More Options. More On: Lost in Space Tags Lost in Space Netflix. Share Selection Facebook Twitter. Post was not sent - check your email addresses! You might very well have been innocently minding your own business in a lab somewhere and have nothing to do with it, but a major scandal has just erupted in your science and you ought to be outraged. How did it get so far without being detected? Why has the scientific community not cleaned shop? Where are the major multi-disciplinary investigations and re-assessments of what is now put in question and what is still well-supported?
Where are the statements from leaders and professional bodies defending good science, and distancing themselves from such malpractice? Some have no wish to attract attention in this hostile political battleground. Whatever their reasons, the problem with the scientific community extends a lot further than just those mentioned in the emails.
List of fictional books - Wikipedia
And overwhelms the sound of their tattered credibility collapsing even further. That Colose and his cohorts seem genuinely incapable of understanding this shows just how buried within the climatologist bubble they have become.
Chris, Your efforts to engage with provocative comments such as those made here by Willis are much appreciated. Thank you for running this gauntlet. The next step might be to ask oneself, as Willis does, why is there such distrust? They just go along with the show. But to have so many top names associated with such sloppy work cannot confidence on the part of outsiders, whether other scientists or the general public, including adherents of any religion. Unfortunately that was by no means the last such example of shaky work by the climate science establishment, as we have more recently seen with the prominent paper by Steig et al , Nature , on warming in western Antarctica.
A bit less advocacy and a bit more rigour might help. As for the demolishing of Steig et al, by a paper which itself has hardly been out long enough to be examined thoroughly, even one of the authors said. Overall, we find that the Steig reconstruction overestimated the continental trends and underestimated the Peninsula — though our analysis found that the trend in West Antarctica was, indeed, statistically significant. In my opinion, the Steig reconstruction was quite clever, and the general concept was sound.
A few of the choices made during implementation were incorrect; a few were suboptimal. Importantly, if those are corrected, some of the results change. Also importantly, some do not. Hopefully some of the cautions outlined in our paper are incorporated into other, future work. Time will tell! Once again, others call it conspiracy. Ho hum. The fact that the central areas once thought to be warming quickly are not, means that although this paper only refines the work of steig, it effectively removes it as evidence for cAGW.
I doubt if you have read the e-mails at all, Chris. If you had, you would not be able to honestly say what you do. I believe Cris has read the e-mails AND understood them. I believe that he is technically competent and understands the Santer paper, the Hockeystick and many other papers much better than either of us. That is why people like Cris disgust me so much. Chris is deliberately trying to mislead people. Nothing Chris writes can be trusted.
You always need to go back and check whether what he claims is true.
If you look at the Santer et al response, it admits that the updated R t does decrease after Amazingly, Santer et al tried the same cherry-picking trick in their paper, using data only up to He can put his opinion forward whenever he likes. What I object to is people projecting their own opinions onto the wider public at large.
Chris, Your reactionary ignorant response works at RC, I am sure.
- Featured Content?
- ‘Lost in Space’ Review: Netflix Successfully Reboots the Robot, But the Rest Is Strictly for Kids;
- Busy Mom Cookbook Easy Recipes & Quick Meal for Busy Families: The Best Breakfast Recipes Cookbook for Healthy Diet Collection.
- Understanding conservative religious resistance to climate science.
- Ambassador Tiki: Living Large and Loving It!.
- See a Problem?.
- Jupiter Returns!
But where people get to actually respond, not so well. Oh well. It might be useful to ponder the number of people skeptical of electromagnetism. Just my engineering bias showing through. It is futile for you to demand that deniers stop their broad paranoia toward main-stream-climate-science because it is also accompanied by demands to be selectively gullible to a daily blizzard of disingenuous alarmist BS. For example, how are we supposed to react when US Sec. This does not seem to be the view of geologists and paleontologists.
One tract about an Arctic island fossil find explicitly put the island within the Arctic circle for the entirety of its existence. Yet when the media reported the find, this was strangely changed to read it moved there from a warmer area. No mention was made that the warmer area was within five degrees of the north pole during a warmer era. This cannot happen if flawed, iconic symbols of warming are enshrined and zealously defended. Criticism must be acknowledged in a way that is channeled toward improving the science!
If you would like to be seen as different, start with what you call skeptics.
What to Read Next
So please peddle your strawman elsewhere. As a former angry denier and now cynical lukewarmer, I come here to learn how to be a civil agnostic lukewarmer. I worked at Goddard for most of 42 years — with the atmospheric scientists. And I talked to them.
Washington update: science integrity
One talks about a lot of different subjects while waiting through a spacecraft thermal-vac test or waiting for a spaceraft science data dump or working through science instrument schedules or problems or waiting for a design meeting to start or over lunch at a conference. And one of those subjects was global warming. And the opinion of nearly all of those atmospheric scientists was that the theory was flawed and the data did not support it to any great degree.
But they dared not express those opinions officially or publish anything of the sort if they wanted to keep their jobs and careers.
How about all those scientists who publish papers and write books that provide evidence against CAGW — and then write conclusions that support it? Are they stupid? Horse puckey. As Willis said — Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin. The bright spot in this whole thing is the rare and valuable people like Judith Curry and Mike Hulme and those like the Pielkes, Spencer, Lindzen and the others who have maintained their integrity and enough of their scientific curiousity to not dismiss sceptics out-of -hand.
And there are too few of them. Where did tha come from? And what kind of gauntlet did they have to run to get it published? Would you have? And yet you diss people like them. So much for grand conspiracies.
Analysis of What I Read
That leaves the petty conspiracies Willis mentions, which you will never be able to PROVE to Chris, not because he will put them beyond proof, but because, by his own admission, he declines to look at the evidence. All you have to do is ask yourself what would happen to the careers of scientists who were sceptics. It would be binned, and you would be ridiculed. Many grant applications in the UK start by saying that the recipient will show the effect of AGW on x, y, z. What happens to the application that says the opposite? Try a thought experiment. Become a sceptic and see how that changes your grades, your life, your career prospects ….
At the end of it after Dionysos, Mithra, Caucasian practices etc he moves on to discuss aspects of Christianity. With kindness, this seems to be to my simple mind a non-article and at best nothing but a distraction. Perhaps the truly fascinating direction this thread could take is to establish what constitutes religious belief as opposed to scientific hypotheses. Think of all this as a straight line in a curved universe where everything is connected.
Related JUPITER RETURNS (The Judith McCain Series Book 4)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved