Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard:
Quote:
|
But the uncertainties do not negate the main conclusion!]
|
t vago replied:
Quote:
|
Which is that there's significant and credible doubt as to the accuracy or validity of AGW. Putting your conclusions in boldface do not make them somehow true.
|
In Neil's world (that of the professional activist) the end justifies the means. It makes no difference that there is credible evidence and doubt to the contrary offered by other scientists who do not agree. Remember,
this is a political movement. That is it's ultimate but unstated purpose. Once you have a majority of scientists singing from the same playbook they automatically win. Case closed. The majority rules. Just like an election. Right Neil?
Just don't call it "science"...
You'll have to wait until they are proven wrong. And the day they are proven wrong, so what? They get paid anyway and can say they didn't know enough at the time. It's the perfect rationalization.
Their game is: "Heads I win, tails you lose."