Climate Change Junk Scientists are self-destructing.....history repeats itself

[ZomBrady]

If you think man created the WIND, then please don't breed. :roflmao:

Yes, man contributed to the dust bowl. NO, man did not create the WIND, unless you count burrito wind generation in the equation.

READ what I wrote. :laugh2:

FYI, I am an environmental/civil engineer. I think that I am qualified to make a statement about how 'we' impact our environment. I do believe that our activities can affect our environment on a large scale. My statement was directed to how it is possible that our activities could have worsened the weather patterns that already existed and that lead to the Dust Bowl due to native vegetation being cleared and destructive farming methods.


Less than a hundred years ago physicists were saying that we would never harness the power of the atom. Surprisingly, we did just that in very little time. Science unlocked the mysteries of DNA/genetics and our understanding of the natural world is changing constantly. It's amazing to me how our breadth of knowledge is constantly expanding and changing with each new discovery.

I do believe that human activities can influence weather patterns, if not globally, then at least on regional scales.

Personally, I find the prospect of humans influencing weather on a global scale awesome and fascinating. I don't find it frightening or apocalyptic. But I definitely think it is a very real possibility. We practiced rain seeding in the 50's and China used the same technology to clean up their skies for the Olympics.

So why is it inconceivable to you that our activities on a global scale could possibly be effecting our global climate?

 

[kastein]

If you think man created the WIND, then please don't breed. :roflmao:

Yes, man contributed to the dust bowl. NO, man did not create the WIND, unless you count burrito wind generation in the equation.

READ what I wrote. :laugh2:

You haven't watched C-SPAN recently I take it?

We certainly create wind... hot air blows away from Washington, and strangely, a huge sucking sound is heard from the vicinity as a result.

 

[joe_peters]

You haven't watched C-SPAN recently I take it?

We certainly create wind... hot air blows away from Washington, and strangely, a huge sucking sound is heard from the vicinity as a result.

LMAO! Man, you are killing me! :laugh:

 

[joe_peters]

FYI, I am an environmental/civil engineer. I think that I am qualified to make a statement about how 'we' impact our environment. I do believe that our activities can affect our environment on a large scale. My statement was directed to how it is possible that our activities could have worsened the weather patterns that already existed and that lead to the Dust Bowl due to native vegetation being cleared and destructive farming methods.


Less than a hundred years ago physicists were saying that we would never harness the power of the atom. Surprisingly, we did just that in very little time. Science unlocked the mysteries of DNA/genetics and our understanding of the natural world is changing constantly. It's amazing to me how our breadth of knowledge is constantly expanding and changing with each new discovery.

I do believe that human activities can influence weather patterns, if not globally, then at least on regional scales.

Personally, I find the prospect of humans influencing weather on a global scale awesome and fascinating. I don't find it frightening or apocalyptic. But I definitely think it is a very real possibility. We practiced rain seeding in the 50's and China used the same technology to clean up their skies for the Olympics.

So why is it inconceivable to you that our activities on a global scale could possibly be effecting our global climate?

Is it the practice of engineers to fudge numbers, hide facts, and just make things up?

I didn't think so.

Mother Nature is an opportunistic B***ch. You ride your bicycle down a hill one time, and MN comes along and cuts the face of the hill and mud slams into the houses below destroying property. Did your action contribute to what happened? Maybe, then again She is a B***ch and maybe She just did it for fun.

Global warming? Prove it. With REAL data, stop defending those cooking the books.

I say we round up every SOB that received tax dollars and then falsified data and fix it so they can't breed.

You want to effect the global climate? Detonate all of the world's nuclear devices at one time. That will effect the global climate.

 

[ZomBrady]

Is it the practice of engineers to fudge numbers, hide facts, and just make things up?

I didn't think so.

Mother Nature is an opportunistic B***ch. You ride your bicycle down a hill one time, and MN comes along and cuts the face of the hill and mud slams into the houses below destroying property. Did your action contribute to what happened? Maybe, then again She is a B***ch and maybe She just did it for fun.

Global warming? Prove it. With REAL data, stop defending those cooking the books.

I say we round up every SOB that received tax dollars and then falsified data and fix it so they can't breed.

