Climategate II? Scientific community accused of muzzling dissent on global warming

a reply to: beezzer

Nope. It helps to gain a rudimentary understanding of science and how peer review does and doesn't work then apply it to thousands of papers written on the specific subject. That way you can judge for yourself.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

Nope. It helps to gain a rudimentary understanding of science and how peer review does and doesn't work then apply it to thousands of papers written on the specific subject. That way you can judge for yourself.

My masters degree is in developmental neurobiology.

I am familiar with the scientific process.

I'm sure your advanced degrees offer you the same benefit.

Yet I remain unconvinced simply because the data is being formulated to coincide with a political agenda and has a skewed approach to interpreting the data.

a reply to: beezzer

You ought to be able to work out fairly well for yourself then and screw all scientific papers and consensus.

What do GHG's do in the atmosphere?

Does burning fossil fuels add GHG's to the atmosphere?

Has the global temperature gone up?

Let me offer as an example, the way scientists can interpret data.

Imagine two scientists are running an analysis of rape.

One scientist asks the question, "Have you ever been raped?" The scientist then collects the data, he may run a 2-tailed T-test or some such statistical analysis to determine if the results are significant, then publish the results.

The other scientist asks a series of different questions.
"Have you ever had rough sex?"
"Have you ever had sex while drinking?"
"Have you ever had sex while on drugs?"
He then determines himself if this constitutes rape collects the data, runs a statistical analysis, then publishes the results.

The point is, is the data telling us what we ask?
Or are we asking questions to satisfy our own agenda.

originally posted by: Kali74


Has the global temperature gone up?

Has it increased since yesterday?
Has it increased since 1900?
Has it increased since 10,000,000 BCE?

I refer back to my previous post.

You can get any answer you desire, if you ask the right questions.

Or as anon once said, "Torture numbers long enough and they'll give you any answer you want."

a reply to: beezzer

You really think this is some sort of worldwide agenda or conspiracy? And not just observable data? You think over 95% of the worlds scientist are on the governments dole?

a reply to: beezzer

So, if a child had a significant amount more neurons in the pre-frontal cortex than most other children, and 50 other doctors agreed would you ask how they felt about autism to determine whether or not they were measuring unbiasedly?

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: beezzer

You really think this is some sort of worldwide agenda or conspiracy? And not just observable data? You think over 95% of the worlds scientist are on the governments dole?

There you go with that 95%!

Let me ask you something.

Are scientists relying on data collected by scientists who perhaps have an agenda?

If the only data points I am referencing to make a determination on man-made climate change are from proponents of man-made climate change, then I will be suspect of the data.

I think someone posted a photo of a climate-study thermometer station in a parking lot. On asphalt.

That would be the same as me taking peoples temperatures in a gym. Then offering a paper stating that humans body temps are increasing at an alarming rate!


As a scientist, as someone who has had peer reviewed papers, (I even offered a link once on ATS to my thesis,) data is always suspect.

How it is collected is JUST as important as HOW it is interpreted.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

So, if a child had a significant amount more neurons in the pre-frontal cortex than most other children, and 50 other doctors agreed would you ask how they felt about autism to determine whether or not they were measuring unbiasedly?

I think you mean dendritic outgrowths? And what does neuron density have to with autism?

For the record, my scope of research was new nerve growth stimulated in the lateral motor column by endocrine micro-environment changes brought about by limb-bud mesenchyme.

a reply to: beezzer

I'm referring to brain overgrowth.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

I'm referring to brain overgrowth.

I'm unfamiliar with the specifics for that specific field of study.

Kali and beezzer ... You two are a fine example of the real problem within the whole debate.

Carry on... It's interesting.

At some point, the debate will become as pointless as the denials. Science and agendas meaningless....

All that wil really matter in the end is survival.

IMO

a reply to: beezzer

How can ice core samples be manipulated and confirmed by multiple scientific teams?

How can data from old corals and lake sediment that all point towards a rise in temperature over the last 100 years be manipulated?

Most scientist types I know are not political.

a reply to: LDragonFire

Sorry, I was eating dinner with the in-laws. Here are examples of Agenda 21 related legislature being shot down.
www.unausa.org...

here is a general summary of Agenda 21s goals.
www.crossroad.to...

Here are some bullet points for Agenda 21 from that last source.

Agenda 21

This global contract binds governments around the world to the UN plan for changing the ways we live, eat, learn, and communicate - all under the noble banner of saving the earth. Its regulations would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas. If implemented, it would manage and monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system

This agenda for the 21st Century was signed by 179 nations at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Among other things, it called for a Global Biodiversity Assessment of the state of the planet. Prepared by the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), this GBA armed UN leaders with the "information" and "science" they needed to validate their global management system. Its doomsday predictions were designed to excuse radical population reduction, oppressive lifestyle regulations, and a coercive return to earth-centered religions as the basis for environmental values and self-sustaining human settlements.

The GBA concluded on page 763 that "the root causes of the loss of biodiversity are embedded in the way societies use resources." The main culprit? Judeo-Christian values. Chapter 12.2.3 states that-

"This world view is characteristic of large scale societies, heavily dependent on resources brought from considerable distances. It is a world view that is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that became firmly established about 2000 years ago with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions.

"Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as drastically from the perspective of humans as members of a community of beings including other living and non-living elements."

here is the main point I wanted to convey from that site.

Maurice Strong, who led the Rio conference, seems to agree. His ranch in Colorado is a gathering place for Buddhist, Bahai, Native American, and other earth-centered religions. Yet, while spearheading the restructuring of the United Nations (see " World Heritage Protection?"), he also helped design the blueprint for the transformation of our communities. And in his introduction to The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, he called local leaders around the world to "undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on 'Local Agenda 21' for their communities."

Achieving that consensus meant painting scary scenarios of a hurting, dying planet that frighten children, anger youth, and persuade adults to submit to the unthinkable regulations. (See "Saving the Earth") It means blaming climate change on human activities and ignoring the natural factors that have - throughout time - brought cyclical changes in climate, storm patterns, wildlife migration, and ozone thinning (there has never been a "hole")

here is a break down of the financial initiatives behind Agenda 21.

americanfreedomwatchradio.com...

The carbon tax scheme, a new type of speculative market based on carbon emission points and the general big brother approach to tallying up ones production of carbon emissions. There was a representative from NJ that wanted to put a bicycling tax because we breath heavier while exercising and emit more carbon dioxide. That is the mentality behind this.

It was generally thought that by compartmentalizing the approach of Agenda 21 by having local communities form their own initiatives using only the blue print laid out that no one would notice. Yet another example of short sightedness by our leaders. They still apply the mentality that their founders had...where most people were illiterate and lived as peasants. The average person is increasingly more intelligent than them having to face more difficult situations provoking more ingenuity and true intelligence. While a good education used to be the only avenue towards being aware of the world around you, and control of the institutions meant control to access. People have learned to circumvent the traditional avenues to knowledge acquisition. The process also leaves one with little to no desire of sharing company with the traditional hierarchy of power since it is not full of "like minds".

Agenda 21 will fail miserably since it is all but wishful thinking. It banks on technology playing a fundamental role in its implementation. Much of this technology isnt even developed and doesnt account for counter technologies and abilities being developed alongside its necessary components in the time they finally come into fruition.

Agenda 21 is about control of habits. The best examples you can find is the extreme fear and irrational attitude portrayed by its proponents and their climate minions. I like to look at a few people for cues as to where the front is heading. David Rothschild, the eco-warrior for example. His family is known at this point to be one of the key holders of the worlds financial balls. His intentions can not be anything but geared towards maintaining that dynamic to their position. The fact that he proposes much of the same hype and fear porn as crazed ecologists is very telling. Even an amateur psychologist can see where his persona is showing and where it is hiding.

In chess you look to a few key pieces depending on the available plays the game can produce for either side (purpose)
You can look to others. The more you see the clearer it all becomes.

I have written this for everyone else. I have come to the conclusion that all this information is readily available to those who ask the question you just have. "Can you give me an example?". If you knew the nature of Agenda 21 you would be asking, "can you tell me of its impact for you". You would know that it is local and regional. That its mission statement is implicit to this end.

I fear that its proponents try to hide it by pinning any lack of a comic book style grab for power as evidence of its nonexistence or worse, its benevolence.

I do not know you and if this is not the case then I do apologize. If not then I will engage in a battle of wits but know that it is just for my amusement. Nothing is needed from me or our conversation to prove or disprove the existence of Agenda 21 and its authors. Players well known in the era of greatest interchange of information for humanity in almost forever.

SO , examples: google my friend. We can test my ability to find, catalog and articulate them but that doesnt mean a thing. Again if you are just curious excuse me and understand that this is an issue. Proponents of Agenda 21 use this tactic relying on the average persons inability to to find, catalog and articulate the presence of Agenda 21 so as to hide it.

I say it is not even necessary. That play book being used is going to be the down fall to our power elite and their security. They are not dynamic and fluid in great numbers

a reply to: beezzer

I think someone posted a photo of a climate-study thermometer station in a parking lot. On asphalt.

Thermometer stations such as those are for one no longer used and for two when they were the readings were adjusted to remove heat bias.

I wonder how much you get paid to run out to temp stations and lie about the readings. /sarc

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: beezzer

How can ice core samples be manipulated and confirmed by multiple scientific teams?

I just gave an example.

How can data from old corals and lake sediment that all point towards a rise in temperature over the last 100 years be manipulated?

Show me data that is 5,000,000 years old and I might be interested.

Most scientist types I know are not political.

That's funny. Because most science types I know, are.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: beezzer

You really think this is some sort of worldwide agenda or conspiracy? And not just observable data? You think over 95% of the worlds scientist are on the governments dole?

Well.

They had 99% of all bankers, investors, and government officials on board with the mortgage backed securities derivatives that caused that wild depression in the late 00's.

Who would of thought those were scams back in the 80's?

originally posted by: ausername
Kali and beezzer ... You two are a fine example of the real problem within the whole debate.

Carry on... It's interesting.

At some point, the debate will become as pointless as the denials. Science and agendas meaningless....

All that wil really matter in the end is survival.

IMO

Perhaps you are correct.

But I will still wait for an unbiased study (s) to make any final determination.

In my humble opinion, I'll be long dead before any change will take place, but I would encourage critical thinking, even if it does go along with your political ideology.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

I think someone posted a photo of a climate-study thermometer station in a parking lot. On asphalt.

Thermometer stations such as those are for one no longer used and for two when they were the readings were adjusted to remove heat bias.

I wonder how much you get paid to run out to temp stations and lie about the readings. /sarc

You have documentation to prove this?

a reply to: beezzer

It's thought to be a cause for brain overgrowth and thus potentially a causal factor for autism. So now that you know, would you ask the doctors how they feel about autism or suspect they were being funded to lie about their data for some NWO agenda?

Now if prenatal exposure to some petrochemical were to be found (purely fiction on my part to make a point) to cause an increase in prefrontal neurons and it was found out to come from the styrofoam cups mom drank her tea out of on her way to work everyday... and the major manufacturers of styrofoam went all tobacco lawyer and painted the 50 doctors as agents of the NWO agenda to kill the styrofoam industry and put thousands of people out of work to increase poverty in order to herd the hungry masses together...

You get the idea?