The Australian reports:
CONSENSUS decision-making on climate change has oversimplified the problem and how to solve it, and unduly politicised the process, a leading US climate scientist has said.
Writing in The Weekend Australian today, Judith Curry, professor and chairwoman of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, said the consensus-building process itself could be a source of bias.
“A strongly held prior belief can skew the total evidence that is available subsequently in a direction that is favourable to itself,” Professor Curry said.
Science is definitely not a game of “the majority rules.” Give us some consistent and rational explanations of the observations. Show us your methods in detail. Then we’ll call it science. Climatology isn’t there yet.
It’s always confused me how people can go on about consensus in science when every scientific hero story is about someone disproving a long standing consensus belief.
Check out “white hat bias”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hat_bias
Also look up bamboozle
Reblogged this on Mothers Against Wind Turbines and commented:
Global warming has lost it’s ability to strike fear into our hearts any longer!
The greentards don’t want to give up the only real sales gimmick they have for the “renewables” scam. You have to scare people, in order to get them to go along with such ridiculous schemes. People are losing their fear, and that is the eco-freaks worst nightmare!