• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Studies in history and philosophy of science >Seepage, objectivity, and climate science
【24h】

Seepage, objectivity, and climate science

机译：渗漏，客观性和气候科学

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Based on the disproportionate amount of attention paid by climate scientists to the supposed global warming hiatus, it has recently been argued that contrarian discourse has "seeped into" climate science. While I agree that seepage has occurred, its effects remain unclear. This lack of clarity may give the impression that climate science has been compromised in a way that it hasn't-such a conclusion should be defended against. To do this I argue that the effects of seepage should be analyzed in terms of objectivity. I use seven meanings of objectivity to analyze contrarian discourse's impact on climate science. The resulting account supports the important point that climate science has not been compromised in a way that invalidates the conclusions its scientists have drawn, despite the reality of seepage having occurred.
机译：基于气候科学家向假定的全球变暖的中断支付的不成比例的注意力，最近被认为是逆情话语“看到了”气候科学。虽然我同意渗漏发生，但其效果仍然不清楚。这种缺乏清晰度可能给人一种印象，即气候科学已经受到影响，即它没有 - 应该捍卫这种结论。为此，我认为应该在客观性方面分析渗出的影响。我使用七种客观性的含义来分析逆流话语对气候科学的影响。结果账户支持气候科学并未以使其科学家们所吸引的结论无效的方式受到影响的重要观点，尽管已经发生了渗漏的现实。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号