ocean conditions are changing due to Rapid Global Climate Shift

This article should make Hoyt and Co. happy

THE ECONOMIST | A sensitive matter

 

I doubt you're any sort of scientist, or that you have close contact with as many of them as you say. Otherwise you'd know better than to insinuate that climatologists are all just hacks, being paid by governments to confuse us for obscure and/or nefarious purposes....

And I think the word you were looking for is 'obfuscate.'

 

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=...=Lm4kVFwDDFK_7zYbQscr4A&bvm=bv.44770516,d.ZG4

 

Climate change predictions proven accurate.

Duncan Clark
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 27 March 2013 16.56 GMT
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/27/climate-change-model-global-warming

 

Nothing "nefarious" about it, they have to do this to keep their jobs, or keep the grants coming. You can doubt me, but you would be wrong; I am trained in science, my sister is a phd in physics who lectures all over the world, has taught at UCLA, the Max Plank institute in Germany, and at Univ. Nevada and University of Washington, my other sister has a masters in biology, by wife's grandfather was the dean of the physics department for 25 years at the University of Missouri and was a pioneer in nuclear research, my form brother-in-law ran a high pressure physics lab at UCLA, and my wife's side of the family has a number of university professors as well.

We spend lots of family gatherings talking about such subjects over Christmas dinners. It is true. there is far more politicking in science than they want to admit. Go find one and ask them in a private place, they will either edge the question, or say something like "a lot more politics than most think goes into science" or "more than we like".

You see you doubt me because you do not know any scientists, and you have a false belief in what scientist say and write as if it was a religion. The "business" of government funded science is just as corrupted and error prone as anything the private sector does, perhaps more so since the success of a company does not depend on government funded research.

Anyone would have to be an ignorant fool to think that where there are humans and lot of money involved, there is no error or corruption.

 

The business of science wants global warming to go away, because that's what business and therefore politics wants.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/s...a-to-fight-global-warming.html?pagewanted=all

 

My grandad built aeroplanes. Does that mean that by talking to him I know how to build an aeroplane?
No!

 

of course not, but if you both were trained in building airplanes, and he has been at it much longer, you will learn something more about the business of building airplanes.

We are not talking about the science involved, we are talking about the way science if funded. Like anything that gets government funding, the process is like sausage making, there are things you just do not want to know about it.

 

I've never said scientists are infallible, and that we must accept their pronouncements as Word From on High. That would be religion, not science. What I do believe is that we should at least listen to what the scientific community believes, based on its latest and most compelling evidence.

If instead you want to believe that climatologists all over the world are lying to us to earn their government paychecks, because for some reason governments all over the world have quietly and unanimously settled on a lie they want sold to their citizens, you've ventured beyond healthy skepticism. You've crossed the line into sheer paranoia and conspiracy theory....

Until I started reading climate change threads on this forum, I was pretty much neutral concerning the subject; I had simply never given it much thought. But as I began paying attention, what struck me was the weakness of the arguments against AGW. Most of those arguments depend at bottom on assumptions that either scientists worldwide are dumber than a rock and more gullible than the average third-grader, or they're deliberately lying to us as part of some government-sponsored conspiracy. A conspiracy so vast it's a wonder there's anyone left outside it to conspire against....

Caution!!!!! Reality check ahead...... do NOT cross this line if you wish to hang onto your 'values-based' beliefs, instead of trading them in for some based on the latest and best available evidence.

Most of the roughly 196 sovereign governments in the world would be a lot happier if climate change weren't happening, because it would be one less major headache to deal with. The notion that they've somehow coalesced around a fake theory instead, and collectively decided to sell it to their citizens by paying their scientists to lie to scientific journals and the public, simply beggars belief.

If you really have as many scientists in your immediate family as you say, it's a shame they haven't taught you anything about how the scientific method works -- and how important it is. But maybe you have an exceptional family when it comes to science. Tell me: do they sit around after Christmas dinners discussing how the lunar landings were faked, and debatng the number of shooters really involved in the Kennedy assassinations?

 

So now you are the expert on the scientific method? I think not.

And again you resort to insulting me and my family rather than engage in meaningful discussion. Typical of those that have NOTHING to contribute.

This shows what you are rather than reveals anything meaningful about my family. My family have accomplished more in meaningful science research than a thousand troys in California will ever accomplish.

You are a small minded and very rude person.

 

Guys, let's please not go too far with the jabs. It appears people are getting insulted again in this thread and that's not what the forums here should be used for. If people want to debate the facts of the issue, that's great. But it would be better to take insults directed towards others to some other site. Thanks.

 

This thread turns my stomach.

 

You remind me of my dog; it would urp on the floor, and then lap it back up.

 

If you don't want me to make comments about your family, perhaps you shouldn't wave them at me as part of a faux argument. Your appeal to authority fails on both counts: you haven't demonstrated their expertise to me, and you haven't convinced me they have a consensus of opinion.

But I was actually more joking than trying to insult a group I obviously don't know, and I apologize if you took me seriously. My point stands, though, and you should address it: if you have such a scientific background and family, why are you making such irrational statements about climatologists?

It simply makes no sense to believe they're all lying to us to protect their government paychecks -- any more than it makes sense to believe all the governments providing those paychecks want us to believe a false theory.

 

climatologists only been around about 50 years and ddn't take off tll computers got plentfull and powerfull, last dozen years or so.

And most greenes are socalists.

clmate s changng. always has.

And NOW! cO2 S A POLLUTANT?

Fund me now or 100 years from now bad conseqences!

A politcal con game by socialsts