A colleague elcentry emailed me a copy of the Lead Letter in Science magazine, May 7, 2010, entitled Climate Change and the Integrity of Science. My friend is a scientist, he is a believer in AGW, and he thought the letter was authoritative. I, on the other hand, am only a Philosophy instructor. But, I must say that every time I read that letter, I get angrier and more disgusted. With the publication of this letter (a despicable, lowly political hack job), the magazine and all the signers relinquish all claim to scientific integrity. There is not one solid thing to hold onto in this letter. This letter is full of the most foul ad hominems, it whines and plays the victim, it makes vague complaints and vague accusations (omitting any particulars, so that any reply would be impossible), begs the question by simply making bold assertion, illegitmately uses appeal to authority and appeal to concensus, whitewashes the climategate affair (calling it McCarthy-like to attack their friends, again without bothering to mention specific charges like stonewalling FOI requests). They even have their own version of Pascal's wager, though it is a wager about the truth of AWG, not about the existence of God. Can you find it? They even smear some of my heroes like Galileo, Darwin, and Einstein, seeming to suggest that they were in it to build reputations and gain recognition. NO! These were men possessed by the quest for scientific truth and understanding. Any person who cannot see that discourse on this level has no place in scientific debate is a person who has no moral integrity. I am going to deconstruct this stupid letter line by line, and maybe you all would like to sign a copy and send a complaint to the so-called Science magazine, to the U.S academy of sciences, and maybe even one to Inhof and the Attorney General of Virginia. So,here is your assignment. If you are smart enough to know that AGW is true, are you smart enough to locate the ad hominems in the Integrity of Science letter, and are you smart enough to say why such fallacious reasoning has no place in scientific discussion? By the way, you don't need a Ph.D. in Philosophy or a statement by the American Philosophical Association to know that ad hominem is scum-bag argumentation and that it is wrong. Cheers.[DC: The wide difference of opinion between you and your scientist colleague is a microcosm of the gulf between scientists and some portions of the general public. It also appears that you have no objection to the initiatives of Senator Inhofe and the Virginia Attorney General. You are entitled to your opinion, however ill-informed it may be. However, I must warn you in advance that your initial comment is already overly long, and it certainly would be unacceptable to post a "line-by-line" critique. So please publish it elsewhere, and if you like you can point to it here. Thanks! ]
oct23dahmane bonjour dajneeh je voie que tu t’inte9resse,a faycel elkhassem et dans cette articl ce que je constate qu,il fait la critique des tortionnaires (arabe)pas tous bien sur,il travail pour el jazera. ce qui m'intrigue le plus ces sont maitre a pense9e et aldouse huexly qui est pour moi et beaucoup d'autre un des porte drapeaux des ide9es du nouvelle ordre mondial je vous signale comme meame qu'il a e9crit le livre le meilleure du monde ,Dans ce livre visionnaire e9crit de8s 1932, Aldous Huxley imagine une socie9te9 qui utiliserait la ge9ne9tique et le clonage pour le conditionnement et le contrf4le des individus.Dans cette socie9te9 future, tous les enfants sont cone7us dans des e9prouvettes. Ils sont ge9ne9tiquement conditionne9s pour appartenir e0 l'une des 5 cate9gories de population. De la plus intelligente e0 la plus stupide: les Alpha (l'e9lite), les Be9tas (les exe9cutants), les Gammas (les employe9s subalternes), les Deltas et les Epsilons (destine9s aux travaux pe9nibles).Le meilleur des mondes de9crit aussi ce que serait la dictature parfaite: une dictature qui aurait les apparences de la de9mocratie, une prison sans murs dont les prisonniers ne songeraient pas e0 s'e9vader. Un syste8me d'esclavage of9, gre2ce la consommation et au divertissement, les esclaves auraient l'amour de leur servitude -un bon exemple a suivre pour faycel elkhassem j'invite tout le monde a inte9resser a ce personnage,la de9sinformation par des me9thodes tre8s subversif,est une propagande bien connus des sbires et les tenons d'un nouvelle ordre mondial dont el-jzira fait partie, je m'explique,on parle jamais des re9pressions commise par le Bahreefn a l’encontre de ces citoyens avec l'aide de saoudien et des quataris,pas de re9solution (1973)a l’ONU pas de dictateur comme sadame et khadafi a tuer pas d'arme9e de l'OTAN le deux poids de mesure,que faycel elkhassem ne de9nonce pas bien sur en tout connaissance de cause que sont maitre a pense9e aldousse huexly lui bien appris.
Oui en effet, une activité "3d" me parait plus séduisante mais peut être que cela est plus difficile et plus couteux pour commencer... Je dispose d'un budget de 300€/mois tt compris..
Not affiliated with C3, Austin City Limits, or Austin City Limits Festival. This is strictly for entertainment purposes. No accuracy is guaranteed by this forum and moderation is limited.
