I was thinking the other day of Uri Geller. Remember him? An Israeli “psychic” who was once famous for his claims of being able to, among other tricks, bend spoons with only the power of his mind. As a clever fraud he was successful in convincing gullible scientists to study him.
Yet despite the hidden cameras that showed Geller and his assistant cheating time and again, the true-believing scientists argued that because they could catch him cheating sometimes, this proved that the other times they didn’t catch him, he wasn’t cheating. (Read that sentence again if you have to; their “logic” is jaw-dropping.)
So how much evidence of data-manipulation, character-assassination, conspiracy, and openly admitted justification of lying for the common good of the masses must people hear to realize that the Warmies are not to be believed?
(If that doesn’t convince you, just send me $100 cash and I’ll send you a spoon I’ve bent with the power of my mind.)
I explicitly reject the idea of thousands of scientists whose pay will remain the same. Actually there are thousands of scientists afraid to dissent because they know they will lose their jobs and/or reputations, as department heads let them know what’s expected of them. They know that a grant application to study the Lower Slobbovian Woodchuck will get rejected, but a grant to study the effects of global whatever on the Lower Slobbovian Woodchuck is a sure winner. (A good trend: As the Boomers retire, many of these scientists are more willing to give their own judgments, not the Party Line.)
“Too much evidence”? How many more years of near constant temperatures will it take for it to register with your guys?
Coming attractions: I am almost finished cleaning out boxes of old Playboys from my closets. (Ah, good memories, good memories!)
Next come the decades of Scientific Americans. It will be interesting to see how the predictions turned from ice ages to catastrophic warming. It will be fun to review the old complaints about poor data collecting (urban heat islands, growth of cities around airports, expansion of runways around the weather stations, etc.). Watch this space!
danielmkimmel over 10 years ago
Nonsense. That’s science, which as all loyal wingnuts know is a liberal plot.
catzilla23 over 10 years ago
For years climate change has been over hyped, now it’s becoming a problem. I call it: “The boy who called wolf syndrome.”
Is climate change happening? Almost certainly.Are Humans, at least partially, affecting it? Probably.Are taxes and carbon credits a solution? No!
We need to let industry and innovators have a bit of free reign to find a solution that’s both practical and profitable.
Bob. over 10 years ago
Magnetic north is in constant change. You need to worry about geographic north.
pschearer Premium Member over 10 years ago
I was thinking the other day of Uri Geller. Remember him? An Israeli “psychic” who was once famous for his claims of being able to, among other tricks, bend spoons with only the power of his mind. As a clever fraud he was successful in convincing gullible scientists to study him.
Yet despite the hidden cameras that showed Geller and his assistant cheating time and again, the true-believing scientists argued that because they could catch him cheating sometimes, this proved that the other times they didn’t catch him, he wasn’t cheating. (Read that sentence again if you have to; their “logic” is jaw-dropping.)
So how much evidence of data-manipulation, character-assassination, conspiracy, and openly admitted justification of lying for the common good of the masses must people hear to realize that the Warmies are not to be believed?
(If that doesn’t convince you, just send me $100 cash and I’ll send you a spoon I’ve bent with the power of my mind.)
pschearer Premium Member over 10 years ago
I explicitly reject the idea of thousands of scientists whose pay will remain the same. Actually there are thousands of scientists afraid to dissent because they know they will lose their jobs and/or reputations, as department heads let them know what’s expected of them. They know that a grant application to study the Lower Slobbovian Woodchuck will get rejected, but a grant to study the effects of global whatever on the Lower Slobbovian Woodchuck is a sure winner. (A good trend: As the Boomers retire, many of these scientists are more willing to give their own judgments, not the Party Line.)
“Too much evidence”? How many more years of near constant temperatures will it take for it to register with your guys?
pschearer Premium Member over 10 years ago
Coming attractions: I am almost finished cleaning out boxes of old Playboys from my closets. (Ah, good memories, good memories!)
Next come the decades of Scientific Americans. It will be interesting to see how the predictions turned from ice ages to catastrophic warming. It will be fun to review the old complaints about poor data collecting (urban heat islands, growth of cities around airports, expansion of runways around the weather stations, etc.). Watch this space!