[MD] Global Warming: Science or Politics?

[David M]

Hi Ian

I think the other aspect of this is good
old fashioned inter-subjective agreement.

Its all about experience, what experiences we
can share and then how we value those experiences,
we are going to agree, we are going to disagree and
we need to understand both aspects of individual,
social and intellectual reality.

David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ian glendinning" <psybertron at gmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Global Warming: Science or Politics?


> Case, and Platt, et al
>
> Yes "peer review is designed to eliminate slant" and maintain
> objectivity, but really it can only do that in relatively simple
> cases. Being designed to do, is not the same as doing.
>
> Take a look at this Wayne Booth article if you haven't already.
> http://www.psybertron.org/?p=1351
> On what authority is someone a "peer", etc. We always rely on rhetoric
> at some level; it's really a matter of recognising that and working
> with it rather than denying it.
>
> In fact there is a body of people in academic research flipping
> "neutrality" on its head and suggesting "aim directed research" -
> where the agenda objectives and "interests" are more formally
> recognised, so they can be taken into account, rather than hidden and
> guessed at.
>
> The net result is game theory ... psychology if you like .... call it
> spin, slant, lying if you prefer - it's been called rhetoric for a few
> millennia. Only the long run, evolved, emergent outcome of patterns in
> large bodies of free dialogue and narrative get close to "truth"
> (beyond simple, repeatable, falsifiable cases).
>
> Ian
>
>
> On 2/14/07, Case <Case at ispots.com> wrote:
>> [Platt]
>> I miss your point entirely. Whoever interprets raw data can slant it to
>> support an argument. When a political body (social level) like the UN 
>> uses
>> data to claim global warming, it does what the MOQ says is immoral. See 
>> "How
>> to Lie with Statics" referred to at:
>>
>> [Case]
>> While lying with statistics may work for politicians it is less effective 
>> in
>> the sciences where most of the practitioners are familiar with Huff and 
>> Mark
>> Twain. That is what peer review is designed to eliminate.
>>
>> moq_discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>