Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Climate Scientists Face Organized Harassment in U.S.

Page 3 of 5 [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2012, 7:42 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JNathanK wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
NoPast wrote:

I think AGW denialism is one of the very specific form of mostly US-centric cretinism like creationism


It is no longer called AGW. It is call ACC, anthropogenic climate change. That way whether it gets too hot or too cold, the eco-phreaks can blame the capitalists.

ruveyn


Or perhaps the re-labelling is due to the fact that most people miss the fact that anthropogenic climate change is expected to result in not only a higher average temperature, but also a greater variance in temperatures...


This past January was just weird. It felt more like spring than winter.


There were also several time periods in the past where the Earth was warmer than it is now. Not to mention scientists got caught putting their thermometers on blacktop, by the exhausts of air conditioners (if you run an air conditioner in reverse you get a heater), etc.

Fact of the matter is that this debate has been so politicized on both sides that I think the politicians need to get the hell out of this debate, and everything needs to be retested from scratch.

Whether people here want to admit it or not, numbers were tampered with by the scientists claiming global warming is real (not all of the scientists, but quite a few, which threw off the simulations of other scientists in the US). There are also idiots on the other side that have arguably played loose with the numbers. So at this point neither side has any credibility.


Funny that you would use the word "credibility".

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf+html

... If providing rebuttals, please include references to peer-reviewed journals... Oh, and "Energy & Environment" might not be the best starting point...


Problem with your statement is the fact that scientists were only allowed to publish their findings if it was in support of the global-warming ideology, so the fact things weren't published has nothing to do with lack of research, it has to do with a lack of objectivity.

I was an intern at Goddard when climategate broke, a lot of scientists were upset with scientists in the UK for tampering with numbers, which brought Goddard Scientists' credibility into question. So, regardless of what the "investigations" said (and I use the term loosely because it would be more accurate to call it a cover-up), I know that numbers were tampered with.

I also know that the other side has played loose with the numbers as well. So as far as I'm concerned everything needs to be gone over from scratch.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

21 Sep 2012, 7:48 pm

Only severely scientifically uninformed individuals with a completely partisan interest in the subject of climate change use the idiotic term "climategate". Or bring it up like it actually means anything.


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2012, 8:05 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Only severely scientifically uninformed individuals with a completely partisan interest in the subject of climate change use the idiotic term "climategate". Or bring it up like it actually means anything.


Vigilans, have you ever been an intern for any division of NASA? Have you ever been on the same bus as fellow NASA employees while interning at a NASA division?

I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center which is a division of NASA, back in 2010, and I rode the same bus as other NASA employees to get to the security gate in order to head to work each day (which is where I picked up that tidbit of information.

If you can answer yes to both questions, then we can have a debate, if not then I probably know more about this issue than you do and you are simply making a total fool of yourself.



Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

21 Sep 2012, 9:39 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
JNathanK wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
NoPast wrote:

I think AGW denialism is one of the very specific form of mostly US-centric cretinism like creationism


It is no longer called AGW. It is call ACC, anthropogenic climate change. That way whether it gets too hot or too cold, the eco-phreaks can blame the capitalists.

ruveyn


Or perhaps the re-labelling is due to the fact that most people miss the fact that anthropogenic climate change is expected to result in not only a higher average temperature, but also a greater variance in temperatures...


This past January was just weird. It felt more like spring than winter.


There were also several time periods in the past where the Earth was warmer than it is now. Not to mention scientists got caught putting their thermometers on blacktop, by the exhausts of air conditioners (if you run an air conditioner in reverse you get a heater), etc.

Fact of the matter is that this debate has been so politicized on both sides that I think the politicians need to get the hell out of this debate, and everything needs to be retested from scratch.

Whether people here want to admit it or not, numbers were tampered with by the scientists claiming global warming is real (not all of the scientists, but quite a few, which threw off the simulations of other scientists in the US). There are also idiots on the other side that have arguably played loose with the numbers. So at this point neither side has any credibility.


Data on ice cover must not that easy to fake, and they do show that the Earth is warming at a alrming rate.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Also:
Image


_________________
Down with speculators!! !


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2012, 10:03 pm

Ice may be decreasing in some areas, but it is increasing in other areas.

