That IU feels is necessarynto teach climate change is a part of physics should be a huge red flag, not some sort of supporting fact.
Acting like you're not on the up and up is a fair motivator for skepticism.
That IU feels is necessarynto teach climate change is a part of physics should be a huge red flag, not some sort of supporting fact.
I think that "religion" currently has its nose farther into the science tent than it was in Copernicus' time. Kinda like 1down says, we are just selling carbon credits instead of indulgences these days.Acting like you're not on the up and up is a fair motivator for skepticism.
I meant to suggest that the arm would be named for ADM Rickover.We ate the banana. We did not name it.
I think that "religion" currently has its nose farther into the science tent than it was in Copernicus' time. Kinda like 1down says, we are just selling carbon credits instead of indulgences these days.
I meant to suggest that the arm would be named for ADM Rickover.
Dad worked for Westinghouse in a plant where a lot of Navy equipment was manufactured. He said you never saw so many managers in absolute fear of a 125 pound guy as they were of Rickover when he visited on an inspection tour.
No. Money. The Green Industrial Complex.
Ted Rockwell's book "The Rickover Effect".UntIL he retired, he personally interviewed EVERY nuclear officer.
And if he said no, they were gone. No reason given or asked.
I can see this being the case for the green companies, however I think .gov has deeper reasons.
The government already gets my money. They would love to tell me how to live and what I am or am not allowed to do.
And us Reactor Operators, well when we did something right, a door opened up on the RPCP (Reactor Plant Control Panel) and a mechanical arm extended, with a banana. To reward us for a job "well done".
I thought it was doughnuts...
No donuts on subs.
Makes sense... I guess you could end up like this guy and risk not fitting through the hatch...
So, in an effort to contribute something serious to the thread, I give you this: Skeptical Climate Scientists Coming In From the Cold | RealClearInvestigations
Putting such ugliness aside, some experts doubt that the science will improve even if the Trump administration asks new research questions and funding spreads to myriad proposals. Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT and a member of the National Academy of Sciences who has long questioned climate change orthodoxy, is skeptical that a sunnier outlook is upon us.
“I actually doubt that,” he said. Even if some of the roughly $2.5 billion in taxpayer dollars currently spent on climate research across 13 different federal agencies now shifts to scientists less invested in the calamitous narrative, Lindzen believes groupthink has so corrupted the field that funding should be sharply curtailed rather than redirected.
“They should probably cut the funding by 80 to 90 percent until the field cleans up,” he said. “Climate science has been set back two generations, and they have destroyed its intellectual foundations.”
The field is cluttered with entrenched figures who must toe the established line, he said, pointing to a recent congressional report that found the Obama administration got a top Department of Energy scientist fired and generally intimidated the staff to conform with its politicized position on climate change.
“Remember this was a tiny field, a backwater, and then suddenly you increased the funding to billions and everyone got into it,” Lindzen said. “Even in 1990 no one at MIT called themselves a ‘climate scientist,’ and then all of a sudden everyone was. They only entered it because of the bucks; they realized it was a gravy train. You have to get it back to the people who only care about the science.”
Professor Lindzen couldn't be any more correct...