Deliberate obsfucation, confirmational bias, or scietific illiteracy?

Unhelpful denialist confusion and delusion

NASA Study Showing Massive Ice Growth Debunks UN Claims
http://ift.tt/1iLRFwV

Quote:

Apparently the science surrounding alleged anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (AGW) is not really so settled after all. In a barely noticed statement released last week, NASA dropped the equivalent of a nuclear bomb on the United Nations' climate-alarmism machine, noting that ice across Antarctica has been growing at break-neck speed for decades. The surging ice growth, of course, directly contradicts the predictions of global-warming alarmists, including a 2013 report by the increasingly discredited UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change claiming, falsely as it turns out, that Antarctica was losing ice at an accelerating rate and causing rising sea levels, all supposedly owing to humanity's emissions of the "gas of life" CO2...

Actual climate science as discussed by the lead author of the NASA study mentioned above:

NASA Scientist Warned Deniers Would Distort His Antarctic Ice Study -- That's Exactly What They Did
http://ift.tt/1iLRFwX

Quote:

A new NASA study found that there has been a net increase in land ice in Antarctica in recent years, despite a decline in some parts of the continent. The study's lead author astutely predicted that climate science deniers would distort the study, even though it does nothing to contradict the scientific consensus on climate change or the fact that sea levels will continue to rise…

As the media matters exploration of the issue also appropriately notes publishing of a science paper is not the end of vetting or true skepticism. Publication is the first and easiest step toward becoming science:

Quote:

Gavin Schmidt, who directs the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and was not affiliated with the study, said that data from a pair of satellites called GRACE, which measure gravity, actually points towards a net loss of ice on the Antarctic continent in more recent years. Schmidt said that there are two methods for measuring the mass of an ice sheet. The first measures gravity, and the second measures the elevation of the top of the ice sheet. Both methods need to take different variables into account to be accurate. The method used in this most recent study measured the ice sheet's elevation, and the most recent time period it considered ended in 2008. "I would pin more weight to the GRACE data than to this latest paper," Schmidt told VICE News.

http://ift.tt/1iLRHF3

My primary question is, when has arguing against the best available evidences ever been a successful and rewarding approach to any aspect of life? More to the point, is there anything we can do to discourage this trend/trait when it arises? Individual and societal efficiency and efficacy would undoudtedly, be greatly enhanced.

Related Link “Conservative Media Have History Of Distorting Scientific Research To Fit Deniers' Agenda”

http://ift.tt/1iLRHF5

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1PjetTa