= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
395b78 comments on 2011 Survey Results - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (513)
Stop being astonished so easily. How much familiarity with climate science do you expect the average non-climate scientist to actually have?
I suspect that people displaying >95% certainty about AGW aren't much more "familiar with the data" than the people who display less certainty -- that their most significant difference is that they put more trust on what is a political position in the USA.
But I doubt you question the "familiarity with the data" of the people who are very very certain of your preferred position.
Desrtopa said:
ArisKatsaris said:
The problem with these arguments is that you need to 1. know the data 2. know how other people would interpret it , because with just 1. you'll end up comparing your probability assignments with others', and might perhaps mistake into thinking that their deviation from your estimation is due to lack of access to the data and/or understanding over it...... ........unless you're comparing it to what your idea of some consensus is.
...Meanwhile I don't know either so just making a superficial observation, while not knowing which one of you knows which things here.