delegitamizing science

[Diuretic]

You fool.

We must excise the cancer, not punch the oncologist.

The East Anglia CRU has set back climatology by 15 years, at least.

I'd say week, maybe two.

No. This is bad.

If it is then let it fall where it may. If there has been bad science then it needs to be shown and it needs to be shown beyond any doubt that it's bad science. But non-scientists and cheerleaders for carbon-producing industries should stay out of the scientific debate until it's finalised and the results are in. And if it's possible to have good science look at the issues, good science not tainted by vested interests on either side of the ideological divide that has been created, then it should go ahead. But it must be good science. This is a serious issue, it probably won't affect any of us here, we'll be dead and therefore uninvolved. But we owe it to the future to do good science now and not to be selfish bastards who don't want to change how we live because the deleterious effects of global climate change, if they can be reduced by our actions, didn't concern us.

 

[del]

Even at the height of the tobacco industries efforts to cast doubt on the scientific findings concerning tobacco, they did not try to denigrate the scientists involved in the research. Today, with trillions of dollars at stake, there is a concerted effort to cast all scientists as the enemy, as liars trying to pervert the system.

While the hacked e-mails concern only a few scientists, the coverage is as if all scientists are involved in a vast conspiracy. Even though no one has yet to show where there is any wrongdoing by the scientists involved in the hacked e-mails.

This assasination of character of a whole class of people is beginning to look like the McCarthy Era bullshit all over again.

It is time for the scientific community to start punching back hard.

looks like it is....

"The head of the climate-change body at the centre of a leaked e-mail controversy has stepped down from his post while he is investigated over allegations of professional misconduct."

Climate-change scientist Phil Jones steps down in e-mail row inquiry - Times Online

"Dr. Michael E. Mann, famed originator of the "Hockey Stick" graph, is now officially under investigation by his current employer, Penn State University"

Penn State to investigate Michael Mann--or whitewash him

one would think a champion of science like you would welcome this; one would apparently be wrong.

Is it still being investigated or has the investigation concluded?

the investigations are ongoing and the UN has announced that they have initiated an investigation as well.

 

[Diuretic]

looks like it is....

"The head of the climate-change body at the centre of a leaked e-mail controversy has stepped down from his post while he is investigated over allegations of professional misconduct."

Climate-change scientist Phil Jones steps down in e-mail row inquiry - Times Online

"Dr. Michael E. Mann, famed originator of the "Hockey Stick" graph, is now officially under investigation by his current employer, Penn State University"

Penn State to investigate Michael Mann--or whitewash him

one would think a champion of science like you would welcome this; one would apparently be wrong.

Is it still being investigated or has the investigation concluded?

the investigations are ongoing and the UN has announced that they have initiated an investigation as well.

 

[Si modo]

I'd say week, maybe two.

No. This is bad.

If it is then let it fall where it may. If there has been bad science then it needs to be shown and it needs to be shown beyond any doubt that it's bad science. ....

It already has, but the media never really cared to communicate that to the general audience. For example, the general public had no idea about this analysis over a year ago. Update on falsifiability

.... But non-scientists and cheerleaders for carbon-producing industries should stay out of the scientific debate until it's finalised and the results are in. ....

Absolutely. If the non-scientists had stayed out of it from the start, I doubt any scandal would have happened, tbh. It got way too politicized (thanks to Al Gore) and some decided to be sellouts to their integrity. The personal cost of bombing on stage is much higher than bombing at a get-together with friends.

.... And if it's possible to have good science look at the issues, good science not tainted by vested interests on either side of the ideological divide that has been created, then it should go ahead. But it must be good science. ....

That has been done, even with illegitimate cards in the hands of some. The media somehow doesn't seem to pick up on that science.

.... This is a serious issue, it probably won't affect any of us here, we'll be dead and therefore uninvolved. But we owe it to the future to do good science now and not to be selfish bastards who don't want to change how we live because the deleterious effects of global climate change, if they can be reduced by our actions, didn't concern us.

I was going to agree with this until you mentioned selfish bastards and why they are - a conclusion about persons based on dubious science.

 

[The T]

The difference is that the Warmers are not Scientists, they are pushing a political agenda.

What political agenda? To point out that there's evidence that humans are contributing to global climate change and might want to do something about it before it's too late?

It's the PROOF that's at dispute here. The E-mails have really called this into question, as have lawsuits against Climate Arm of NASA for refusal of FOIA requests...

I'd say there's a game afoot here, and it isn't looking good for 'climatologists', and science in general on this issue.

 

[Diuretic]

No. This is bad.

