Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Space, the environment, new discoveries and new uses for old ones
User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby kramer » Mon Jul 22, 2013 7:23 pm

Greening of the Earth pushed way back in time
Researchers say a newly named South African fossil points to rising oxygen and life 2.2 billion years ago
University of Oregon


EUGENE, Ore. -- (July 22, 2013) -- Conventional scientific wisdom [i.e. "consensus"] has it that plants and other creatures have only lived on land for about 500 million years, and that landscapes of the early Earth were as barren as Mars.

A new study, led by geologist Gregory J. Retallack of the University of Oregon, now has presented evidence for life on land that is four times as old -- at 2.2 billion years ago and almost half way back to the inception of the planet.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 072213.php


And the consensus was off by a factor of 4!




"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts."
- Richard Feynman


“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18125
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby Fordama » Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:14 am

It's always cute how you show your lack of understanding of scientific consensus. It's like watching a monkey use the wrong end of a spoon to fling their own poo.

The consensus--even mentioned in that story--is that land plants and animals did not exist before half a billion years ago. That still holds because as you can read in that story,the scientists said of this cyanobacteria: ""They certainly were not plants or animals, but something rather more simple."

So this is a great find in that it is the first time that any evidence (from which you form consensus) of any sort of life has ever been found on the surface. It is the first sign of any life, but not of animal or plant life.

You see, consensus is not based on the political beliefs of scientists, but on the available evidence. And as you should certainly know--but apparently don't--is that all knowledge is provisional. That proposition is key to the scientific process.

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby kramer » Tue Jul 23, 2013 8:38 am

The first sentence of that article says:
"Conventional scientific wisdom has it that plants and other creatures have only lived on land for about 500 million years, and that landscapes of the early Earth were as barren as Mars."

But now they have evidence that the Earth's surface 500 million years ago wasn't barren like it is on Mars.

Do you see it now?
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 18653
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby John Q. Public » Tue Jul 23, 2013 8:50 am

Only Kramer could see an exciting new discovery as proving that scientists were wrong.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby kramer » Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:17 am

No. Just pointing out the problems of scientific consensus.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 18653
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby John Q. Public » Tue Jul 23, 2013 10:43 am

"Scientific consensus" is that science isn't final. There are new discoveries being made every day. That's why there will continue to be "Scientist Wanted" ads in the Pennysaver.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby kramer » Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:31 pm

And that's my point. Since the global warming 'consensus' isn't final, we shouldn't rush to socialize our economy, de-wealth ourselves, and commit ourselves to a electronically monitored life.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18125
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby Fordama » Tue Jul 23, 2013 6:49 pm

Round up all the usual suspects?? Now you are the one bordering on the ridiculous, Fordy.
It never ceases to amuse me.

It reminds me of people who don't go to doctors because a few hundred years ago they would apply leaches. So since they were wrong then they must be wrong now.

I hope kramer picks out a good shaman when he gets ill.

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby kramer » Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:10 am

 ! Message from: "John Q. Public"
COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY QUOTE REMOVED

If the day ever comes where we find out that many doctors have hidden some of their raw data, massaged other parts of their raw data, hid declines, conspired to block opposing health research papers from getting published, fought tooth and nail to keep public emails on a study (Mann's hockey stick) from being released via FOIA, and are pushing health care changes in order to bring about global socialism, redistribution of wealth both within and between nations, and to control our lives, I'll look up a good shaman.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18125
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby Fordama » Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:23 pm

Good thing there are thousands of good studies confirming they main hypothesis of global warming.

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
Troglodyte
Posts: 16607
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby Troglodyte » Thu Jul 25, 2013 4:58 pm

Wide acceptance of an idea is NOT proof of its validity, Fordy.. Every generation's absolutes are proven false by the next generation's technology.
Global warming, or climate change, is just a theory without proof. A hair different than wild guessing.
Every one of the "tipping points" have failed to arrive. None of the predictions have come true. Any contrary facts or theories are harshly decried and abased. This has been an open experiment in circular reasoning, a new religion if you will. .
I don't suffer from any mental illnesses.. I enjoy them..

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Another 'scientific consensus' overturned.

Postby kramer » Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:06 pm

Good thing there are thousands of good studies confirming they main hypothesis of global warming.


And yet there has been a roughly 16 or so year long "pause" in global warming. The latest IPCC draft report is currently claiming a lower climate sensitivity to Co2. It remains to be seen if this remains in the final draft. A PNAS paper shows that half of the recent warming is from nature. And according to Al Gore, scientists say that CO2 is responsible for only around 40% of the warming meaning whatever warming we have had since 1980 is only about 20% from CO2. And this is if you dismiss the 1979 paper by Libby and Pandolfi that claimed (based on a repeating pattern of 3 different proxies) there would be natural warming from 1980ish to 2000.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

Return to “Science and Technology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest