Posted on 11/20/2019 4:49:16 AM PST by Kaslin
All you need to know about global warming and rising sea levels...
Obama just purchased a $16 million beach house.
There’s no grant money to be had if you admit Global Warming is a hoax.
When sea levels rise, they rise everywhere. The beaches I want to as a kid are the same now as they were then.
Paid off by special interests!
Dishonest. Afraid.
For sale.
I'm sure there lots of honest "climate scientists" and unbiased MSM "reporters" < /sarcasm>
I’ve been staring at the tide at the nearest beach for three decades almost day and night looking for a move.
Boy do I feel silly.
I can name lots of honest climate people, there’s ..., wait, and there is .... hmmmm. Give me a minute, I am sure I can come up with a name, just need more time to think about it.
In a nutshell...that the root of much of it.
There are ideologues who believe it root and branch, too...and getting grants is a nice byproduct for them.
But scientists who see it for the hooey it is are attacked and driven out of the educational bastions that are fostering that crap.
So, most of them who disagree with it simply shut up to save their jobs.
A GREAT book that discusses this aspect a little bit is “Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed” by Christopher Horner.
True. Only 97% of them are
That is a great political cartoon...thanks for posting it!
So correct on a few different planes...
“Climate scientists” and “MSM reporters” like working.
They like money.
They like a roof over their head.
They like food in their stomachs.
They are human.
So—they must lie.
If this was the Middle Ages they would be getting their paycheck from the Church and would be leading the Inquisition.
It is up to us to understand human nature—and expose their lies.
Scientists should be objective. They should search for the truth without bias. Science is not a matter for belief.
But it isn’t! Huge numbers of “scientists” are liberals who got into science to change the world. The Scientific American, a magazine that was once a respected, real science magazine, has become a liberal rag.
Not just the money...it’s the ease of data generation that draws so many in.
Lazy scientists can pick and choose data to come to a conclusion that is stated openly in the government grant because the grant application says the conclusion will be reached with the proper amount of money.
Amen to all that. Us Horner still around? Seems like he used to be a regular guest on Hannity and was often referenced by Rush.
Yeah, but it’s funny how much “research” is necessary to “study” something that has already been “settled”.
Now, ‘getting your name out there’, going to or organizing big conferences at which the scientific ‘stars’ are wined and dined, and becoming somewhat of a celebrity in your field is the draw. So, the science is less trustworthy now than it has been maybe ever.
This is also promoted by universities. The ‘leadership’ at these places are often political hacks with little understanding of what constitutes good science, and their criteria for whether someone is successful or not is the amount of grant money they bring in and how well known they are.
People like Mann are emblematic of the ‘connected’ and known science mafia who control way too much and who suppress competitors and those whose data conflict with their own.
So, yes, there are plenty of scientists who are dishonest and who will fudge or overstate data to further their careers, and there are scientists who are afraid of these people - because they can suppress or ruin your career.
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.