Tuollaisen ihan samanlaisen tolppadiagrammin saa mistä tahansa asiasta. Esim: Usko Scientologiaan riippuen siitä, kuinka monennella tasolla vastaaja on.
Kuinka pitkään te oikein jaksatte puolustella Cook:n huijausta?
Cooking stove use, housing associations, white males, and the 97%
Kuinka pitkään te oikein jaksatte puolustella Cook:n huijausta?
The Cook et al. (2013) 97% paper included a bunch of psychology studies, marketing papers, and surveys of the general public as scientific endorsement of anthropogenic climate change.
I need -- hopefully we need -- science to not be dumb, journals to not be dumb. I'm anti-dumb. I expect people to have a basic grasp of logic, epistemology, and to know the gist of decades of research on bias, or even just what wise adults understand about bias. This whole paper is just too dumb, even if it weren't a fraud case. We've been asleep at the wheel – this was a failure of peer-review. And the way people have strained to defend this paper is jawdropping.
Those climate scientists who defended this garbage upset me the most. What are you doing? On what planet would this kind of study be valid or clean?
Cooking stove use, housing associations, white males, and the 97%