Thousands and Thousands of Scientists Can't be Behind a Hoax(AGW), Right?

Fantastic thread EU.
And yep it's all about money as xuenchen and others have stated.
And as usual time is being wasted when we should be
moving the breadbasket and preparing for our Electric Sun to snooze a while.
The at least 200 year cold spell I believe is here
is going to shock the world into a distrust
of status quo academic-science.

yep it's all about money as xuenchen and others have stated

Yeah, selfish and greedy people like you will lie all day every day to avoid spending anything to help the planet or our future.

originally posted by: CB328

yep it's all about money as xuenchen and others have stated

Yeah, selfish and greedy people like you will lie all day every day to avoid spending anything to help the planet or our future.

Quote from beezer:

In both cases, they will do anything they can to insult, debase any opposition.

See?

yep it's all about money as xuenchen and others have stated

originally posted by: CB328
Yeah, selfish and greedy people like you will lie all day every day to avoid spending anything to help the planet or our future.

Here's Mr. Stern & Serious himself....

Obama: My Plan Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket
www.youtube.com...

"Science is not always what scientists do."

- J. Allen Hynek

originally posted by: CB328

more sunlight on climate science cannot be a bad thing.

WTF? Why would anyone treat scientists as criminals when we have real criminals running our country into the ground?!

Why not put some "sunlight" on the liars and criminals in business, politics, insurance, pharmaceuticals, the oil companies etc??

That is sunlight on it because it has to do with liars, corruption, criminals, business, politics, taxes and funding that supports these scientists.

If you're stuck in the Left/Right divide, of course, you won't see that. The "My guy supports it" vs "My guy is against it" I support MY SIDE!" -politics!

Yep, two of my ex-bosses, both are "scientists" in that they have a degree or two in science, have signed one or more of those petitions even though they have no training whatsoever in meteorology or climate studies or astrophysics or even plain ole physics. They know by personal experience that a lot of fraud happens in science where funding is involved yet they refuse to admit that it could happen in this instance.
What really boggles my mind is that both have taught anthropology classes in which they discuss the Ice Ages, the Maunder Minimum and other periods of wild swings in climate/weather. They even know that the guy who came up with tree ring dating was studying sunspots and looking for a relationship between climate and sunspots. Yet they won't entertain for a moment the thought that those computer models might look different if the information about sun cycles was added.
It just makes my head go round and round !!!!

But what really frosts my cupcakes are those who are all "green" and preaching the Gospel of Green and yet generate tons of garbage that goes to the landfill each year. The ones I meet in the grocery store who comment, "Oh, you bring your own bags----I always mean to do that....." or if I mention taking my recyclables to Recycle Day (held every six weeks in our town) their comment runs something along the lines of, "Oh, I wish we had curbside recycling, maybe then I could get into it. I just can't ever remember to do it...." They preach the Gospel of Green but live the life of Rampant Consumerism and the Disposable Society.

I bristle at being called a "denier" simply because I'm skeptical of some of the material presented as "absolute truth." I was trained in the scientific method also, and have seen time after time, "absolute truth" turned to "not-so absolute" in my lifetime. The statement "The science is settled" really tells me the level of non-education in those who are out there posing as leaders and the abysmal ignorance of their flocks of followers.

I'm a conservationist. I believe that I should be a good steward of the land on which I live. I should teach my offspring to be mindful of our Mother the Earth. Since 1970 I've actively campaigned for reductions in pollution and safeguards against corporate entities that seek to destroy our resources. I've seen some pretty big victories in that arena and I know for a fact that every waterway in our watershed is in better shape now than it was in 1970. But the battle is on-going and in order to make a difference we all must live in accordance with our beliefs and make careful and thoughtful decisions when we put the power of our money into the economy.

And Beez...I'd give you a sky full of stars if I could!

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Money makes even scientists to babble hoaxy tales. And the political convenience and collegial rules can enforce the hoaxy tale beyond god-like creations.

Global warming by now is beyond tipping point. What we were warned of, has actually happened. Now, if you for some reason have missed what happened, that is simply because, the effects from the tipping point take decennia and in some cases centuries or millenia to emerge...

Clearly Hansen and the like were paid off. Why else would they risk their credibility and careers?

The question is, who's really behind the GW propaganda, and why are they so desperate to convince us that it's a serious threat? Oh wait.... another distraction. Huh.

originally posted by: Gh0stwalker

The question is, who's really behind the GW propaganda, and why are they so desperate to convince us that it's a serious threat? Oh wait.... another distraction. Huh.

Eh I personally think its just a method used to try to create more support for a new energy industry.
I mean oil will in fact cease being a viable fuel source someday, and I think the global warming/cooling deal is just a tactic being used to get people to be more willing to move to alternate sources of energy sooner rather than later.
The reason for this I think is so that everything don't come to a screeching halt one day, and force us all to scramble for a viable source of energy at the last minute.
Not to mention the folks with the cash wanna get in on the ground floor as early as possible knowing whats coming down the pike, eventually.

I read somewhere, just after the USSR collapsed, that half the weather stations were closed down due to lack of funds, so the Russian weather data is suspect, plus with urban sprawl, airports are now in the middle of a 'heat islands' more suspect weather data, and just how does a satellite measure the temperature of the sea?

originally posted by: BABYBULL24
It's the Sun.

Thanks for the Occam's Razor, BB. I still doubt the exhaust
fumes from Aunt Suzie's SUV could cause the polar ice cap
on Mars to shrink at the same rate ours was.

EU -

Thank you for posting this. You have put a magnifying glass to what I tried to point out in another post, and you took the focus where I was hoping it would go.

You also highlighted (as I attempted to) that in a lot of cases, it is indirect or unintentional of a lot of scientists to use data that they don't realize is transformed from its original raw state, which I feel is extremely important in understanding the problem. If more of the science community understood that their sources were the problem, they would be scrutinizing the data more and would likely find these issues before publishing and having models and other scientists use the same incorrect foundation of data. Once that foundation of data is smoothed or filtered, you have clues and facts that are gone forever and no scientists will ever have it as part of their study without specifically looking for it, but how are they going to know it's missing in the first place? (that really is the trillion dollar question)

This entire thread resonates deeply with my own observations and understandings of the problem we have at hand with climate science being based almost entirely on models, which are based almost entirely on data that is very tightly controlled and in some cases, even regulated. There is also the fact that we have direct evidence of it being manipulated on more than one occasion.

This problem is not just in climate science, but because climate science includes so many wide areas of scientific study, much of the data is shared, as are the models, so it is far more rampant.

For example, when a geologist looks at a rock sample, he sends it to a chemist or lab for a chemical breakdown and identification of elements in the sample. The geologist knows that the chemist has a very limited set of tools to work with, and a solid understanding of the periodic table of elements. If there was any doubt by the geologist, it's easy for them to check into what tools were used since the periodic table is well defined and understood and allows the raw information to be questioned and investigated.

Conversely, when a scientist studying the sun wants to collect data about ground temperatures and atmospheric data to correlate to the RAW data they get from the measurements of the sun, they don't go to every thermometer or measuring station or satellite and get the RAW data too - they outsource, or go to other agencies for that data. This is where climate science gets burned with models. They think they have raw data (because they are told it is raw) but don't realize it's actually averaged, or smoothed, or filtered, removing facts that COULD correlate their data, but WON'T correlate because it's NOT THERE.

Much of what I have seen, is that even the hardest of AGW skeptics (myself included) still believe that we have a duty to stop polluting and clean up our messes as humans, and I have rarely seen anyone deny that to be the case. The argument is almost always centered around a "side" to pick in the "fight to save the planet". I have rarely, if ever, seen anyone saying that the climate isn't changing but the skepticism is growing, and it's not because people are "misinformed" or because of the "Koch Brothers"... it's because if you give people enough time to think about a problem, they will apply reason and logic to some extent, and arrive at their own conclusions. Those conclusions, are leading to a growing skepticism that there is nothing humans are doing to cause the warming, and nothing we can do to change it, so therefore we can only prepare for it and get ready to adapt.

