<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Global Warming &amp; Epistemology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/</link>
	<description>Get Marooned</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:09:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Ghostologist</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19264</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Ghostologist]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Dec 2008 20:22:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19264</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Actually, I am myself a ghostologist. That&#039;s right, I study ghosts. Most people don&#039;t believe ghosts are real, but who are they to disagree with me anyway? After all, I&#039;m a ghostologist and they are not! Si if we ghostologists reach a consensus on the fact that ghosts do indeed exist, you&#039;d better believe us.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Joke aside, the problem I have with global warming is not regarding the science itself. It&#039;s that some environmentalists want me to accept all the following statements:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;* there is global warming&lt;br&gt;* and it is man-made&lt;br&gt;* and it is necessarily a bad thing&lt;br&gt;* so we have to fight it through massive economical planning&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Actually, I&#039;m not a scientist and it may be true that there is man-made global warming. But you&#039;d better have to be really convincing if you want me to accept giving even more power to bureaucrats.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, I am myself a ghostologist. That&#39;s right, I study ghosts. Most people don&#39;t believe ghosts are real, but who are they to disagree with me anyway? After all, I&#39;m a ghostologist and they are not! Si if we ghostologists reach a consensus on the fact that ghosts do indeed exist, you&#39;d better believe us.</p>
<p>Joke aside, the problem I have with global warming is not regarding the science itself. It&#39;s that some environmentalists want me to accept all the following statements:</p>
<p>* there is global warming<br />* and it is man-made<br />* and it is necessarily a bad thing<br />* so we have to fight it through massive economical planning</p>
<p>Actually, I&#39;m not a scientist and it may be true that there is man-made global warming. But you&#39;d better have to be really convincing if you want me to accept giving even more power to bureaucrats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Kepler</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19263</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jon Kepler]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19263</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You know, there&#039;s another side to this argument.  Regardless of whatever happens, what the hell are you as a single person going to do about it?  Nothing.  The only way to affect real change is to inspire a larger group of people.  Since the general public seems to be increasingly motivated to do something as of late (with our without you), I feel that I and my close friends really only have two options:  1) ignore it/wait it out 2) get involved for the purpose of profiting.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I read an article yesterday written by someone who, when driving a Rolls Royce Phantom, was flipped off by a Prius driver.  While you could argue about who&#039;s being more self righteous, a single V12 has the same effect on the environment as a single hybrid powertrain:  none.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know, there&#39;s another side to this argument.  Regardless of whatever happens, what the hell are you as a single person going to do about it?  Nothing.  The only way to affect real change is to inspire a larger group of people.  Since the general public seems to be increasingly motivated to do something as of late (with our without you), I feel that I and my close friends really only have two options:  1) ignore it/wait it out 2) get involved for the purpose of profiting.</p>
<p>I read an article yesterday written by someone who, when driving a Rolls Royce Phantom, was flipped off by a Prius driver.  While you could argue about who&#39;s being more self righteous, a single V12 has the same effect on the environment as a single hybrid powertrain:  none.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19262</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 07:23:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My only concern is the data: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?x...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;When a hypothesis (global warming caused in total or in part by manmade activity) is based entirely on numbers (temperature readings), and some of those numbers are discovered to be false exaggerations, there&#039;s a problem.  If scientists are going to recommend serious costly overhauls to the economy to curb carbon emissions among other things, they had damn well better make sure the data is right and has been rigorously tested and verified.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My only concern is the data: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml" rel="nofollow">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?x&#8230;</a></p>
<p>When a hypothesis (global warming caused in total or in part by manmade activity) is based entirely on numbers (temperature readings), and some of those numbers are discovered to be false exaggerations, there&#39;s a problem.  If scientists are going to recommend serious costly overhauls to the economy to curb carbon emissions among other things, they had damn well better make sure the data is right and has been rigorously tested and verified.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Simons</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19261</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Simons]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 20:18:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Janm said &#039;Michael Crichton studies biological anthropology, lectured in anthropology at Cambridge and got an M.D. from Harvard. That&#039;s a bit more that &quot;just a writer&quot; and certainly close to &quot;scientist&quot;.&#039;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I have given an extract of one of his books (Jurassic Park) to students to see if they could spot the five blunders on the one page. He was not much of a scientist.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Janm said &#39;Michael Crichton studies biological anthropology, lectured in anthropology at Cambridge and got an M.D. from Harvard. That&#39;s a bit more that &#8220;just a writer&#8221; and certainly close to &#8220;scientist&#8221;.&#39;</p>
<p>I have given an extract of one of his books (Jurassic Park) to students to see if they could spot the five blunders on the one page. He was not much of a scientist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mattmaroon</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19260</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mattmaroon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 20:06:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19260</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s largely not how science is funded. Many have been fired because the corporations that pay them to study climate change don&#039;t like the results. It&#039;s not Al Gore funding them all, it&#039;s Exxon.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#39;s largely not how science is funded. Many have been fired because the corporations that pay them to study climate change don&#39;t like the results. It&#39;s not Al Gore funding them all, it&#39;s Exxon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19259</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:30:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19259</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting ... though ....I thought the agrument was that if global warming is a non-issue, all the people who collect money for studying climate have a difficult time buying groceries because no one cares.  You seem to take it in the other direction i.e. if those studying a problem claim it&#039;s a major problem, then we should give them lots of money.  May I add you to my mailing list please?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting &#8230; though &#8230;.I thought the agrument was that if global warming is a non-issue, all the people who collect money for studying climate have a difficult time buying groceries because no one cares.  You seem to take it in the other direction i.e. if those studying a problem claim it&#39;s a major problem, then we should give them lots of money.  May I add you to my mailing list please?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mattmaroon</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19258</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mattmaroon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:20:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19258</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The difference between trusting priests and scientists is that scientists use things like data collection, experimentation, and peer review. It&#039;s not at all similar. It&#039;s the opposite.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Here&#039;s the first list of facts I found Googling: &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Which not coincidentally directly refutes the &quot;facts&quot; you gave. For instance:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&quot;Average temperatures have climbed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius) around the world since 1880, much of this in recent decades, according to NASA&#039;s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;• The rate of warming is increasing. The 20th century&#039;s last two decades were the hottest in 400 years and possibly the warmest for several millennia, according to a number of climate studies. And the United Nations&#039; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that 11 of the past 12 years are among the dozen warmest since 1850. &quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;How are you so sure the facts you gave are the correct ones? If most scientists believe the facts I just gave, and you&#039;re not a scientist, why do you believe them? Recent cooling doesn&#039;t refute global warming (which is better termed global climate change anyway) at all. You would expect some small periods to be cooler than preceding ones.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The difference between trusting priests and scientists is that scientists use things like data collection, experimentation, and peer review. It&#39;s not at all similar. It&#39;s the opposite.</p>
<p>Here&#39;s the first list of facts I found Googling: <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming.html" rel="nofollow">http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12&#8230;</a></p>
<p>Which not coincidentally directly refutes the &#8220;facts&#8221; you gave. For instance:</p>
<p>&#8220;Average temperatures have climbed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius) around the world since 1880, much of this in recent decades, according to NASA&#39;s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.</p>
<p>• The rate of warming is increasing. The 20th century&#39;s last two decades were the hottest in 400 years and possibly the warmest for several millennia, according to a number of climate studies. And the United Nations&#39; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that 11 of the past 12 years are among the dozen warmest since 1850. &#8220;</p>
<p>How are you so sure the facts you gave are the correct ones? If most scientists believe the facts I just gave, and you&#39;re not a scientist, why do you believe them? Recent cooling doesn&#39;t refute global warming (which is better termed global climate change anyway) at all. You would expect some small periods to be cooler than preceding ones.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mattmaroon</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19257</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mattmaroon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19257</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It was spam filtered for whatever reason. I&#039;ll fix it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was spam filtered for whatever reason. I&#39;ll fix it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Hensley</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19256</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Justin Hensley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:03:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19256</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you want to talk anthropology, I would take a look at Jared Diamond&#039;s work before I looked at Crichton&#039;s.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Diamond is a Pulitzer prize winner who writes nonfiction.&lt;br&gt;Crichton writes science fiction.&lt;br&gt;Diamond wrote Collapse, a factual account of previous civilization&#039;s undoings and what caused them. &lt;br&gt;Crichton wrote a sci-fi book called State of Fear that talks about environmentalists killing people to support their views.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Michael Crichton was a good sci-fi author and a bad authority on climate change.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you want to talk anthropology, I would take a look at Jared Diamond&#39;s work before I looked at Crichton&#39;s.</p>
<p>Diamond is a Pulitzer prize winner who writes nonfiction.<br />Crichton writes science fiction.<br />Diamond wrote Collapse, a factual account of previous civilization&#39;s undoings and what caused them. <br />Crichton wrote a sci-fi book called State of Fear that talks about environmentalists killing people to support their views.</p>
<p>Michael Crichton was a good sci-fi author and a bad authority on climate change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: janm</title>
		<link>http://mattmaroon.com/2008/11/27/global-warming-epistemology/#comment-19255</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[janm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 08:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattmaroon.com/?p=610#comment-19255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hmm.  My other (long) response was lost.  Will it come back?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm.  My other (long) response was lost.  Will it come back?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

