Ron Bailey wonders what it would take to convince you that AGW was occurring.
Roy Spencer responds.
I agree that Ron is a smart guy, but I do think there’s some of this going on:
I hate to impute motives, but I really have to wonder if he is succumbing to peer pressure, since believing anything that smacks of denial-ism is really frowned upon in the intellectual circles I’m sure Ron is part of.
I think it’s compounded by the fact that it’s hard enough to change your mind once. It would be kind of embarrassing to revert back to skepticism. The key point, of course, is that Ron doesn’t necessarily believe that the problem demands any particular policy solution.
One key part of a scientific theory is that it can make predictions which can be tested and falsified. So the scientific question is not “what would it take to make you believe it is true?”, it is “what would it take to make you believe it is false?”
Something like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa.
AGW is the new astrology. No matter what happens, you can always point to something and say “egad, that is so true!”