Quote:
Originally Posted by kevman
I gave you the title of an article and where you could find it. Pardon me for not pirating and presenting you with the entire article. However, Cowperson was able to find this link ( http://www.springerlink.com/content/g87327815xg2u1h2/) pretty simply by following directions.
Do tell me why my "peer reviewed" articles are not up to the same standard as yours...if you did explain this already pardon my ignorance because I missed that. I simply searched an academic search engine for "peer reviewed" articles on the topic I was looking for. I was under the impression that by limiting by search to only peer reviewed articles that is what I would get. Apparantly just like the scientists disputing our influence on global warming peer reviewed articles on that matter are also not "real" peer reviewed articles...
I never claimed that 1 article was enough to make an informed decision. I simply said that while you (and Mr. Gore and his 928 articles) were unable to find an article disagreeing with his consensus I was. In fact I believe my whole point a few weeks ago and I'll restress it now was not to take 1 movie (Mr. Gores) as truth like so many did.
Personally I have a hard time believing any "scientists" right now on the issue because it seems like every ideal has a group of their own scientists supporting them. |
Look, it's not like I'm moving the bar on you. A scientist is someone who does original research. A peer-reviewed article is an article where that person presents their data for evaluation by the scientific community. It's really not hard.
What you showed us was neither--it was a review article, and moreover it was a review article that wears its bias on its sleeve--it says at the bottom "our view is ..." which is a signal that there will be two parts--a review of research and then their re-interpretation of that research. Note--and this is important--that only one of the three authors is even a "climatologist"--and that none of them are academics. I'm not saying they're idiots--I'm sure they know what they're talking about. Just that they're not "scientists" any more than Timothy Ball is.
Also, just so you're not putting words in my mouth, I never said there would be no articles out there at all. You can find articles arguing all kinds of stuff, if your standard is one article here or there equals a controversy. By that standard, evolution is a controversy. It's all about who you're prepared to listen to. Personally, I'm more interested in the data, but if you think it's better to listen to the kind of rhetoric you found in your article, be my guest.
