Comments on: Phil Jones May Still Have Some More Reflecting To Do

By: Leif Thell

Leif Thell — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 00:09:53 +0000

a couple of the remarks folks put up are silly and unrelated, occasionally i ask myself if they in reality study the article content and items prior to leaving your 2 cents or if perhaps they actually skim the title of the publish and pen the extremely very first issue that pops into their brain. in any case, it’s enjoyable to browse smart commentary from time to time rather than the quite identical, outdated blog vomit which i very usually discover on the net

By: Tiffany Grey

Tiffany Grey — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 01:38:42 +0000

I thought that was extremeley helpful. Thanks for the unusual content. I’ll keep checking back on this.

By: Emily

Emily — Mon, 31 May 2010 01:16:21 +0000

Jones strikes me as one who has dug a hole too deep. I’m sure that his ‘earlier’ work didn’t really prepare him for the scrutiny that he is now faced with. His subsequent work apears to be that of a scientist who has placed greater emphasis on his notariety than on his science. We all have an ego, some of us manage to remain grounded while others ‘go with the flow’. It strikes me that Jones has practiced ‘poor science’ more to maintain his ‘position in the climate science community’ than to further the critical assessment of the science itself. His lack of scientific method, wrt to the core data supporting his hypotheses, reflects a less than critical approach and can be likened to one who ‘feels’ he no longer needs the ‘proof’, he just needs to continue the storey. All scientists are lost once they start to ‘believe’ they are right and that they have a cause to champion.

By: Tom Kennedy

Tom Kennedy — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 23:35:39 +0000

Yes, I agree Prof. Jones has not done anything like come clean. The mere fact of the time of release of his interview, on a friday night, suggests that this is more about preserving a position than an attempt to redress past wrongs.

The significance of AGW to its political backers in terms of the old standbys money and power suggests their goal will not be easily let go. But there is another group, the religious believers who likely will be even more resistant to loss of their hope to establish a new garden of Eden on this sorry planet. I wonder if the recent spate of atheist books (Dawson, Hitchens) have led some to conclude they must take matters into their own hands. Finally for the scientists themselves fame, influence and self image as a white knight will hard to yield.

The entire basis of science is humility: before the data, and in willingness to let go of hypotheses which the data has disproved. Humility also says intrinsic self worth is related to neither success nor failure. I hope the Professor remembers this soon.

By: House

House — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 08:48:35 +0000

By: Robert E. Phelan

Robert E. Phelan — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 21:39:52 +0000

I’m not entirely sure that more reflection will give Dr. Jones a more objective view of Climate Science…. or any of us, for that matter. The notion that “facts speak for themselves” is an illusion. Facts are always filtered through multiple, polarizing lenses that ultimately seem to give a coherent world view. The exact same facts can be used to support radically different views of reality… and the various approaches to those views can coalesce…. religion, politics, literature, economic advantage…. all can come together to support a particular vision of reality.

I suspect that Dr. Jones is conceding what he must and no more. I think very few of us could survive Saul’s experience on the road to Damascus. Cognitive dissonance is excruciating.