Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Overselling Of Global Warming May Lead To A Dark Age?
Forbes ^ | February 3, 2014 | Patrick Michaels

Posted on 02/04/2014 10:40:10 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets

Will the overselling of climate change lead to a new scientific dark age? That’s the question being posed in the latest issue of an Australian literary journal, Quadrant, by Garth Paltridge, one of the world’s most respected atmospheric scientists.

Paltridge was a Chief Research Scientist with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO). The latter is Australia’s equivalent of the National Science Foundation, our massive Federal Laboratory network, and all the governmental agency science branches rolled into one.

Paltridge lays out the well-known uncertainties in climate forecasting. These include our inability to properly simulate clouds that are anything like what we see in the real world, the embarrassing lack of average surface warming now in its 17th year, and the fumbling (and contradictory) attempts to explain it away.

While the politically correct name for the last 17 years is “the pause,” it’s much more like the P-wave, which reflects the crustal slippage that occurs before the shaking (and tsunami, if beneath the sea) of a catastrophic earthquake. Humans can’t feel them, but many animals can, which is why birds alight shortly before all hell breaks loose.

(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Hobbies; Science
KEYWORDS: climatechangefraud; darkages; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; hoax
This possibility occurred to me years ago. I think the role of "Science" with a capital "S" needs to be taken down a peg. After World War II, a lot of people thought that governance should be turned to a panel of "objective" and "disinterested" technicians. IOW, Paul Krugman would be dictator for life and Micheal Mann would be his deputy. This is an idea so idiotic only someone who takes the New York Times seriously could believe in it.
1 posted on 02/04/2014 10:40:11 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

May lead to a scientific dark age. . .I think we are already there, but when the lights are off, no one can see.


2 posted on 02/04/2014 10:43:29 AM PST by gspurlock (http://www.backyardfence.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Science changed dramatically in the 1970s, when the reward structure in the profession began to revolve around the acquisition of massive amounts of taxpayer funding that was external to the normal budgets of the universities and federal laboratories. In climate science, this meant portraying the issue in dire terms, often in alliance with environmental advocacy organizations. Predictably, scientists (and their institutions) became addicted to the wealth, fame, and travel in the front of the airplane:

From President Eisenhower's farewell address.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present -- and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Eisenhower hit dead center with that warning.
3 posted on 02/04/2014 10:48:24 AM PST by KarlInOhio (Republican amnesty supporters don't care whether their own homes are called mansions or haciendas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio; zot

And Ike’s quotation is totally ignored by the academic/scientific community. While they and their allies continually boast Ike’s “industrial/military complex” portion of the same speech.

Down with the academic/government research grant complex!


4 posted on 02/04/2014 10:59:13 AM PST by GreyFriar (Spearhead - 3rd Armored Division 75-78 & 83-87)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
I've long feared that the corruption of rigorous science and the scientific method would be the lasting legacy of politicized global warming/climate change hysteria. It seems to be happening.

In addition to the lush funding of science in pursuit of political objectives, many of today's "scientists" have learned they can obtain their 15 minutes of fame by making dramatic (but not peer-reviewed) announcements to the media.

5 posted on 02/04/2014 11:00:59 AM PST by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
This is just the latest and greatest of the junk science fiascoes that followed WWII. The overselling the dangers of nuclear energy, Silent Spring and the banning of DDT, the acid rain scare, silicone breast implants . . .

Science has been perverted to serve political ends and, yes, there will be hell to pay for it with the loss of much credibility.

6 posted on 02/04/2014 11:04:31 AM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

the corruption in science have been happening since the start. Theres always the establishment view and and those who think outside this view are treated as heretics. I just read the other day an article that suggest that development in cold fusion may have been set back decades because of established views


7 posted on 02/04/2014 11:10:11 AM PST by 4rcane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
...they can obtain their 15 minutes of fame by making dramatic (but not peer-reviewed) announcements to the media.

Frankly, I don't think "peer-reviewed" means anything anymore. First, if it doesn't agree with the herd, it is unlikely that a paper will even be accepted in a peer-reviewed publication. Second, soothsayers don't make a practice of calling each other out as fakes. If one climate scientist would point out that climate modelling is inherently a joke, then no model (and no grant money) is safe.

8 posted on 02/04/2014 11:16:29 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

I am sorry you have to misfortune to live in Mass. and I would bet you are lonesome.

When you sell a house the buyer may hire a inspector to check the mechanical systems of the house. I have sold a few over my life and I always tell the buyer that bear in mind that you are paying someone to find something wrong with this house. They will find something wrong in order to justify their overpriced inspection. Without fail that is exactly what happens.

Last house we sold daughter of the buyer, both women, had a radon inspection done. Cost a 125 bucks for the inspection and then the inspector charged the old lady 800 bucks for a radon detector. The guy we bought the house from was in his 90’s when he died and no connection to radon was made. We had lived there for 5 years with no ill effects.

I had told the old lady buying the house that the radon was a scam. I was overruled by her daughter who was a school system employee who buys into any government horse apples she hears of.

Global warming is the same deal. The government tells the scientists what results it is looking for and the scientists reach those results no matter what they have to do. The old saying that the man who pays the fiddler calls the tune is in effect and this BS is taken as gospel by the masses of dummies that now inhabit the formerly great US.

