Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

Mon Feb 22 19:38:34 UTC 2021

OK, I looked closer.  I see it is a self titled opinion piece so there is
that.  Next, I see all the links in the article go to questionable sites
(not .edu or scientific organizations, etc.)  except one cherry picked NOAA
stat for a single event type for a single year.  Last, the writer is the
president of a right wing anti science lobbying group called "Spark of
Freedom" funded by Exxon Mobil.

Look, I and most everyone on this list are not qualified, experienced
climate scientists.  However, I think when you are not an expert you should
respect and believe what experts say as a group.  Picking outliers and
sharing opinions of obviously unqualified and biased people is
reprehensible and dishonest as far as I am concerned.

If you truly believe the scientific consensus around climate change is
wrong you are going to have to do a lot more than share links.  You will
have to do science and prove it.

Best.

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:27 AM Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:

> What offended you? The term “Global Warmist”? It’s an accurate description
> of people who hold that climate change is causing more frequent and severe
> weather, due to heating of the atmosphere.
>
> And your argument about “Forbes for something related to science” fails on
> the classic logical fallacy “appeal to authority”. Just because Forbes
> states easily verifiable public facts doesn’t make them untrustworthy.
> Scientific knowledge is best established by evidence and experiment rather
> than argued through authority by “consensus”. Science is not a consensus
> enterprise.
>
>  -mel
>
> > On Feb 22, 2021, at 10:16 AM, Brandon Svec via NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Feb 22, 2021, at 9:56 AM, Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry Global Warmists,
> >
> >
> > Stopped taking you seriously or reading further right there.  Well, that
> and linking to Forbes for something related to science.
> >
> > Best.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210222/a637690d/attachment.html>