You want to effect the global climate? Detonate all of the world's nuclear devices at one time. That will effect the global climate.

Did I say anywhere that I was defending those individuals? Not that I recall, but I will defend the very real possibility that there is something called Global Warming and that we have a hand in it.

I think the more important question to answer is how much of a hand do we play in Global Warming. Although, these idiots have succeeded in putting the scientific community back to square one in the eyes of the public.

As for engineer's fudging numbers, well, we don't do that. Instead we factor in margins of safety on a conservative basis. If we design something, rate it at what we know it can handle even though our design calculations may say it can handle twice that rating. It's called being conservative and it protects lives and property. If we didn't do that, and instead design strictly for optimization then very bad things would happen. And lots of people would be very unhappy with us.

I am not going to dismiss out right every bit of scientific research that has been done on Global Warming over the last 20 years simply because some idiots compromised their ethics and research in pursuit of a personal agenda/opinion. They, in my opinion, do not represent the scientific community a whole. To think that they do, is just silly and unintelligent.

Unfortunately, these scientists have succeeded in muddying the waters and doing more harm than good for those scientists that might be on the correct path. You're a good example of that. I don't know what 'proof' it would take to convince you that the possibility exists that we have an impact on Global Warming, and I kind of doubt that you could be convinced. Me, I prefer to keep an open mind, and if something comes out that can shed more light on this topic one way or another, I'll listen. If it sounds reasonable in regards to my knowledge, it very well may change my opinion.

And comparing riding a bicycle to the collective actions of the entire world in respect to 'mother nature' is equally silly.

 

[joe_peters]

Wow. Well, I can see why you wouldn't dismiss out right every bit of scientific research that has been done on Global Warming over the last 20 years, heck, they have only been flat out lying about the last 10 years.

They have been cooking the books on data collected from the 1700 freaking hundreds!!

No, not all scientists are lying dirty filthy scum that should be exterminated from the face of the earth. Just those lying dirty filthy scum that have been cooking the books. When they have been exterminated, and 30 years of truth and open discussion on climate research has been accomplished, then come back to me and lets discuss it.

Climatologists, of the lying dirty filthy scum "the sky is falling" Global Warming type, are discredited. Now, with the full support of the main stream lying dirty filthy scum news organizations, they will get to keep their jobs, continue to screw the REAL climatologists (you know, those are the actual scientists that didn't have to cook the books to support their theories).

Why? Because of the "True Believers".

 

[JNickel101]

I do believe that human activities can influence weather patterns, if not globally, then at least on regional scales.

FINALLY...you said "weather" and not "climate".....

"Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get..."

 

[IslanderOffRoad]

the money will get funneled to corporations that will do nothing except to enrich the investors.

Whats wrong with enriching investors?

If you can't beat em, join em.

 

[JNickel101]

....problem is taxpayer money is being funneled to these "investors" (like Al "my house uses 5 times more energy than yours" Gore)

 

[Rod Knee]

Appeals for proof of global warming (or the absence thereof, for that matter) are requested a bit naively. Anthropogenic global warming cannot be proven. There's no proof that cigarettes harm your health or that the sun will rise in the morning either. Science is not about proof, its about explaining things.

 

[kastein]

That's the issue. It's been explained by a bunch of people who seem to have made a lot of glaring mistakes and thrown scientific method out the window.

I can prove I can walk on water if I am allowed to throw out evidence to the contrary. Excuse me, "smooth" evidence to the contrary to make it follow the trend better.

 

[IslanderOffRoad]

....problem is taxpayer money is being funneled to these "investors" (like Al "my house uses 5 times more energy than yours" Gore)

I know, and agree thats a problem.

I stand by if you can't beat em, join em though. Might as well benefit by being an investor, right?

 

[JNickel101]

Appeals for proof of global warming (or the absence thereof, for that matter) are requested a bit naively. Anthropogenic global warming cannot be proven. There's no proof that cigarettes harm your health or that the sun will rise in the morning either. Science is not about proof, its about explaining things.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578368,00.html

Official request made by a Professor of Env Studies. He asked for the raw data, which, they conveniently had thrown out. Or are just unwilling to provide.

As for the rest of your statement....tell that to my great-grandfather who smoked his whole life and had lung cancer and emphyzema.

