I don’t accept when people say “see, it’s snowing, climate change isn’t real!” so why would I accept the equal but opposite statement? Just because it reinforces my beliefs?
It’s anti-science to pretend they are the same thing because you want them to be. A random anecdotal sample is a single data point, or twenty data points, etc. The actual scientific problem of estimating and anticipation climate effects are the modeling billions of those data points, almost none of which we were around to actual observe.
This blind tribalism where ”You don’t get to use x as evidence but I do” hurts climate science overall.
When you flip a coin five times and get heads each time, you shrug and assume you were just lucky that day. When you flip a coin a 20 times and get heads each time, you start to wonder if the coin is unevenly weighted. A consistent pattern of extremely hot weather year after year breaking established records at least suggests a trend.
SV_BubbleTime|4 years ago
I don’t accept when people say “see, it’s snowing, climate change isn’t real!” so why would I accept the equal but opposite statement? Just because it reinforces my beliefs?
It’s anti-science to pretend they are the same thing because you want them to be. A random anecdotal sample is a single data point, or twenty data points, etc. The actual scientific problem of estimating and anticipation climate effects are the modeling billions of those data points, almost none of which we were around to actual observe.
This blind tribalism where ”You don’t get to use x as evidence but I do” hurts climate science overall.
retrac|4 years ago
jeffbee|4 years ago
[deleted]