Common sense is out of style and believing the unbelievable is in. I had Elvis’s two headed love child is now a common headline, the more unbelievable the more it is believed. Mooshelle is the best dressed and possesses the best sense of style in America. We are outnumbered by the zombies, God have mercy on us.


9 posted on 02/04/2014 11:17:42 AM PST by Foundahardheadedwoman (God don't have a statute of limitations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Between the overselling of global warming and the undercutting of cold fusion, the scientific community has a lot to answer for. The scientist’s dark age may only be a consequence of the dark age with which they are threatening us all.

My hope is that modern technology, including desktop supercomputers and 3D printing, will make scientific research so cheap that it won’t require massive government funding.


10 posted on 02/04/2014 11:18:04 AM PST by AZLiberty (No tag today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker

The thiomersal hoax, alar , ... The list is long, the costs enormous.


11 posted on 02/04/2014 11:23:30 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (In the long run, we are all dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
QUOTE: "...a lot of people thought that governance should be turned to a panel of "objective" and "disinterested" technicians.

IGY by Donald Fagan:

On that train all graphite and glitter
Undersea by rail
Ninety minutes from New York to Paris
(more leisure for artist everywhere)
A just machine to make big decisions
Programmed by fellows with compassion and vision
We'll be clean when their work is done
We'll be eternally free yes and eternally young

What a glorious world this will be
What a glorious time to be free

12 posted on 02/04/2014 11:44:55 AM PST by jimmyray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Yep..the CommieLibs love to bitch and whine about "Big Tobacco" and "Big Oil". "Big Science" and "Big Education" are the real threats.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

13 posted on 02/04/2014 11:47:58 AM PST by wku man (We are the 53%! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUXN0GDuLN4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Very similar to the ecclesiastic class that used to be regarded as an unquestionable authority until people actually got to read the Book for themselves.

The power of so-called scientists, much like so-called judges, should be reigned in.


14 posted on 02/04/2014 11:50:43 AM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Foundahardheadedwoman

You are exactly right.

I bought a home in 1989 that had “radon” remediation done. The only reason it was done was that the home was owned by a relocation company and they feared a lawsuit.

Radon is or was a scam. A scam that made money by instilling fear.

The same thing is happening with so-called climate change, but on a much bigger scale.

It’s the fear of the unknown and fear based on “possibility” not “probability”.

It’s possible that we are all living in the matrix, however unlikely.

The left, has convinced a great number of unthinking people to accept and embrace uncertainty as fact. I don’t think this is a conspiracy. These are true believers whose foundations for rational thought actually have no foundation, but are so convinced of their position that they reject any and all evidence to the contrary.

As a result. Their positions must be defended, not by an established scientific method, but with the propaganda of fear and more importantly, peer pressure and group think.

These folks are extraordinary shallow in their defense of AGW. They trust and believe what “their” payed for scientists spew, because their world view would collapse otherwise. They would be forced to admit they were wrong. They, if honest, would be forced to reconsider the very foundations of how they know anything.

This runs completely counter to their embrace of uncertainty.


15 posted on 02/04/2014 11:58:20 AM PST by Zeneta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jimmyray

“I was born in a welfare state
Ruled by bureaucracy
Controlled by civil servants
And people dressed in grey
Got no privacy, got no liberty
Cos the twentieth century people
Took it all away from me.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD14kdgQEe8


16 posted on 02/04/2014 12:02:15 PM PST by Zeneta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Paltridge lays out the well-known uncertainties in climate forecasting. These include our inability to properly simulate clouds that are anything like what we see in the real world, the embarrassing lack of average surface warming now in its 17th year, and the fumbling (and contradictory) attempts to explain it away.

Clouds are the key to moderation of Global Temperatures. Low clouds reflect the infrared heat from the earth back to the earth. That is why with all other factors the same, cloudy nights are not as cold as a clear sky night. High clouds reflect heat back into space.

Any computer model for global warming that can not reproduce cloud formation is absolute crap and the modeling results from the program are also crap.

17 posted on 02/04/2014 12:17:13 PM PST by cpdiii (Deckhand, Roughneck, Mud Man, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist. THE CONSTITUTION IS WORTH DYING FOR!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cpdiii

From the beginning the warm-Earthers knew clouds were a net negative feedback so purposely never brought them up or studied them too closely. Clouds are a powerful iris that control how much light gets in.


18 posted on 02/04/2014 12:34:55 PM PST by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Frankly, I don't think "peer-reviewed" means anything anymore.

Yes, you're probably right. I guess I'm remembering the "good old days" when scientific rigor was the rule. I momentarily overlooked the corruption that's compromised the professional journals.

While "Discover" Magazine is a far from being a pro journal I was astonished at what a junk science propaganda medium it is. My wife gave me a gift subscription and nearly every article had some sneaky reference to global warming/climate change/overpopulation etc. It's thoroughly politicized and not credible.

19 posted on 02/04/2014 12:52:13 PM PST by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Foundahardheadedwoman

Great points; being out numbered by the Zombies makes the next Dark Age look welcome; they’ll be the first to die.


20 posted on 02/04/2014 1:01:09 PM PST by Rich21IE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GreyFriar

Thanks for the ping. I agree that “science” and “scientists” are no longer seen as honest, and for good reason.


21 posted on 02/04/2014 1:08:49 PM PST by zot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

Sort of, but churches led the way for literacy so people COULD read the Bible.


22 posted on 02/04/2014 10:28:41 PM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson