|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.136.244.80
In Reply to: Clark, show me an article with a similar point of view from a peer-reviewed scientific journal of repute... posted by C.B. on June 16, 2006 at 09:42:15:
How many anti-racism works were published in the Nazi Germany?
Follow Ups:
Science is always open to opposing opinions, indeed it is built on the premise that theories and "working models" are made to be demolished. If a "climate scientist" with credentials were to present a dissenting article to, say, Scinetific American or Nature, the editors would welcome it, since a little controversy is always good for sales.
The whole branches of science have been pushed and destroyed before.
-
As soon as you introduce into science things politically acceptable and not, you kill it. This is happening now.
d
.
s
NT
.
.
Vic,
science works like that. You get to a certain point and the crowd jumps the fence. After that point they don't want to hear from the Old Guard.That does NOT mean the Old Guard is ignored. Far from it. There are many instances in the history of science where the old guard has managed to destroy the new theory.
If someone came up with a REAL argument that kills GW, it would get published. The scientist would announce his results, and the 'war' would begin. This has not happened, and at this point I don't think it can happen.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: