Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 02/05/2010 12:02:45 PM PST by inkling
Earlier this week, the Energy and Environment Conference was held in Phoenix. Needless to say, this event featured mostly "global warmists" and their co-religionists. However, one man decided to speak the truth.
William A. Sprigg is one of the most respected and longest-tenured scientists in the field of climatology. He even led the technical review of the first IPCC report on climate change. But unlike most of his colleagues, he tackled "Climategate" head-on.
In short, he urged his colleagues to stop defending the likes of infamous "Hide the Decline" emailers Phil Jones and Michael Mann. He urged his colleagues to stop treating as pariahs scientists who offer evidence contrary to the climate alarmists. He urged his colleagues to stop rigging the game to keep contrarians out of the "respected" climate journals. He knows that the very credibility of the entire discipline is at stake and it's time to stop ignoring this fact.
It did not go over very well in the audience — who were undoubtedly expecting to hear a lecture about how Climategate was no big deal when they saw the agenda. Apparently the only camera rolling was that of The Heartland Institute, a free-market think tank based in Chicago.
(VIDEO AT LINK)
(Excerpt) Read more at exurbanleague.com ...
He’ll be put on the “do not publish” list for this heresy!
There should be derision quotes around “climatologist”. It’s nothing but a pathetic title that only a lib would go for.
I’m an engineer, & I know all the science they do for this issue.
The rest of their “degree” must be largely about Mike’s Nature Trick.
It is not just unsettling it should really be a wake up call not just to the scientists because truthfully they know about the inside job that goes on in attempts to maintain government grants and maintain good esteem among the liberal intelligentsia that dominate Science and the media today. Peer Review has always been a joke and it has often been used to squelch new innovations as much as vet out bad research. Scientists are human and they are mostly of above average intelligence which automatically makes them very capable of using deception which we have seen. This just goes to show that no one should blindly trust anything especially if those pushing an idea are trying to make it a popularity contest and use intimidation instead of reason to prove their case.
What is "religionism?" It seems to be a made up word which could be used in place of older words like deism, Christianity, belief, etc. The older words have more specific meanings, while the meaning of "religionism" seems to vary depending on context.
Good info, but will have to find it elsewhere. That was horrid.
Unsettling?
So much for the alarmist hysteria about Global Warming.
If they really originally believed that there was such a threat and were “shocked” to learn that the books had been cooked, they should be RELIEVED to learn that the planet Earth is NOT in jeopardy and Mankind is not responsible for destroying the planet.
I can do without the drums.
ping
One lefty site I go to it is easily observable that the cult is losing traction and the kids are ready to move on and pretend for the rest of their lives that they were really not that stupid to fall for the AGW shtick.
What these people were practicing was not science, but some weird form of witchcraft, which for them is a substitute for actual science. As practiced honestly, the science of ANYTHING is never settled. Science is, by its nature, continuously evolving, i.e., first a postulate is set forth, a formulation is drawn up, the formulation is tested, the results of this test are compared with the hypothesis, and a conclusion is prepared, stating the differences between the theoretical outcome and the actual result. The original postulate is revisited, to see if there may have been unexplored factors or overlooked data, and these are then incorporated in the next test of the hypothesis. There may be continual refining of the answers, but no conclusion is ever firmly and unshakeably accepted as “settled”, as new conditions and new data are constantly being discovered, which, upon being integrated with the previous body of collected facts, produce contradictory or imcompatible results.
The only thing continuously revealed is the lack of appreciation we have for the REAL world, hampered by the fact that so much of what we know for certain turns out to be not to be true at all.
At least half of everything you learn within your lifetime shall turn out, before you die, to have been totally wrong.
Calling it science is what is unsettling. If NASA ran the space program the way “climate science” is conducted they would still be blowing up monkeys on the launch pad.
Weird is right. If we're going to use that as an analogy then climate science is the equivalent of Belinda the Teenage Witch on cable TV. In re-runs. lol
Climategate puts into question every speck of data collected into question.
A real scientist would welcome others to verify his oor her conclusions by a peer review.
However, if they are reluctant to expose their raw data or if they have deleted it, they should not have any credibility going further.
In addition to that, the data suspicion requires verification before anybody goes any further.
The e-mails and subsequent behavior shows a disregard for facts and verification. They all should have to go through a review process themselves to re-certify themselves before speaking at all in public.
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.