Trying to "save the planet", is the equivalent of an ant mound trying to stop a burning building from falling to the ground. Ants can't save a burning building, just like humans are not capable of saving a planet. We might be capable of saving ourselves and a few others, but the planet will go on long after we're here and gone and doesn't need our saving, but we should definitely stop beating on it.

We need to save ourselves from ourselves - Earth itself, will be fine.

~Namaste

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
I would take AGW more seriously if it was based on hard data, and not models fueled by cherry picked data. But it is not. A computer model is not hard science. It is speculation and theory, and thus, not something I am going to jump on the bandwagon for, especially when counter studies and data have been made and presented.

I believe you reflect a large majority that hasn't spoken up yet.

My encounters with most people is that they feel much like you do, but due to fear of perception and societal pressure, they choose to be silent with their opinions until an opportunity presents itself.

~Namaste

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Unsettling enough, I am reminded of the ideology of religious extremists when dealing with Man-Made-Climate-Change enthusiasts.

In both cases, they are only going to do things for our own good.

In both cases it'll cost us, but the rewards will be wonderful.

In both cases, it's okay if we don't understand because they do understand.

In both cases, we are wrong and they are right.

In both cases, they refuse to listen to any opposing viewpoint.

In both cases, they have their literature which they think is indisputable.

In both cases, they will do anything they can to insult, debase any opposition.

In both cases, they have very narrow, myopic views.

In both cases, they put their faith into others rather than seeking it out themselves.

Wow beez... that's a scary, yet eerily accurate, comparison.

I hadn't looked at it through that lens before, but that's a great analogy.

So I guess a question would be.... at what point does belief in an idea (or something similar) turn into a religion?

~Namaste

a reply to: Sublimecraft

That they hide the data was the first thing that pisses off those of us who make our living collecting and verifying data. That they appear to have lied/tweaked the data and squeezed out industry in the western world suggest a sinister conspiracy that the money trail tells us whom to look for when we start arresting the fraudsters.

originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Unsettling enough, I am reminded of the ideology of religious extremists when dealing with Man-Made-Climate-Change enthusiasts.

In both cases, they are only going to do things for our own good.

In both cases it'll cost us, but the rewards will be wonderful.

In both cases, it's okay if we don't understand because they do understand.

In both cases, we are wrong and they are right.

In both cases, they refuse to listen to any opposing viewpoint.

In both cases, they have their literature which they think is indisputable.

In both cases, they will do anything they can to insult, debase any opposition.

In both cases, they have very narrow, myopic views.

In both cases, they put their faith into others rather than seeking it out themselves.

Wow beez... that's a scary, yet eerily accurate, comparison.

I hadn't looked at it through that lens before, but that's a great analogy.

So I guess a question would be.... at what point does belief in an idea (or something similar) turn into a religion?

~Namaste

I think it becomes a religion when you ignore facts that contradict the truth as you wish it to be just to support a claim. But it is greed when you do it for profit, not a religion at all in that case. We obviously are dealing with both types.

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne


British Columbia has all manner of companies trying to do this and that, and all of them will succeed!

Because of all the religions (beliefs) any manner of things can get done in ANY manner of ways, providing they feel the need to do so......pipelines will go through no matter what anyone says, I find it amusing that people think they can stop this with the same tactics that have stopped NOTHING, in this planets history.


The religions that are the core beliefs that Beezer and others do NOT see themselves participating in , are the most real and dangerous ones out there IMO.

They harbor all kinds of intentions that no matter how looked at, too ME and many others who have separated the thinking from the emotions in a DIFFERENT WAY, look no different than the religious extremists they believe are the "enemy".

NO NEED for confusion in this world, it is all too obvious to those that actually WANT to see the deepest reasons for all things "evil"....those who claim they can fix the planet while being involved in all types of programming and mind control will NEVER SEE IT.

I.E. 99.95% of all the "human beings".

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Just like you dont have to be part of psychological operations to be utilized (involved). Its best you do not know generally.