How come people believe in non-peer reviewed Global Warming Articles?

I am an Environmental Geography Major, and it baffles me that people would believe in non-peer reviewed global warming articles that are used to dis-prove the theory. A scientific theory is the highest regarded set of standards that an experiment go through. For anyone arguing "It's just a theory and not a law, so its wrong." A theory is a tested hypothesis that is repeated and get the same results, and a theory is unpredictable. A law is the same as a theory but you are able to predict what will happen in the experiment, like gravity, we will always be able to predict gravity. I mean The theory of Global Warming is as close as the Theory of Evolution and the Theory of Plate Tectonics. So how come people print false leading article that this is a hoax? Are they afraid of it being to popular? Are they to ignorant? Do they work for the oil or connected to the oil lobbys? The Bush Admin falsified reports on Global Warming which is a felony, and in some countries punishable by death. So why do people go out of their way to write false reports?

2008-12-31T13:29:54Z

Yeah well I've never seen a peer review against Evolution but alot of people dont believe in that so I guess we both are at odds.

2008-12-31T15:23:18Z

Jeff, Water Vapor may be the most abundant, but do you know where water vapor goes when the atmosphere cant hold any more of it? It goes to the ground. CO2 and Methane are probably the two most harmful green house gases in the atmosphere. I can tell you so much more information on this subject. But I am lead to believe my information hurts the RWers and isnt much help on the internet because that is all they are good at is spreading their lies. I have read about 4 books on this subject and taken 2 college classes on it. And how come my professors who graduated from UCLA, Ohio State and so on believe in this subject?

2009-01-01T09:42:36Z

Geography has no labs, so it is a social science, just as Anthropology and Sociology. Geography, you can not get a BS of Science, but you can get a BA in Geography because it is a liberal art's subject. I also said I am minoring in Geology, which is a BS. The difference between a BS and a BA is the curriculum, a BS is more math based, with advance Calc, Physics, Chemistry, and Bio. I am learning that anyways because of my Geology courses. So its funny how two phrases can mean the same thing.

Anonymous2009-01-01T06:25:32Z

Favorite Answer

Just A review of what peer review is and is not.

Peer review is not now and never has been scientific. Independent testing by the scientific method is valid, as is double blind testing. None of the concepts used to promote AGW will pass even the simplest scientific method review, which is why the number of believers is shrinking and getting more vocal in their alarmisim. Peer review is a legal term used in reviewing legal decisions to assure they have referenced legal terms correctly. Peer review does not check math or if the data is used correctly.

And peer review absolutely does not go independently back to source data and redo all tests and calculations from scratch using different methods than the original tester used. Scientific method requires the proving if another working with no knowledge of the original persons results and methods can achieve similar results. Why is the number of vocal skeptics growing so fast, they have independently attempted to validate the AGW concept using true scientific method and found it could not be done using the original data sets that had not been leveled by Hansen.

Peer review is for use in law offices in reviewing legal decisions.
Scientific method is how research concepts can reach Hypotheses level or even theory level. Double blind is preferred over normal on serious questions.

No part of the AGW concept has ever passed review to even be accepted as a possibly valid Hypothesis.

Anonymous2016-04-06T12:28:26Z

It is a combination of both fact and politics. To put in perspective, GW 10% Politics 90%(just a guess). Politicians will use any excuse, seize on any opportunity and waste no crisis if a chance to tax and spend is in the offering. Tainted data compared with actual available data suggests that there may be something to it, but not enough to determine if it is a natural cycle or not. Excessive legislation and control at this point is a waste of time and effort until we know what is really happening. The weather patterns lately suggest that it was a cycle which has turned. The warmest year was in 1998 with a cooling trend since. These are the same people who predicted in the late 70's that an ice age would occur by 1993, so their claims are suspect already. With the new advances in technology, the emissions of CO2 are due to be reduced by improvements in the fuels we are using.

bishophill19672009-01-01T11:44:34Z

Peer review has only been a norm for the last fifty years. Before that, publication or otherwise was decided on the opinions of the journal editor. In particular Einstein's 1905 papers in Annalen der Physik and Watson & Crick's publication of the structure of DNA were not peer-reviewed.

One should also consider the opinions of Richard Smith, a former editor of the British Medical Journal who said:

"Peer review is a rather arbitrary black box.... It’s very slow, expensive, a considerable lottery, completely hopeless at detecting errors and fraud, and there’s evidence of bias."

antarcticice2009-01-01T07:54:59Z

The answer is pretty simple and shown clearly in the first three answers the first two are well known for simply making up facts and the third

"I don't believe any peer reviewed or non peer reviewed article on anything."

This statement is interesting given he claims to be a geologist, as a core science modern geology is based on peer review literature.
You could not become a geologist today without reading, understanding and accepting a large amount of peer reviewed work.
Obviously little thought went into that comment.
Given that they have nothing that can counter peer reviewed science the only option left is to try and attack it.

Anonymous2009-01-01T09:00:41Z

You also are a liar, in your next post you said this

I am a social science major and geology minor

Yet in this post you are a Environmental Geography Major.

Why should we take anything else you say seriously?

Show more answers (13)