4
$\begingroup$

I am talking of this thread: Are 60C heat waves predicted by 5C of global heating? (The worst consequence of global heating)

Obviously, downvoting did not give the right signal, it seems to have fueled the flurry.

Provocative question: is ES Stackexchange a serious science site ?

The above linked question can not be answered at the moment, and is too general anyway, but a purely opinion based answer that follows the agenda of denial is not helpful at all.

Edit: My concern is not about degrees of exactness or more or less valid hypotheses in current discussion. I love to debate as long as it is founded. It is about the spreading of obviously unfounded and partly false claims and factoids and putting them as equally valid as published data. It is about discrediting published work and modelling by claiming it is all guesswork and agenda.

"Don't worry, the system will heal itself" obviously does not work here, it is already a swan song for many.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Are you asking about the question itself or this answer? If you ignore the tabloid language, the question itself is a reasonable one about projected temperature extremes. $\endgroup$ – Deditos Dec 20 '19 at 12:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, the answer of course. Sorry for being unclear. $\endgroup$ – user18411 Dec 20 '19 at 12:41
4
$\begingroup$

Well, the answer is now greyish and at the bottom of the answer list, so I would say that the SE system worked well in this case. This is why it is important to vote, and not say "I boycott down voting", which goes against the core principles of the site. However, another principle of the site has not been respected: comments are not meant for "secondary back-and-forth discussion or debate". The chat is here for that purpose.

I don't think SE in general, or our community here at ES, should censor/delete an answer because we think it's opinion-based. I will be a little provocative myself: earth science is not an exact science. There has long been multiple theories about the same process, from the formation of the Moon to the origin of basalt. Plutonists didn't win their argument against Neptunists by shutting them up; they won by gathering enough facts to support their theory, until their adversaries had no other choice than to change their views, like Robert Jameson did.

We should apply the same here: just keep writing good, well-supported answers, with facts and references. The bad answers will eventually get lost in the limbos at the bottom of the page. That is, if the community keeps doing his job by up voting and down voting when necessary...

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the input. I updated my question. Would it be too much asked to clearly state where people boycotted and discussed back-and-forth ? Just to potentially avoid future straying from the path ;-) $\endgroup$ – user18411 Dec 20 '19 at 16:41
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry if it was not clear, I was referencing to this kind of comment earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/18737/… Although I don't want to point the finger at anyone in particular, I just mean that the system should work if members use it correctly. But maybe I have too much faith in the system... $\endgroup$ – Jean-Marie Prival Dec 20 '19 at 16:53

You must log in to answer this question.