The lynchpin in the anthropogenic global warming theory is the shrinking Arctic ice, but now that some of that ice is actually increasing, scientists claim, without a trace of irony, it is normal for temperatures and ice sheets to fluctuate.
Greenland's Sermitsiak reported, “The ice between Canada and southwestern Greenland has reached its highest level in 15 years.” Denmark's Meteorological Institute used satellite images to track the southward expansion of the ice and when the paper asked how these findings “fit in with” continual reports of Arctic ice “melting at a record rate due to increasing temperatures,” global warming was, of course, affirmed (map) (bold mine throughout):


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lynn-david ... z27AEAMk9Z

The formatting didn't transfer over in the copy-paste.

Fact of the matter is a lot of the skepticism is because of the blatent double standard.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

21 Sep 2012, 10:24 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Only severely scientifically uninformed individuals with a completely partisan interest in the subject of climate change use the idiotic term "climategate". Or bring it up like it actually means anything.


Vigilans, have you ever been an intern for any division of NASA? Have you ever been on the same bus as fellow NASA employees while interning at a NASA division?

I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center which is a division of NASA, back in 2010, and I rode the same bus as other NASA employees to get to the security gate in order to head to work each day (which is where I picked up that tidbit of information.

If you can answer yes to both questions, then we can have a debate, if not then I probably know more about this issue than you do and you are simply making a total fool of yourself.


Not only do I own Goddard Space Flight Center and NASA, I also invented bus public transportation. I'm glad you are able to absorb NASA employee's credibility through osmosis by riding the same bus. Not many can make this claim


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2012, 11:12 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Only severely scientifically uninformed individuals with a completely partisan interest in the subject of climate change use the idiotic term "climategate". Or bring it up like it actually means anything.


Vigilans, have you ever been an intern for any division of NASA? Have you ever been on the same bus as fellow NASA employees while interning at a NASA division?

I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center which is a division of NASA, back in 2010, and I rode the same bus as other NASA employees to get to the security gate in order to head to work each day (which is where I picked up that tidbit of information.

If you can answer yes to both questions, then we can have a debate, if not then I probably know more about this issue than you do and you are simply making a total fool of yourself.


Not only do I own Goddard Space Flight Center and NASA, I also invented bus public transportation. I'm glad you are able to absorb NASA employee's credibility through osmosis by riding the same bus. Not many can make this claim


:roll:

In other words you've never worked at NASA (let alone Goddard Space Flight Center)...

If I remember correctly there were two routes I used to get to Goddard, Bus Route 15 and the 15 express.

Goddard Space Flight Center is in Greenbelt Maryland. Since I was an intern in 2010, it's been a few years so hopefully I remember the two bus routes that go by the entrance, feel free to look it up yourself.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

22 Sep 2012, 12:02 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Only severely scientifically uninformed individuals with a completely partisan interest in the subject of climate change use the idiotic term "climategate". Or bring it up like it actually means anything.


Vigilans, have you ever been an intern for any division of NASA? Have you ever been on the same bus as fellow NASA employees while interning at a NASA division?

I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center which is a division of NASA, back in 2010, and I rode the same bus as other NASA employees to get to the security gate in order to head to work each day (which is where I picked up that tidbit of information.

If you can answer yes to both questions, then we can have a debate, if not then I probably know more about this issue than you do and you are simply making a total fool of yourself.


Not only do I own Goddard Space Flight Center and NASA, I also invented bus public transportation. I'm glad you are able to absorb NASA employee's credibility through osmosis by riding the same bus. Not many can make this claim


:roll:

In other words you've never worked at NASA (let alone Goddard Space Flight Center)...

If I remember correctly there were two routes I used to get to Goddard, Bus Route 15 and the 15 express.

Goddard Space Flight Center is in Greenbelt Maryland. Since I was an intern in 2010, it's been a few years so hopefully I remember the two bus routes that go by the entrance, feel free to look it up yourself.


Not only is there no reason for me to believe any of that, you haven't even described anything particularly impressive. Wow, you took a bus with NASA employees. Congratulations on making no actual argument and instead relying on some BS about your own personal experiences that nobody on this forum can even verify. visagrunt was right, you aren't even trying anymore


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,481
Location: Aux Arcs

22 Sep 2012, 12:18 pm

Wow,just look at the fur fly!



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

22 Sep 2012, 12:18 pm

Tollorin wrote:
Also:
Image


This representation is baseless and without scientific merit... Only 90 percent...! You are surely on Exxon Mobil's payroll...

A cleaner has been dispatched to your last known location... please do not leave your last known location...



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

22 Sep 2012, 12:48 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JNathanK wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
NoPast wrote:

I think AGW denialism is one of the very specific form of mostly US-centric cretinism like creationism


It is no longer called AGW. It is call ACC, anthropogenic climate change. That way whether it gets too hot or too cold, the eco-phreaks can blame the capitalists.

ruveyn


Or perhaps the re-labelling is due to the fact that most people miss the fact that anthropogenic climate change is expected to result in not only a higher average temperature, but also a greater variance in temperatures...


