14
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 409:
Line 409: − + + + + + + +
Talk:Science of global warming (view source)
Revision as of 12:29, May 11, 2007
, 12:29, May 11, 2007Added note on qualifiers in introduction.
== Cite Leading Group of Climate Change Skeptics? ==
== Cite Leading Group of Climate Change Skeptics? ==
As the IPCC is included in the introduction to this entry, it's appropriate that the leading group of climate change skeptics be cited, instead of individual scientists. Does anybody know what the appropriate body to cite is? I'm aware of "The Friends of Science", but I believe they're exclusively Canadian.
As the IPCC is included in the introduction to this entry, it's appropriate that the leading group of climate change skeptics be cited, instead of individual scientists. Does anybody know what the appropriate body to cite is? I'm aware of "The Friends of Science", but I believe they're exclusively Canadian. [[User:Dbarefoot|Dbarefoot]] 08:29, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
== Qualifers on IPCC in Introduction ==
I posit that if we're going to lay out the groups on both side of the global warming debate, they ought to be qualified equally, or not at all. I don't think these qualifiers are appropriate in introductions--they belong in the particular entries about the individuals or groups.
As I've queried above, I think it makes sense to describe the leading group of climate change skeptics or doubters, as they seem a natural counterpoint to the IPCC. Citing individual scientists seems too anecdotal for an encyclopedia, which ought to seek to be conclusive.