et pet

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About et pet

  • Rank
  1. Scientific Method in climate science

    My apologies then, I was under the impression that NortonH did NOT accept argument from authority as proof : "Please only speak for yourself. I do not accept argument from authority as proof." - NortonH "Anyway, thank you for your answers. I find it odd that on a forum named "Science Forums" some people advocate for junking the scientific method and accepting the fallacy of argument from authority but that is your prerogative." - NortonH. "BeeCee - be clear - I am NOT arguing from authority. I am the one opposing that tactic. OK? - NortonH. "Final attempt - argument from authority has no value ever." - NortonH. "er no. Any reputable scientist will argue against the fallacy of argument from authority because it is contrary to the SM." - NortonH. Again, my apologies, I may have misread or misunderstood these Posts by NortonH.
  2. Scientific Method in climate science

    It appears that what seemed to begin as an effort to engage in a discussion about "Scientific Method in climate science", has been derailed. For whatever reason, some Members (whether by choice or the simple inability to participate in real scientific discussions?) seem to NOT want THAT discussion to take place. As for this "Argument from Authority" issue - in relation to Science - I present the following Quote : "One of the great commandments of science is, 'Mistrust arguments from authority'. (Scientists, being primates, and thus given to dominance hierarchies, of course do not always follow this commandment.) Too many such arguments have proved too painfully wrong. Authorities must prove their contentions like everybody else. This independence of science, its occasional unwillingness to accept conventional wisdom, makes it dangerous to doctrines less self-critical, or with pretensions to certitude." The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark By Carl Sagan