New Anthropocene
science
Mount Isa City Council: showing how to value evidence
In Merchants of Doubt, Oreskes and Conway make a compelling point about a need for fair weight, as opposed to the historical equal weight approach of ideas within the media. The latter treats two ideas as though they have equal merit, to be debated on the same level. The former instead gives higher value to … Continue reading
Is there anything wrong with dismissing a previously dismissed and dismissed again idea?
Politics is a funny arena, to say the least. From the madness we have been witness to over the past decade, I’m seriously starting to worry about the negative impacts this career path might have on the sanity of public figures. Perhaps that’s the cost of doublespeak. Which brings me to Greens MP John Kaye. … Continue reading
Fluoridation of drinking water to WHO recommended levels DOES NOT reduce IQ: New rebuttal
Too much of anything will do you harm, yet this does not automatically suggest that beneath a certain level, exposure cannot be beneficial. Any medicine, mineral or vitamin can go from beneficial to toxic if you have enough of it. Fluoride is no different. Anti-fluoridation advocates list favoured papers that find links between fluoride exposure … Continue reading
Pointing to association with commercial dental hygiene products is a STRAWMAN argument: New rebuttal argument
Another favoured strawman argument is that genuine experts that support drinking water fluoridation can be ignored if they have associations with various brands of commercial dental hygiene products. However, how much relevance does this actually have to fluoridation of drinking water? Clearly, none. The anti-fluoridation advocate are only too happy to point out that the … Continue reading
Fluoridation is NOTHING like “tobacco science”: New rebuttal entry
Often, when an individual is aware of no valid arguments to support a position they would prefer to be true, they instead demonise the position, attempting to render it immoral, removing the need for evidence. This demonization isn’t based on valid criticism and is referred to a strawman argument. Climate “sceptics” will call the UN … Continue reading
Simplifying the counter-measures to the anti-fluoridation mob
Pondering on what I could do to further assist science and other whom also challenge the anti-fluoridation advocates, I’ve decided to adopt a layout of the anti-fluoridation rebuttal page to something similar to the SkS Myths rebuttal page. Now, the anti-fluoridation page contains a simple reply to the debunked anti-fluoridation arguments, which is linked to … Continue reading
Fluoridation of drinking water IS effective: New Rebuttal Entry
Below is the newest rebuttal added to my growing Anti-fluoridation Arguments page: Many anti-fluoridation advocates will wrongly attempt to demonstrate that fluoridation of drinking water is ineffective, by comparing a cherry picked group of affluent first world communities to show that tooth decay is on the decrease regardless of the measure, as FAN do in … Continue reading
The war on water fluoridation in Queensland is relentless
It has spilled into two competing petitions that can be found on change.org on water fluoridation in the Rockhampton Regional council area. One, created by Lissetta Grant, simply asks for consulting the community prior to removing water fluoridation and the other, created by none other than Merilyn Haines, President of QAWF, continues the same thoroughly … Continue reading
There’s consensus and then there’s consensus: Climate “Sceptics” Just Don’t Get It
Every single time researchers go to the otherwise wasted effort of reviewing the standing position of climate research in relation to anthropogenic climate change (for, in what other field of science do scientists undertake such analyses?), we hear the same backlash from the committed sceptics. In fact, looking at the dismissal charges of conservative columnists … Continue reading
