- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NOAA Whistleblower: How world leaders were duped over manipulated AGW data
Posted on 2/6/17 at 6:57 am to League Champs
Posted on 2/6/17 at 6:57 am to League Champs
I never understood why they always have to "adjust" the data, isn't the data the data?
2
Posted on 2/6/17 at 7:08 am to Strannix
The fundamental problem with climate science today is simple.
No governments are funding skeptic research. That's just bad science.
Job 1 in any scientific theory is to devise ways to challenge it and the best challenges won't ever come from those that already believe current theory.
With the vast majority of research dollars on climate coming from government and governments effectively freezing out all skeptical research, you can't help but end up in an echo chamber.
It would be like having almost all government research dollars on alternative energy going to solar for 30 years. Pretty soon, you could say, "90% of alternative energy scientists say Solar is the best choice"
No governments are funding skeptic research. That's just bad science.
Job 1 in any scientific theory is to devise ways to challenge it and the best challenges won't ever come from those that already believe current theory.
With the vast majority of research dollars on climate coming from government and governments effectively freezing out all skeptical research, you can't help but end up in an echo chamber.
It would be like having almost all government research dollars on alternative energy going to solar for 30 years. Pretty soon, you could say, "90% of alternative energy scientists say Solar is the best choice"
Posted on 2/6/17 at 10:39 am to Strannix
quote:It isn't so much adjusted as the data is selected to be used, and data that doesn't fit the narrative is either not used at all or marginalized.
I never understood why they always have to "adjust" the data, isn't the data the data
The best man at my wedding does Atmospheric studies for NASA. He's on some of those papers you warming enthusiasts love so much and that's what they do. They get a grant to study why the earth is warming, and they present the data that supports the most concrete "proof" that it is.
If it bleeds it leads is the mantra of the media, and that certainly is true as well of global warming presentations.
What though rarely if ever gets mentioned is how the climate has reacted past the last 150 years.
Why? Because that destroys the narrative that pays them.
"Warmest temperature on record"
Laughably false, but no one ever challenges this. Our that the planet is at one of the coldest periods in the last 600 million years, which right now seems to be about as far back as they can estimate with any degree of confidence.
"Fastest warming ever"
Anyone who says that doesn't appear to have ever heard of something known as the Minoan warming. Which btw according to ice core studies was about 2.5 degrees C warmer than now.
The fact is the planet will warm up, quite a bit over the next few years. Few as in few million, which is a small fraction of the planets history.
These idiots are telling you that only about .003% of the global history matters (and that's just the last 600 million years). They get away with it because most people don't bother to check.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News