject climate science. You should be saying how you agree with the evidence seeing you're adding to it. <br /><br />Anyway, <a href="http://archive.is/iEBvY" rel="nofollow">the evidence is right there</a>. On a recount given there are now more comments than when I wrote <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2013/07/more-denier-self-portraits-including.html" rel="nofollow">that article</a>, it's 42 engineers boasting how they reject climate science. Forty two science-rejecting engineers in a single thread!<br /><br />Much talk of "wrestling with their conscience" and "communists" and other wackiness. <a href="http://archive.is/iEBvY" rel="nofollow">That thread</a> is a classic if you want to see how the brain of a denier doesn't work. Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-73016913307557527102014-02-04T20:05:35.403+11:002014-02-04T20:05:35.403+11:00The fossil fuel industry employs an awful lot of e...The fossil fuel industry employs an awful lot of engineers. Reading thru the comment section of this Guardian article indicates how very, very active they are on the web:<br /><br />http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/oct/25/oil-companies-north-sea-spills?commentpage=1Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-62498765368374271672014-02-04T20:03:22.281+11:002014-02-04T20:03:22.281+11:00Millicent, you forgot to post a reference to your ...Millicent, you forgot to post a reference to your assertion of corruption, I don't even know who you are referring to. <br /><br />Sou, you are <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2013/07/more-denier-self-portraits-including.html" rel="nofollow">referencing your own opinions</a><br /><br />Credible scientists do not behave this way.Greighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14845487134006948830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-27760110835813549532014-02-04T19:32:05.569+11:002014-02-04T19:32:05.569+11:00There is a disproportionate number of people claim...There is a disproportionate number of people claiming to be engineers who are science deniers. Not so many people who know science are similarly afflicted. I figure it's got something to do with the type of person who gravitates to some engineering courses. Plus a bit of science-envy, maybe? <br /><br />http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2013/07/more-denier-self-portraits-including.htmlSouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-73065054011630153402014-02-04T19:08:32.685+11:002014-02-04T19:08:32.685+11:00"I am tertiary qualified in...."
Yes, b..."I am tertiary qualified in...."<br /><br />Yes, but you are posting stuff about how we should value the garbage produced by a guy with a history of debunked papers and who is known to have trousered money from the fossil fuel industry. That wouldn't impress a nine year old let alone an adult.<br /><br />Do feel free to head off to a site where former tobacco scientists are worshipped as the fount of all knowledge.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-57594713116340820902014-02-04T18:17:39.933+11:002014-02-04T18:17:39.933+11:00MikeH,
I getting familiar with the name-calling ...MikeH, <br /><br />I getting familiar with the name-calling that happens at this site, so being called a buffoon by a racist doesn't faze me much.<br /><br />If you have me pegged as a creationist or pseudo-scientist, you have it wrong. Evolution is a fact as evidenced by the fossil record. And as mentioned previously, I am tertiary qualified in pure and applied maths and physics, fluid and thermo-dynamics, and environmental engineering.Greighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14845487134006948830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-15839303713831497132014-02-04T16:56:49.107+11:002014-02-04T16:56:49.107+11:00Greig quoting H L Mencken. Oh the irony! Mencken h...Greig quoting H L Mencken. Oh the irony! Mencken had some very nasty racist views which poison his legacy but he also had little time for what he viewed as pseudo-science. <br /><br />Here is an account of Mencken and the 1925 Scopes trial. If he was alive today he would likely call Greig a "buffoon".<br /><br />" H.L. Mencken's trial reports were heavily slanted against the prosecution and the jury, which was "unanimously hot for Genesis." He mocked the town's inhabitants as "yokels" and "morons." He called Bryan a "buffoon" and his speeches "theologic bilge." In contrast, he called the defense "eloquent" and "magnificent." Even today some American creationists, fighting in courts and state legislatures to demand that creationism be taught on an equal footing with evolution in the schools, have claimed that it was Mencken's trial reports in 1925 that turned public opinion against creationism"<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_trial<br /><br />MikeHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-41198393997962975182014-02-04T14:08:42.448+11:002014-02-04T14:08:42.448+11:00"Conceivably, though, as more components — co..."Conceivably, though, as more components — complicated biological systems and fully dynamic ice-sheets, for example — are incorporated, the range of possible feedbacks will increase, and chaotic climates might ensue."<br /><br />The great big analogue model we call Planet Earth already includes those components. Which is a sobering thought.Cugelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-81027784999747307072014-02-04T13:23:27.043+11:002014-02-04T13:23:27.043+11:00You really want readers to follow the link to your...You really want readers to follow the link to your "NASA statement on consensus" ? In case they are nervous to follow a Greig link, here it is again.<br /><br />http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus<br /><br />I encourage readers to follow up on the statements by all the US and International professional scientific societies.<br /><br />PLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-61730249115110043782014-02-04T13:20:06.526+11:002014-02-04T13:20:06.526+11:00Greig, you've already tried that one on numero...Greig, you've already tried that one on numerous occasions and failed. Go read some climate science and quit wasting your energy denying it.<br /><br />I couldn't give a damn about *your* definitions. Going by your past behaviour they are usually misdirection and/or misinterpretation on your part. <br /><br />The preponderance of science shows that climate change will be bad if we don't cut emissions. And very bad if we keep increasing them.<br /><br />You can moan and play word games and avoid producing evidence to back up your silly claims (because there is none). It won't stop global warming.<br /><br />(Duane Gish, watch out. Greig isn't on par with you yet, but he's trying.)Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.com