This past January was just weird. It felt more like spring than winter.


There were also several time periods in the past where the Earth was warmer than it is now. Not to mention scientists got caught putting their thermometers on blacktop, by the exhausts of air conditioners (if you run an air conditioner in reverse you get a heater), etc.

Fact of the matter is that this debate has been so politicized on both sides that I think the politicians need to get the hell out of this debate, and everything needs to be retested from scratch.

Whether people here want to admit it or not, numbers were tampered with by the scientists claiming global warming is real (not all of the scientists, but quite a few, which threw off the simulations of other scientists in the US). There are also idiots on the other side that have arguably played loose with the numbers. So at this point neither side has any credibility.


Funny that you would use the word "credibility".

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf+html

... If providing rebuttals, please include references to peer-reviewed journals... Oh, and "Energy & Environment" might not be the best starting point...


Problem with your statement is the fact that scientists were only allowed to publish their findings if it was in support of the global-warming ideology, so the fact things weren't published has nothing to do with lack of research, it has to do with a lack of objectivity.

I was an intern at Goddard when climategate broke, a lot of scientists were upset with scientists in the UK for tampering with numbers, which brought Goddard Scientists' credibility into question. So, regardless of what the "investigations" said (and I use the term loosely because it would be more accurate to call it a cover-up), I know that numbers were tampered with.

I also know that the other side has played loose with the numbers as well. So as far as I'm concerned everything needs to be gone over from scratch.


I interned for NOAA in Maryland in 2009 and 2010. I also studied at the University of Washington as a graduate student between 2007 and 2010 where I got my MS in atmospheric science. I can assure you the "scandal" which consisted of a bunch of nitpicked and misunderstood out-of-context emails was a bunch of manufactured BS. If anything those scientists were criticized for fighting with certain skeptics who wouldn't leave them alone. There was also criticism of the "hockey stick" graph published in IPCC reports in the late 90s. This was very old crap being rehashed that has little or no bearing on the overall body of evidence for AGW.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

22 Sep 2012, 12:50 pm

Tollorin wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JNathanK wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
NoPast wrote:

I think AGW denialism is one of the very specific form of mostly US-centric cretinism like creationism


It is no longer called AGW. It is call ACC, anthropogenic climate change. That way whether it gets too hot or too cold, the eco-phreaks can blame the capitalists.

ruveyn


Or perhaps the re-labelling is due to the fact that most people miss the fact that anthropogenic climate change is expected to result in not only a higher average temperature, but also a greater variance in temperatures...


This past January was just weird. It felt more like spring than winter.


There were also several time periods in the past where the Earth was warmer than it is now. Not to mention scientists got caught putting their thermometers on blacktop, by the exhausts of air conditioners (if you run an air conditioner in reverse you get a heater), etc.

Fact of the matter is that this debate has been so politicized on both sides that I think the politicians need to get the hell out of this debate, and everything needs to be retested from scratch.

Whether people here want to admit it or not, numbers were tampered with by the scientists claiming global warming is real (not all of the scientists, but quite a few, which threw off the simulations of other scientists in the US). There are also idiots on the other side that have arguably played loose with the numbers. So at this point neither side has any credibility.


Data on ice cover must not that easy to fake, and they do show that the Earth is warming at a alrming rate.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Also:
Image


QFT That is brilliant! The only issue is the number should be more like 98%.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

22 Sep 2012, 2:25 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Only severely scientifically uninformed individuals with a completely partisan interest in the subject of climate change use the idiotic term "climategate". Or bring it up like it actually means anything.


Vigilans, have you ever been an intern for any division of NASA? Have you ever been on the same bus as fellow NASA employees while interning at a NASA division?

I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center which is a division of NASA, back in 2010, and I rode the same bus as other NASA employees to get to the security gate in order to head to work each day (which is where I picked up that tidbit of information.

If you can answer yes to both questions, then we can have a debate, if not then I probably know more about this issue than you do and you are simply making a total fool of yourself.


Not only do I own Goddard Space Flight Center and NASA, I also invented bus public transportation. I'm glad you are able to absorb NASA employee's credibility through osmosis by riding the same bus. Not many can make this claim


:roll:

In other words you've never worked at NASA (let alone Goddard Space Flight Center)...

If I remember correctly there were two routes I used to get to Goddard, Bus Route 15 and the 15 express.

