Report: No "Global Warming" for 325 Months...

[BigMatt]

Wow, if we have to get our news from a neutral source with no financial obligations or ties...who would that be? I don't know any.

It's not only the news, but the scientists. Can you name a prominent climate scientist that isn't employed by, or get grants from or work for an institution that gets grants from the government? These scientists have a vested interest in toting the government water.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

It's not only the news, but the scientists. Can you name a prominent climate scientist that isn't employed by, or get grants from or work for an institution that gets grants from the government? These scientists have a vested interest in toting the government water.

Have a friend who is a prof at a major university who takes exception to academia rolled in with industry science. His specialty is research - the kind you do at a computer gathering information about a given topic. He doesn't believe academia is moved or swayed by money because he isn't. He doesn't believe his colleagues are swayed or moved either. I deal with several sources of research (the laboratory work kind) including academia and I've seen first hand the kind of "research" done when the money is right. Some of it right here in our state. Professors at universities are interested in one thing - publication. How does one get published? Say the right thing, especially if it's what the research grant is looking for. My friend who is a prof at a major university - obviously - disagree on this issue.

 

[rhino]

Have a friend who is a prof at a major university who takes exception to academia rolled in with industry science. His specialty is research - the kind you do at a computer gathering information about a given topic. He doesn't believe academia is moved or swayed by money because he isn't. He doesn't believe his colleagues are swayed or moved either. I deal with several sources of research (the laboratory work kind) including academia and I've seen first hand the kind of "research" done when the money is right. Some of it right here in our state. Professors at universities are interested in one thing - publication. How does one get published? Say the right thing, especially if it's what the research grant is looking for. My friend who is a prof at a major university - obviously - disagree on this issue.

Perhaps if he allows himself to believe the truth, it will be too painful for him (I'm serious). I know I had a unrealistic opinion of research scientists and engineers before I did some of it and when the reality of business and politics became apparent to me, it was not a pleasant realization. If you can't trust something that you held in such high regard in terms of ethics and honesty, what or who can you trust?

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Perhaps if he allows himself to believe the truth, it will be too painful for him (I'm serious). I know I had a unrealistic opinion of research scientists and engineers before I did some of it and when the reality of business and politics became apparent to me, it was not a pleasant realization. If you can't trust something that you held in such high regard in terms of ethics and honesty, what or who can you trust?

Very true my friend. Science is a business. Period. You can get good science, but it is not all the same. Period.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Wow, an article about an entire sea disappearing - environmental activist interviewed - and not one word - NOT ONE - about climate change or global warming:

Vanishing Act: The World's Fourth Largest Inland Body of Water Has Disappeared - AccuWeather.com

 

[rhino]

Saturday night I had the misfortune of watching part of this Discussion Science Skeptics | Video | C-SPAN.org toward the end of the piece.

I don't know what happened during the early part, but the level of arrogance, derision, and outright hubris displayed by the panel was amusing, but also irritating. Marginalizing dissenters and skeptics via labels such as "science deniers" (implying ignorance of fundamental scientific principles) is a classic example Saul Alinsky-style tactics.

It's ironic that more than an handful of the people who contribute regularly to this topic have academic and professional backgrounds based on science, math, and engineering that dwarf those of the alleged scientists (the two on the right) on that panel, yet they would smugly call each and every one a "science denier" and feign pity at the ignorance.

Oy, the humanity!

 

[pudly]

Sorry to kick a good man when he's down, Rhino. But false/bad science is widespread. Here is an article from the Lancet, estimating that about half of biomedical literature is false.
Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?

much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness

 

[rhino]

I'm curious if the waning existence of skepticism, critical thinking, and the will to challenge are the primary reasons why so much crap in all fields of study goes from crap produce to crap consumer with no one in between saying "Wait a minute! Prove it!"

Perhaps the cultural pressure to be "nice" in lieu of genuine respect prevents people from throwing the BS flag when it needs to be thrown?

