OT: Well this is slightly eerie

incongruent chap, isn't he:

"Anyone who thinks scientists like agreeing with one another has never attended a scientific conference."

"I?m so disappointed that the country that I grew up in . . .that people are debating what is and what is not scientifically true."

about your comment. I would say this is another case of a non-scientist (y ou) making claims about something they know nothing about (scientists).

attended a scientific conference."

? that put men on the moon, that developed the internet, that invented pe rsonal computers and smartphones ? that people are debating what is and what is not scientifically true."

ttle more about this stuff than the armchair deniers on SED.

people

Whatever you mean by that....

Whatever.

I am indeed merely an engineer, not a scientist, but I've spent my whole career in a scientific institute of some renown and I've seen thing or two.

I'm not going to argue any further over this. It's a waste of time.

Jeroen Belleman

Nobody is forcing you to reply.

I mean he is talking out of both sides of his mouth.

e:

te:

ck

ht about your comment. I would say this is another case of a non-scientist (you) making claims about something they know nothing about (scientists).

r attended a scientific conference."

?? that put men on the moon, that developed the internet, that invented personal computers and smartphones ? that people are debating what is and what is not scientifically true."

little more about this stuff than the armchair deniers on SED.

hat people

I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion.

The first quote is in reference to the accusation that scientists in genera l are pressured to agree with one another. In other words, if a lot of the m agree with one another, it's because they came to that conclusion indepen dently, not because they were pressured into it. As an engineer this is no t difficult for me to believe as engineers are just as stubborn and unwilli ng to change their opinions without good reason.

The second quote is regarding the apparent increase in society's unwillingn ess to believe in scientific research despite everything concrete it has pr oduced.

I see no conflict between these two.

Precisely.

It isn't that difficult, but it seems to exceed the anonymous poster's critical thinking abilities. (Assuming his objective isn't simply to troll this group).

WTF are you talking about??? This isn't about resistors. Are you suggesting Sandy was from the wrong parts bin?

I don't think it takes too many years and we have already seen a few.

Are you saying John Larkin is an expert and so knows nothing?

te:

It's not if, it's when"

do

re design.

to pipe in here. I've heard a few random meteorologists while listening to the radio and TV say something to the effect that Harvey, Katrina and Sand y were likely the way they were because of warming ocean temperatures, caus ed by climate change. But, you denier dumbasses know better than them.

ic most medical professionals are involved in a massive conspiracy to screw everyone, too.

But Sandy was unusual:

Not sure if you're serious, but I'm sarcastically saying the real experts k now nothing. Larkin might be closer to an expert in electronics, but certa inly not in weather-related issues.