Oh wait, you can't, because he died from that.....


Science IS about proof. Religion is about "explaining things".....if you're a scientist and you can't PROVE your theory, it is thrown out the window. Hence the need for "Climate Change" junk scientists to doctor their data.

 

[heyhar]

Whats wrong with enriching investors?

Certainly nothing! But when it's AlGore and those 'Warmers' like him, it's a little self-serving. Everybody had a cow when Halliburton was given work in Iraq, because of Dick Cheney. But, I've seen where Al stands to make hundreds of millions on 'green', all the while telling us about the evils of SUVs and the such. What's his carbon footprint? And, let's not forget to ask Hillary about what she earned in the early '90s when R-12 became an endangered species, while holding DuPont stock. They think no one sees these kinds of things.
Yeah, it's about time to do things more responsibly, but those who tell us what to do should lead by example, not just by wagging their fingers. Maybe the lives of those who deem themselves important are the real Inconvenient Truths.

 

[JNickel101]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578486,00.html

Nothing says "Guilty" like stepping down/running away.....

That guy looks exactly the way I would imagine a douchebag to look....

 

[RichP]

He who controls the database controls the output.

 

[Rod Knee]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578368,00.html

Official request made by a Professor of Env Studies. He asked for the raw data, which, they conveniently had thrown out. Or are just unwilling to provide.

As for the rest of your statement....tell that to my great-grandfather who smoked his whole life and had lung cancer and emphyzema.

Oh wait, you can't, because he died from that.....


Science IS about proof. Religion is about "explaining things".....if you're a scientist and you can't PROVE your theory, it is thrown out the window. Hence the need for "Climate Change" junk scientists to doctor their data.

I. THE NATURE OF SCIENTIFIC PROOF
A. Is there proof in science?
1. In the sense that the word proof is used in mathematics and philosophy, nothing
is ever proven in science. There is always some uncertainty about the actual value of results
obtained from some experiment or their interpretation.​

From:
http://www.holycross.edu/departments/biology/kprestwi/behavior/e&be_notes/E&BE_04_Sci_Meth&Philo.pdf




"Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science." From:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...sconceptions-about-science-i-scientific-proof

 

[joe_peters]

I. THE NATURE OF SCIENTIFIC PROOF
A. Is there proof in science?
1. In the sense that the word proof is used in mathematics and philosophy, nothing
is ever proven in science. There is always some uncertainty about the actual value of results
obtained from some experiment or their interpretation.​

From:
http://www.holycross.edu/departments/biology/kprestwi/behavior/e&be_notes/E&BE_04_Sci_Meth&Philo.pdf




"Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science." From:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...sconceptions-about-science-i-scientific-proof

Lies, destruction of raw data, suppression of discussion, character assassination, threats of physical violence against those that disagree AND their families--not science; more like socialism--NATZI socialism, Commie socialism, fascist socialism, Liberal Socialist Democrat socialism.

These "scientists" should be sent to study the raw data at the bottom of a septic tank, they should be used to the stench, they have been shoveling out to everyone else for years.

As a taxpayer, I want every scientist that participated in this farce, and received U.S. tax dollars, to be sitting in a federal prison.

 

[ZomBrady]

Lies, destruction of raw data, suppression of discussion, character assassination, threats of physical violence against those that disagree AND their families--not science; more like socialism--NATZI socialism, Commie socialism, fascist socialism, Liberal Socialist Democrat socialism.

These "scientists" should be sent to study the raw data at the bottom of a septic tank, they should be used to the stench, they have been shoveling out to everyone else for years.

As a taxpayer, I want every scientist that participated in this farce, and received U.S. tax dollars, to be sitting in a federal prison.

Seriously, take a tranquilizer.

It's a good thing that this happened and that these emails were hacked. Now we know that the litmus test will be much improved in future research.

But I wonder, will it matter to you? Or are you still going to be outraged skeptic, holding on to the past to discredit that which comes out in the way of research in the future.

 

[Rod Knee]

Lies, destruction of raw data, suppression of discussion, character assassination, threats of physical violence against those that disagree AND their families--.

Oh I agree, absolutely deplorable. But you asked SBrad for proof of global warming. That is why I posted about proof and science.