I recall attending seminars in my research areas when I was in grad school. I knew by looking around the room who was going to challenge the present and who was going to challenge the people in the audience who asked questions or made their own challenges. At the time, I found it tiresome. Today, I wish we had more more of it. It's tedious, often ego-driven, and doesn't always produce good results, but it's necessary for good scientific inquiry and the reporting for findings.

By contrast, a huge part of the community studying climate goes unquestioned as long as their conclusions match the pre-conceived answers.

 

[actaeon277]

I'm curious if the waning existence of skepticism, critical thinking, and the will to challenge are the primary reasons why so much crap in all fields of study goes from crap produce to crap consumer with no one in between saying "Wait a minute! Prove it!"

Perhaps the cultural pressure to be "nice" in lieu of genuine respect prevents people from throwing the BS flag when it needs to be thrown?

I recall attending seminars in my research areas when I was in grad school. I knew by looking around the room who was going to challenge the present and who was going to challenge the people in the audience who asked questions or made their own challenges. At the time, I found it tiresome. Today, I wish we had more more of it. It's tedious, often ego-driven, and doesn't always produce good results, but it's necessary for good scientific inquiry and the reporting for findings.

By contrast, a huge part of the community studying climate goes unquestioned as long as their conclusions match the pre-conceived answers.

 

[jamil]

Saturday night I had the misfortune of watching part of this Discussion Science Skeptics | Video | C-SPAN.org toward the end of the piece.

I don't know what happened during the early part, but the level of arrogance, derision, and outright hubris displayed by the panel was amusing, but also irritating. Marginalizing dissenters and skeptics via labels such as "science deniers" (implying ignorance of fundamental scientific principles) is a classic example Saul Alinsky-style tactics.

It's ironic that more than an handful of the people who contribute regularly to this topic have academic and professional backgrounds based on science, math, and engineering that dwarf those of the alleged scientists (the two on the right) on that panel, yet they would smugly call each and every one a "science denier" and feign pity at the ignorance.

Oy, the humanity!

Apparently the Scientific Method includes the list of rules for radicals. BTW, I proper cased "Scientific Method" because I learned on INGO that it's now a proper noun.

 

[rhino]

Amen.

Apparently the Scientific Method includes the list of rules for radicals. BTW, I proper cased "Scientific Method" because I learned on INGO that it's now a proper noun.

Heh!

Textbooks almost always refer to "the Scientific Method," but when I taught in the classroom, I preferred to say "a scientific method," suggesting that not all legitimate methods of investigation are identical. However, they do have common elements. Formulating questions and seeking the answers with healthy doses of skepticism (internal as well) are part of almost all of them. I have yet to see an instance wherein there is much overlap with Rules for Radicals. Well, except when the "science" is about promulgating unsubstantiated, socio-politically-based conclusions of course.

Of course.

 

[actaeon277]

June 1 and I'm sitting at a bench freezing

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Not that you need more reminders of how bat**** insane Vox is.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Not that you need more reminders of how bat**** insane Vox is.

..........

 

[rhino]

????

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

????

My humor is subtle. I suppose implying that any tumbleweed floating by now has some sort of significance to climate change (we're all going to be living in a desert...or is that dessert...I never get that straight...I think it's desert).

 

[rhino]

My humor is subtle. I suppose implying that any tumbleweed floating by now has some sort of significance to climate change (we're all going to be living in a desert...or is that dessert...I never get that straight...I think it's desert).

Oh! I didn't understand the message to which you were responding either!

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Oh! I didn't understand the message to which you were responding either!

Game of Thrones is a television show a fantasy story about a fictitious kingdom in fictitious times, etc. No clue what that has to do with Climate Change.

 

[rhino]

Game of Thrones is a television show a fantasy story about a fictitious kingdom in fictitious times, etc. No clue what that has to do with Climate Change.

So . . . we're both at square one!

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

So . . . we're both at square one!

Cpy & Rgr.

But if you read the article about the disappearing sea - pretty cool in a really sad kind of way.