Slashdot Mirror


Science By Democracy Doesn't Work

StartsWithABang writes The US Senate just voted on whether climate change is a hoax, knowing full well that debates or votes don't change what is or isn't scientifically true or valid. Nevertheless, debates have always been a thing in science, and they do have their place: in raising what points would be needed to validate, robustly confirm or refute competing explanations, theories or ideas. The greatest scientific debate in all of history — along with its conclusions — illustrates exactly this.

4 of 497 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Science by democracy doesn't work? by arpad1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How does one determine when science has "fully resolved" a question? When the hypothesis has experimental/observational verification. Policy based on any other standard, like a consensus of dubious objectivity, is a crap shoot.

    --
    Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
  2. Re:So what was the result?? by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is climate change real and not a hoax?: Yes (98:1) - Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) voted "Yes"

    Do humans contribute significantly to climate change?: No (50:49) - All the Dems plus a few Reps votes "Yes". Key to that result however is that before the vote Sen. Lisa Murkoswki (R-AK) took exception to the word "significantly", which I actually think is a reasonable point given the available data that tries to quantify our contribution to the changes.

    The question that remains unanswered is how many of those 50 that voted "No" in the second vote would have voted differently if the contentious "significantly" wasn't present. That's almost certainly more than zero, so it appears that the disconnect between what US politicians and scientists believe about climate change and AGW might not be as far apart as some are portraying it, and might not even exist at all.

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  3. Re:A question for all the"deniers". by Tranzistors · · Score: 3, Interesting

    By "self regulating eco-system" AC meant that Earth always has a climate. And at some point (indefinite future) it will stabilize. Did snowball Earth (if such existed) have climate? Yes. Was it stable? Sure, for a while. So there you have it.

  4. Re:Science by democracy doesn't work? by itzly · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The difference is that you can duplicate the tests, measurements and models, and that you are invited to come up with alternative explanations.