The “Escalator to Extinction” Myth

By Jim Steele – Re-Blogged From WUWT

In Life on the Mississippi Mark Twain wrote, “There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.” Unfortunately, conjecture based on limited facts has produced “research” trumpeting catastrophic fears of extinction. The “escalator to extinction” theory argues organisms must migrate to higher elevations where a cooler altitude will offset global warming temperatures. But there is scant evidence that is happening.

Crested Quetzal

Continue reading

Another Nail in the LNT Coffin

By Andrew Montford, GWPF – Re-Blogged From WUWT

A few weeks ago, we at GWPF published a paper by Ed Calabrese and Mikko Paunio, about the linear no-threshold (LNT) model as applied to the harms caused by nuclear radiation. The LNT model encapsulates the idea that there is no safe level of radiation exposure, no threshold below which exposure is not a problem. It is therefore the cause of all extraordinary levels of bureaucracy and safety measures that have all but killed off the nuclear industry in much of the western world.

James V. Neel, author of the ABCC study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Continue reading

Rein in the Four Horsemen of Irreproducibility

   By Dorothy Bishop – Re-Blogged From Nature

Dorothy Bishop describes how threats to reproducibility, recognized but unaddressed for decades, might finally be brought under control.

More than four decades into my scientific career, I find myself an outlier among academics of similar age and seniority: I strongly identify with the movement to make the practice of science more robust. It’s not that my contemporaries are unconcerned about doing science well; it’s just that many of them don’t seem to recognize that there are serious problems with current practices. By contrast, I think that, in two decades, we will look back on the past 60 years — particularly in biomedical science — and marvel at how much time and money has been wasted on flawed research.

How can that be? We know how to formulate and test hypotheses in controlled experiments. We can account for unwanted variation with statistical techniques. We appreciate the need to replicate observations.

Continue reading

Scientific Apophenia

By Kip Hansen – Re-Blogged From WUWT

apophenia_definitionScience, as a whole, advances or fails to advance in large part in a direct relationship to the presence or absence of bias in its research efforts.  There are many types of bias, and these have been discussed in the pages of various Climate Science blogs and publications over the years. [ see the short list at the end of the essay ].

One of the most common biases that skew research and slow or even stop the progress of science is Confirmation Bias:

 

Continue reading