If it is then let it fall where it may. If there has been bad science then it needs to be shown and it needs to be shown beyond any doubt that it's bad science. ....

It already has, but the media never really cared to communicate that to the general audience. For example, the general public had no idea about this analysis over a year ago. Update on falsifiability

Absolutely. If the non-scientists had stayed out of it from the start, I doubt any scandal would have happened, tbh. It got way too politicized (thanks to Al Gore) and some decided to be sellouts to their integrity. The personal cost of bombing on stage is much higher than bombing at a get-together with friends.

.... And if it's possible to have good science look at the issues, good science not tainted by vested interests on either side of the ideological divide that has been created, then it should go ahead. But it must be good science. ....

That has been done. The media somehow doesn't seem to pick up on that science.

.... This is a serious issue, it probably won't affect any of us here, we'll be dead and therefore uninvolved. But we owe it to the future to do good science now and not to be selfish bastards who don't want to change how we live because the deleterious effects of global climate change, if they can be reduced by our actions, didn't concern us.

I was going to agree with this until you mentioned selfish bastards and why they are - a conclusion about persons based on dubious science.

I can never resist hyperbole - I know, it's a weakness.

In my defence, I did say we shoudn't be "selfish bastards". That does imply we are, yes, I'm not going to try and wriggle out of it. But we should be open-minded rather than retreat into ideology. I'm not suggesting we go backwards, that we somehow de-industrialise. That isn't going to happen and nor should it. It would be denying our descendants if we decided that they shouldn't benefit from the progress that humans have achieved. I'm suggesting there may be a different way of maintaining and extending that progress.

I wonder though if the science will ever free itself from the web of ideologies. All the opposers have to do is hinder it, the proposers have to get out there and prove it. I'm not naieve enough to believe that the truth (whatever that means) will out by itself, not without a damn good midwife it won't.

 

[Diuretic]

The difference is that the Warmers are not Scientists, they are pushing a political agenda.

What political agenda? To point out that there's evidence that humans are contributing to global climate change and might want to do something about it before it's too late?

It's the PROOF that's at dispute here. The E-mails have really called this into question, as have lawsuits against Climate Arm of NASA for refusal of FOIA requests...

I'd say there's a game afoot here, and it isn't looking good for 'climatologists', and science in general on this issue.

That's fine, at least you're taking a tentative position and waiting for the evidence to come in.

 

[tigerbob]

On tobacco. I had the rare privelege of watching my mother-in-law die of emphasema. My brother, two years younger than I am is winded getting out of the car on a low mountain pass, 4000 ft. I still hike to 14,000. He and my mother-in-law were heavy smokers. And, yes, my brother has been diagnosed with emphasema. For all of you defending that habit, well, have another, why don't you.

On global warming. For many years, scientists tried to get their message out. Dr. Hansen testified before Congress in 1988, and got zero results. He made predictions then that have come to pass, and has had those predictions constantly lied about by the denialists. It was not until an ex-politician, turned businessman, Al Gore, started lecturing on the subject in layman's terms, then made a movie out of the lecture, that the public finally paid attention.


Since that movie, the lies concerning the movie, concerning the scientists engaged in the study of climate have been unremitting.

And look at the 'scientists' that are leading the Denialtists. Lindzen and Singer. Both tobacco company whores. Don't like the language? Tough shit, I don't like watching people I like die because of the lies told by such 'scientists'. For I was constantly being told by smokers that 'the science isn't settled'. That is the Doubt Industry at it's best.

Now we have a major disaster in the making concerning the affects of AGW. And the same old liars are trotting out the same old tricks. Only this time, unlike smoking, none of us have a choice. We are all on the same planet, and will be in the same place as it hits the fan.

The data and results obtained by the scientists that are being attacked have been obtained by many other scientists using data that they have obtained independently. The National Academy of Sciences independently confirmed the Mann graph in 2006.

This is an attack on all scientists. It is not just limited to Mann and the East Anglia scientists. From the posts here you can see the direction that this is taking.

Yes, get the raw data out there. Not that it is not already out there, it has been posted here from NASA, NOAA, and raw research here many times. But when one of the whores puts out the lies, make it a big deal. Don't like this kind of talk coming back your way? Prefer nice polite in the back ground scientists? Too fucking bad. You started a fight, I think you will find it interesting where this fight will take us.

Your intro para is missing the point rocks. Don't try to deflect the issue by throwing out the usual bone and hoping somebody bites. This has never been about defending "the habit".

Those who have questioned the link between second hand smoke and chronic disease have had to deal with character assassination it for years. So have those who question the link between man and climate change.

