am I missing something? I only know two or three members with those attributes ...

I also count the ones with whom I disagree.

 

Well, studying it employs lots of people and keeps the proles scared, thats' what big brother wants eh?
If my uni seat depended on me publishing supportive documents rather than getting a proper job, i would go along with the funding bodies.

The planet could do with a few billion less people anyway, why worry about it.

 

Well, studying it employs lots of people and keeps the proles scared, thats' what big brother wants eh?
If my uni seat depended on me publishing supportive documents rather than getting a proper job, i would go along with the funding bodies.

The planet could do with a few billion less people anyway, why worry about it.

Please don't take this wrong.
Near as I can tell there are about 250 publishing researchers. So what you are saying is someone is paying them to publish pro warming papers?
So what does the university get to do this?
Do you think there is any descent among the troops about writing something they don't believe and their peers just rubber stamp it?

 

Off Topic is much more lightly moderated than the rest of the forum to allow the free exchange of thoughts and opinions even though that sometimes ruffles feathers. Not everyone will be happy with every thread but that is the price of allowing this sort of discussion. AAC enjoys a plethora of intelligent, engaged and mature members and for the most part discussions in Off Topic tend to self moderate. As long as that happens, a looser, case by case interpretation of TOS/UA is warranted in my view. The resulting conversations won't be everyone's cup of tea and when that happens, they can and should decline to participate. That's what I do. Obviously, there are times when things go way south and we appreciate reports when that happens.

Fair enough! -- Heaven knows I've little enough room for complaint considering my involvement with the (often far afield) EHT thread! --- Still, I'd be less than honest was I to deny my concern - I've seen political rancor essentially destroy two sites first hand That said, it is my observation that AAC affects a unique resilience!

As always, the eternal optimist...
HP

 

So what you are saying is someone is paying them to publish pro warming papers?

Heavens yes. And if you want to work on alternative hypotheses, or do experimental work that might uncover "issues", or generally give the funding bodies an inkling that you're not fully on board, you will NOT get grants. Worse, you may get called out for being a heretic and have trouble getting future funding for unrelated studies. Your university bosses will be asked why you're still on the faculty, and it turn will ask you why you're not raking in grant money (of which they get a cut).

The pro-AGW crowd often screams that the only dissenting papers on the topic are funded by the energy industry. Well duh, how else are they going to get funding? The DOE or NASA or whoever it is spreading around climate research dollars is not going to give a nickel to a a dissenter.

 

In specific, I have said that tcmtech tends to rattle my grates. I have no objection to that. The primary result is that I get my beliefs properly adjusted. Getting your feathers ruffled is a healthy part of growing up.

Similar thoughts here as well. Being in my comfort zone too long makes me nervous that I m missing something.
(or maybe losing my touch to debate.)

 

am I missing something? I only know two or three members with those attributes ...

Okay. Now I'm confused.

Do we need to compare notes?

 

am I missing something? I only know two or three members with those attributes ...

I didn't click a "like" because I agree. I did it because I laughed. I can name 6 without looking at the member list.

 

The DOE or NASA or whoever it is spreading around climate research dollars is not going to give a nickel to a a dissenter.

And they are doing this why? Because they want more regulatory power?
That might work for the US, but what about all the other countries? Have we bought them off as well?

 

I didn't click a "like" because I agree. I did it because I laughed. I can name 6 without looking at the member list.

And I can think of many, many more. Of course I was being sarcastic... it's all @joeyd999 's fault. His sense of humor is rubbing off on me.... not that that's a good thing!

 

We got new data coming in.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/01/f...nipulated-environmental-data-for-two-decades/

 

Please don't take this wrong.
Near as I can tell there are about 250 publishing researchers. So what you are saying is someone is paying them to publish pro warming papers?
So what does the university get to do this?
Do you think there is any descent among the troops about writing something they don't believe and their peers just rubber stamp it?

Did you hear about 200 years of Russian temperature data that was thrown out?

 

Did you hear about 200 years of Russian temperature data that was thrown out?

that's consistent with the view expressed by the leading scientist in climate research. Mann (from the climate gate if you recall) said a few days ago that climate data and models are "increasingly unnecessary" because we can see climate changes.

This is the same guy who said that cold weather is no repudiation of global warming because of the distinction between weather and climate - but hot weather is indicative of global warming.

It is precisely because of "scientists" like that that average people question the actual "science" in climate research and integrity of such "scientists".

 

Yes, and behavior like this doesn't help either. Hansen is allegedly a decent scientist and has a wide following. But as far as I'm concerned, a public display like this exposes a deep bias and makes me question the validity of any science he has done. You simply cannot do good science – ask good questions – if you already have a position and think you know the answer.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013...st-arrested-again-in-white-house-protest.html

 

I would happily be arrested alongside Daryl Hannah. But it wouldn't be for protesting.

 

The pro-AGW crowd often screams that the only dissenting papers on the topic are funded by the energy industry. Well duh, how else are they going to get funding? The DOE or NASA or whoever it is spreading around climate research dollars is not going to give a nickel to a a dissenter.

So you have almost convinced me.
Just one more blank to fill in.
NASA does this because _________

 

@Sinus23
Maybe you can tell us from first hand experience how your glaciers are doing.

 

So you have almost convinced me.
Just one more blank to fill in.
NASA does this because _________

money

 

Hmm... Last time i checked they were shrinking ( not an expert in that field) However the last 3 summers here on the south-west corner have been pretty cold( barely 2 digit Celsius). While my sister which lives in the middle south Iceland has had really good summer so far.

But I've noticed some extremes in the weather. Before the last 3 years we had almost 10 summers here which had next to no rain and you had to use a fan just so you could sleep. (20> Celsius all day for days) And the last 3 winters have been extreme compared to what we are used to here on the south-west corner. A storm at least once a week, Ice on the sidewalk that wouldn't melt the whole winter and far into the spring.

 

Gentlemen, in terms of the planet life, we have been around less than a millisecond, so what if we want to crap on our own doorsteps and ruin the place. Mankind, if it's still around in a couple of hundred years, could do with a re-start.
It's the poor old dinosaurs i feel sorry for, they had a far more successful run than us and a damn site longer too.
Just another climate change, shit happens eh? Any punitive efforts we make to stop it or even slow it are just a laugh with population growth as it is. Spending money studying it and it's effects is fine by me but the arrogance of some of the 'scientists' who think we can stop it, matches my own cynicism.