I’m in no way a climate change denier and I too believe that the current path leads us there. However, isn’t it normal for 80% of climate scientist actively researching this to think this way? Would they not spend their efforts somewhere else if they would think this isn’t happening?
A survey among mathematicians showed that 80% consider that mathematics has the answer they’re looking for.
We need to discuss hard data and proper research, not surveys.
Apparently those brainiacs with their fancy book learnin’ and expertise are useless. We must all sift through hundreds of thousands of pages of raw data before reaching any conclusions. The entire concept of career specialization is wrong! Throw it out!
Yeah, I used to run into you in r/skeptic a lot, fighting the good fight lol. And we both know the mods of that sub let it be overrun with all types of deniers and insane conspiracy theorists… But at least those trolls put a little more effort into it than just scoffing at experts.
That’s not what I said at all, is it? I’m simply pointing out that we’re reacting to a poorly written article which plays on our emotional side instead of discussing the actual facts. Yes, scientists doing research in an area believe that their research is going to confirm their hypothesis. That’s how research works. In this case, I’m surprised it’s not 100% to be honest.
The whole premise of the article is stupid. Not global warming, not the fact that we’re heading towards more than 2.5C global warming by 2100, not the people answering the questions. What’s stupid is the idea of “conducting an opinion poll” in that specific group.
If someone could convincingly scientifically back up their belief that climate change isn’t going to be a big deal, they’d be swimming in oil company money to promote their work. There’s definitely an incentive to research it if you think the other way.
If they’re not the ones to give us that data, who would? Polling experts in the field is different from asking fisherman if they think we should eat fish
What data though? This article doesn’t contain data - that’s my issue. You’re right, it’s not asking fishermen if they think we should eat fish. It’s asking nutritionists if they like fish.
I’m in no way a climate change denier and I too believe that the current path leads us there. However, isn’t it normal for 80% of climate scientist actively researching this to think this way? Would they not spend their efforts somewhere else if they would think this isn’t happening?
We need to discuss hard data and proper research, not surveys.
Sorry… are you saying that a survey of what experts in a field think is happening is no indication of what is happening?
Apparently those brainiacs with their fancy book learnin’ and expertise are useless. We must all sift through hundreds of thousands of pages of raw data before reaching any conclusions. The entire concept of career specialization is wrong! Throw it out!
It’s a bizarre claim even for a climate change denier.
Yeah, I used to run into you in r/skeptic a lot, fighting the good fight lol. And we both know the mods of that sub let it be overrun with all types of deniers and insane conspiracy theorists… But at least those trolls put a little more effort into it than just scoffing at experts.
We clearly need to take back control and hack the planet 😉
No. I’m saying that “77% of Top …etc” is a stupid way of conveying the importance of the information.
In what way should it have been conveyed in a simple manner that non-scientists could understand? Because Common Dreams is not a scientific journal.
“I’m not a climate change denier but why does anyone care what experts think?!” 🙄
That’s not what I said at all, is it? I’m simply pointing out that we’re reacting to a poorly written article which plays on our emotional side instead of discussing the actual facts. Yes, scientists doing research in an area believe that their research is going to confirm their hypothesis. That’s how research works. In this case, I’m surprised it’s not 100% to be honest.
The whole premise of the article is stupid. Not global warming, not the fact that we’re heading towards more than 2.5C global warming by 2100, not the people answering the questions. What’s stupid is the idea of “conducting an opinion poll” in that specific group.
If someone could convincingly scientifically back up their belief that climate change isn’t going to be a big deal, they’d be swimming in oil company money to promote their work. There’s definitely an incentive to research it if you think the other way.
Maybe the answer you expect is not presented in this article?
Or at least the expectation you are presenting is something an exact science would produce?
!collapse@lemmy.ml Is what you’re looking for.
If they’re not the ones to give us that data, who would? Polling experts in the field is different from asking fisherman if they think we should eat fish
What data though? This article doesn’t contain data - that’s my issue. You’re right, it’s not asking fishermen if they think we should eat fish. It’s asking nutritionists if they like fish.