But the tracer is now pinging off the cockpit of the climate lobby. Well too fucking bad.

While hoping that a greater degree of openness between the 2 sides results from this I, for one, am rather enjoying watching the discomfort of those who, until recently, were only too happy to be on the inside pissing out.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What political agenda? To point out that there's evidence that humans are contributing to global climate change and might want to do something about it before it's too late?

It's the PROOF that's at dispute here. The E-mails have really called this into question, as have lawsuits against Climate Arm of NASA for refusal of FOIA requests...

I'd say there's a game afoot here, and it isn't looking good for 'climatologists', and science in general on this issue.

That's fine, at least you're taking a tentative position and waiting for the evidence to come in.

The hint that this was political with no science behind it was when the Warmers starting talking about "Settled Science"

 

[The T]

It's the PROOF that's at dispute here. The E-mails have really called this into question, as have lawsuits against Climate Arm of NASA for refusal of FOIA requests...

I'd say there's a game afoot here, and it isn't looking good for 'climatologists', and science in general on this issue.

That's fine, at least you're taking a tentative position and waiting for the evidence to come in.

The hint that this was political with no science behind it was when the Warmers starting talking about "Settled Science"

Game, Set, Match..Frank 30, Diuretic LUV...

They 'Magically' Closed the door...END DISCUSSION...therefore WE are closing the door and no futher discussions will be allowed...

*Oh? And Umm? WE won't SHARE our DATA with you either...* WE will just tell you politely to FUCK OFF*

 

[Chris]

Even at the height of the tobacco industries efforts to cast doubt on the scientific findings concerning tobacco, they did not try to denigrate the scientists involved in the research. Today, with trillions of dollars at stake, there is a concerted effort to cast all scientists as the enemy, as liars trying to pervert the system.

While the hacked e-mails concern only a few scientists, the coverage is as if all scientists are involved in a vast conspiracy. Even though no one has yet to show where there is any wrongdoing by the scientists involved in the hacked e-mails.

This assasination of character of a whole class of people is beginning to look like the McCarthy Era bullshit all over again.

It is time for the scientific community to start punching back hard.

Facts get in the way of the right wing world view.

Evolution, the rise in atmospheric CO2, the genetic component of homosexuality, etc... all go against the extreme right's view of the world.

That's why they are trying to discredit science.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Even at the height of the tobacco industries efforts to cast doubt on the scientific findings concerning tobacco, they did not try to denigrate the scientists involved in the research. Today, with trillions of dollars at stake, there is a concerted effort to cast all scientists as the enemy, as liars trying to pervert the system.

While the hacked e-mails concern only a few scientists, the coverage is as if all scientists are involved in a vast conspiracy. Even though no one has yet to show where there is any wrongdoing by the scientists involved in the hacked e-mails.

This assasination of character of a whole class of people is beginning to look like the McCarthy Era bullshit all over again.

It is time for the scientific community to start punching back hard.

Facts get in the way of the right wing world view.

Evolution, the rise in atmospheric CO2, the genetic component of homosexuality, etc... all go against the extreme right's view of the world.

That's why they are trying to discredit science.

The Science you claim to loves shows there is no correlation between de miniums increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 and "Global Warming"

Back to the drawing board, Sherlock

 

[Midnight Marauder]

delegitamizing science

It's more correctly, de-legitimizing you illiterate cut and paste hack. And yes, science suffers "de-legitimization" when scientists let their political agendas bastardize and corrupt the scientific process, like you see now with Warmergate.

They have been caught. You should be lambasting them and railing against them, and demanding investigations and the immediate resignations of all involved.

 

[Chris]

Even at the height of the tobacco industries efforts to cast doubt on the scientific findings concerning tobacco, they did not try to denigrate the scientists involved in the research. Today, with trillions of dollars at stake, there is a concerted effort to cast all scientists as the enemy, as liars trying to pervert the system.

While the hacked e-mails concern only a few scientists, the coverage is as if all scientists are involved in a vast conspiracy. Even though no one has yet to show where there is any wrongdoing by the scientists involved in the hacked e-mails.

This assasination of character of a whole class of people is beginning to look like the McCarthy Era bullshit all over again.

It is time for the scientific community to start punching back hard.

Facts get in the way of the right wing world view.

Evolution, the rise in atmospheric CO2, the genetic component of homosexuality, etc... all go against the extreme right's view of the world.

That's why they are trying to discredit science.

The Science you claim to loves shows there is no correlation between de miniums increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 and "Global Warming"

Back to the drawing board, Sherlock

Every national scientific organization in the world disagrees with you, but don't let that keep you from living your fantasy.

BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change -- Oreskes 306 (5702): 1686 -- Science

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Facts get in the way of the right wing world view.

Evolution, the rise in atmospheric CO2, the genetic component of homosexuality, etc... all go against the extreme right's view of the world.

That's why they are trying to discredit science.

The Science you claim to loves shows there is no correlation between de miniums increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 and "Global Warming"

Back to the drawing board, Sherlock

Every national scientific organization in the world disagrees with you, but don't let that keep you from living your fantasy.

BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change -- Oreskes 306 (5702): 1686 -- Science

"There is no uniform data integrity, it's just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they're found." -- From the hacked emails

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Facts get in the way of the right wing world view.

Evolution, the rise in atmospheric CO2, the genetic component of homosexuality, etc... all go against the extreme right's view of the world.

That's why they are trying to discredit science.

The Science you claim to loves shows there is no correlation between de miniums increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 and "Global Warming"

Back to the drawing board, Sherlock

Every national scientific organization in the world disagrees with you, but don't let that keep you from living your fantasy.

BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change -- Oreskes 306 (5702): 1686 -- Science

You're lying, Warmer, there is no homogeneity of opinion on the "Voracious CO2 Spaghetti Monster Eating the Glacier" that you call "MMGW"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Facts get in the way of the right wing world view.

Evolution, the rise in atmospheric CO2, the genetic component of homosexuality, etc... all go against the extreme right's view of the world.

That's why they are trying to discredit science.

The Science you claim to loves shows there is no correlation between de miniums increases in the atmospheric trace element CO2 and "Global Warming"

Back to the drawing board, Sherlock

Every national scientific organization in the world disagrees with you, but don't let that keep you from living your fantasy.

BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change -- Oreskes 306 (5702): 1686 -- Science

Science 3 December 2004. That's pre-melt down, Warmer

 

[Chris]

^ The 2001 joint statement was signed by the national academies of science of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the UK. The 2005 statement added Japan, Russia, and the U.S. The 2007 statement added Mexico and South Africa. The Network of African Science Academies, and the Polish Academy of Sciences have issued separate statements. Professional scientific societies include American Astronomical Society, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Institute of Physics, American Meteorological Society, American Physical Society, American Quaternary Association, Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, European Academy of Sciences and Arts, European Geosciences Union, European Science Foundation, Geological Society of America, Geological Society of Australia, Geological Society of London-Stratigraphy Commission, InterAcademy Council, International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics, International Union for Quaternary Research, National Association of Geoscience Teachers, National Research Council (US), Royal Meteorological Society, and World Meteorological Organization.

Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[CrusaderFrank]

^ The 2001 joint statement was signed by the national academies of science of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the UK. The 2005 statement added Japan, Russia, and the U.S. The 2007 statement added Mexico and South Africa. The Network of African Science Academies, and the Polish Academy of Sciences have issued separate statements. Professional scientific societies include American Astronomical Society, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Institute of Physics, American Meteorological Society, American Physical Society, American Quaternary Association, Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, European Academy of Sciences and Arts, European Geosciences Union, European Science Foundation, Geological Society of America, Geological Society of Australia, Geological Society of London-Stratigraphy Commission, InterAcademy Council, International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics, International Union for Quaternary Research, National Association of Geoscience Teachers, National Research Council (US), Royal Meteorological Society, and World Meteorological Organization.

Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"And how would you like you data cooked, Phil Jones?"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

^ The 2001 joint statement was signed by the national academies of science of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the UK. The 2005 statement added Japan, Russia, and the U.S. The 2007 statement added Mexico and South Africa. The Network of African Science Academies, and the Polish Academy of Sciences have issued separate statements. Professional scientific societies include American Astronomical Society, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Institute of Physics, American Meteorological Society, American Physical Society, American Quaternary Association, Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, European Academy of Sciences and Arts, European Geosciences Union, European Science Foundation, Geological Society of America, Geological Society of Australia, Geological Society of London-Stratigraphy Commission, InterAcademy Council, International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics, International Union for Quaternary Research, National Association of Geoscience Teachers, National Research Council (US), Royal Meteorological Society, and World Meteorological Organization.

Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, once upon a time Warmers held sway over the quasi-scientific field of Climatology. They made up the data that proved their theory and suppressed the debate. Was this science? Fuck No! This was Global Warming at its peak.

Now, they stand on the verge of extinction, the hacked emails detailing the scope and breadth of their audacious lies impacted the Warmer like the dinosaur killing asteroid.

You were great in your day, Warmers. You lied, cheated, shut down debate but had a brief monopoly and can still get free blow jobs in Denmark.