Goddard Space Flight Center is in Greenbelt Maryland. Since I was an intern in 2010, it's been a few years so hopefully I remember the two bus routes that go by the entrance, feel free to look it up yourself.


Not only is there no reason for me to believe any of that, you haven't even described anything particularly impressive. Wow, you took a bus with NASA employees. Congratulations on making no actual argument and instead relying on some BS about your own personal experiences that nobody on this forum can even verify. visagrunt was right, you aren't even trying anymore


You do realize I had to sign confidentiality agreements in order to be an employee at Goddard.

Fact of the matter is, I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center back in 2010, I really couldn't care less if you believe me or not.

Furthermore, I don't think that there are many people on this forum that have ever worked at NASA, let alone Goddard Space Flight Center, so it is unsurprising that nobody here can verify what I'm saying...

Fact of the matter is, I would have no reason to know the bus routes to get dropped off at Goddard Space Flight Center unless I had worked there.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

22 Sep 2012, 3:33 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Funny that you would use the word "credibility".

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf+html

... If providing rebuttals, please include references to peer-reviewed journals... Oh, and "Energy & Environment" might not be the best starting point...


Inuyasha wrote:
Problem with your statement is the fact that scientists were only allowed to publish their findings if it was in support of the global-warming ideology, so the fact things weren't published has nothing to do with lack of research, it has to do with a lack of objectivity.


I generally tend to disregard the statements of people who themselves disregard the entire institution of scientific peer review... I will entertain some sort of tolerance for the purpose of facilitating communication and putting an end to hostilities, however, but..... proof?
Inuyasha wrote:
I also know that the other side has played loose with the numbers as well. So as far as I'm concerned everything needs to be gone over from scratch.


Since researchers are studying the same phenomenon (the global climate) again and again, starting from scratch occurs quite frequently.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

22 Sep 2012, 4:18 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
You do realize I had to sign confidentiality agreements in order to be an employee at Goddard.

Fact of the matter is, I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center back in 2010, I really couldn't care less if you believe me or not.


That is not a fact to me or anyone who does not know you. Essentially what you are trying to do is intimidate people from debate with claims of first hand experience we cannot verify in any way. This is because you know you can't argue the science itself on any level.

Inuyasha wrote:
Furthermore, I don't think that there are many people on this forum that have ever worked at NASA, let alone Goddard Space Flight Center, so it is unsurprising that nobody here can verify what I'm saying...

Fact of the matter is, I would have no reason to know the bus routes to get dropped off at Goddard Space Flight Center unless I had worked there.


You're really dim sometimes, it is a simple matter of using Google Maps to deduce a bus route. I could do it in less than a minute.

Stop using this idiotic "argument from experience", the only way you could back it up is by revealing personal details that I don't want to know nor do I want you to put your own privacy at risk for the sake of an internet debate, it is simply not worth it amigo.


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

22 Sep 2012, 5:47 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
You do realize I had to sign confidentiality agreements in order to be an employee at Goddard.

Fact of the matter is, I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center back in 2010, I really couldn't care less if you believe me or not.


That is not a fact to me or anyone who does not know you. Essentially what you are trying to do is intimidate people from debate with claims of first hand experience we cannot verify in any way. This is because you know you can't argue the science itself on any level.


It wouldn't matter if I posted 15 sources including sworn testimony from the scientists confessing to tampering with their data (it wouldn't happen cause it would ruin the careers), you still would be screaming that it was a vast right-wing conspiracy or some other idiocy.

Fact of the matter is I worked at Goddard Space Flight Center back in 2010. I really don't care if you believe me or not.


Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Furthermore, I don't think that there are many people on this forum that have ever worked at NASA, let alone Goddard Space Flight Center, so it is unsurprising that nobody here can verify what I'm saying...

Fact of the matter is, I would have no reason to know the bus routes to get dropped off at Goddard Space Flight Center unless I had worked there.


You're really dim sometimes, it is a simple matter of using Google Maps to deduce a bus route. I could do it in less than a minute.


Then do it already, I've stated in the past I was an intern at Goddard Space Flight Center in 2010.

Vigilans wrote:
Stop using this idiotic "argument from experience", the only way you could back it up is by revealing personal details that I don't want to know nor do I want you to put your own privacy at risk for the sake of an internet debate, it is simply not worth it amigo.


Well considering the lack of honesty of the media these days, and the fact you really don't consider what any Conservative outlet says to be accurate, and I actually do have some knowledge regarding this issue (which is deflates your sources), I am going to bring it up.