I nearly thought about posting on this, where the Toad (aka Connolley) has finally decided that 8minutes of watching him rowing is more important than anything else.
However, then I noticed people were commenting and I couldn’t help wondering what the eco-fascist line was on rowing. Then I spotted this gem from the EndOfPhysics:
Apart from the “can can’t” this is something I seem to be encountering more and more. People who are insisting on validation of models, or precise confirmation of certain quantities (like the ECS for example). It’s as if they think science should be more like engineering and don’t realise that science is about trying to understand the world around us, not control or use it. You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand, you can only do as well as is possible given the tools/knowledge available at that time.
Yet another classic example of the ivory tower mentality: “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand“. And yes, because engineers deal with this type of problem day in day out where “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand“, engineers are the professionals in judging a situation where “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand“, and this is why engineers work on these kinds of issues where we do need to make decisions where “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand” and this is why we don’t allow academics in their ivory towers to go anywhere near problems where you do want “scientific results on demand“.
This is the delusion of academia. They sit in their ivory towers thinking they are better than engineers, telling us they are “95% confident” and that there is “97% consensus”. But when anyone asks them to justify their claims that any engineer can see are fraudulent they say: “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand“.
The difference between science and engineering.
An engineer is a scientist. The difference is that engineers have ADDITIONAL TRAINING, SKILLS & TECHNIQUES which allow them to make the best possible decisions when “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand“. So engineers are scientists who are also trained to deal with situations with limited information, with unclear results, with the human factors and with life and death decisions – and make the best decision.
In contrast academics don’t make any decision. They understand how to deal with less-that-perfect real world situation. The reality is that they only work in areas where “You CAN deliver a scientific result on demand“, and look down at the far higher training, skills & techniques of engineers having to make time-critical, life-critical decisions in the real world outside their ivory towers.
And it is this arrogant stupidity of academics, who clearly do not have any legitimacy as any kind of expert in situations like the climate where “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand“. It’s this arrogance they have any expertise, which has led them into the non-science of pretending to be experts in an area where they have no competence:Climate Engineering
Definition: Climate engineering is the scientific & engineering skills, techniques & training to make the best scientific, engineering, economic & policy decisions on climate in a situation where “You can’t just deliver a scientific result on demand“.