unfortunately when science is governed and funded by governments that are run by politicians the integrity of the science.
kinda just left that one dangling.....damn IPhone
"the integrity of the science is degraded"
unfortunately when science is governed and funded by governments that are run by politicians the integrity of the science.
The A to Z Guide to Political Interference in Science
in case you missed it the first time i posted it.
well...
They'll stone you when you're trying to be so good
They'll stone you just like they said they would
They'll stone you when you're trying to go home
They'll stone you when you're there all alone
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned
follow the money..
and almost ALL science is regulated the governments. dont think so? grow some marijuana to study....
i never said "run by" or conducted by i said funded by and regulated by
IMO, you have just found a new religion to preach with this man made Global Warming argument set forth by our corrupted establishment. This time under the veil of and intertwined with real physical science. It's genius propaganda. Almost of as genius as the rise of American Fascism.
This new phenomenon coined "denialism" is all part of this BS, Neo-Con, Neo-Liberal, Neo-Keynesian economics global model we live in. It's all new and I'll have say it sucks. IMO, your the "denialist" because you think you are too smart to be brainwashed. But you are just human. It can happen to anyone. It already happened to you once and there you go again.
You're underlying intention for this thread is very clear bro. You can sit there and try and play it off till you are blue in the face , but it obvious what you are doing.
Faith in science and faith in the modern scientific establishment are two different things. I'm off.
Faith in science and faith in the modern scientific establishment are two different things. I'm off.
You know I get paranoid myself after smoking too much strawberry diesel. Don't let them get you.
Mj
LOL. I've actually been a smoking hiatus for about 3 weeks. Too much crap at work and being on call all the time requires a clear mind.
I'll try not to let them get to me. Try not to let them get you over the next few ominous years. Especially, with this "recovery" (lmao) being preached by your political messiah and your corrupted establishment that you have so much faith in. As always, history will be the final arbitrator. I'm fine with that. I'm ready. You believe at your own peril.
LONDON — An independent report into the leak of hundreds of e-mails from one of the world's leading climate research centers is being published Wednesday, with many scientists hoping it will help calm the global uproar kicked up by their publication online.
Muir Russell's inquiry is the third major investigation into what some have dubbed "Climategate" — the theft and dissemination of more than 1,000 e-mails exchanged between climate scientists over more than a decade.
The messages, pilfered from a server at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, captured researchers speaking in scathing terms about their critics, discussing ways to stonewall skeptics of man-made climate change, and talking about how to freeze opponents out of peer-reviewed journals.
Their dissemination across the Internet late last year created a sensation, energizing skeptics and destabilizing the international climate change talks in Copenhagen. The research center's director Phil Jones stepped down and the university called in Russell, a high ranking administrator, to investigate.
Many who study climate science or work in policy-related fields say the furor has put them in a tough spot.
"This has cast doubt over the whole community," said Bob Ward, the policy director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change at the London School of Economics.
Ward said that the scandal had put scientists on notice that they were operating in a highly politicized environment — one in which personal conduct could come under as much scrutiny as the science itself. He added that he hoped the report "will in some ways draw a line under this."
The contents of Russell's report have been kept under wraps so far, but its stated agenda is to examine whether there is any evidence that scientists at the Climatic Research Unit doctored or suppressed data, perverted the peer review process, or improperly blocked Freedom of Information requests — something Britain's data-protection watchdog has already scolded the university for doing.
The report follows a British parliamentary inquiry which largely vindicated the scientists involved and another, parallel investigation which examined the soundness of the science itself.
The reports have been criticized by skeptics who alleged they were incomplete or biased.
It has been difficult to gauge the impact of the scandal, which played widely in the British and U.S. media. In Britain, there is some evidence that public concern over global warming has been diluted, although not by much.
An Ipsos MORI poll published last month suggested that 78 percent of Britons believed that the world's climate was changing, compared with 91 percent five years earlier. Seventy-one percent of respondents expressed concern about global warming, versus 82 percent in 2005. The pollster surveyed 1,822 people aged 15 and over in face-to-face interviews between January and March 2010.
Some scientists have said the scandal has made it impossible for researchers to hide data from their critics and pushed those who do believe in the dangers of man-made global warming to be more vocal about their doubts.
"The release of the e-mails was a turning point, a game-changer," Mike Hulme, a professor of climate change at the University of East Anglia, told The Guardian newspaper earlier this week.
"Already there is a new tone. Researchers are more upfront, open and explicit about their uncertainties, for instance."
Ward agreed that, whatever the result of the inquiry, openness was the order of the day.
"There is a need to re-establish trust," he said.
Which completely vindicates those involved from any wrongdoingLeaked climate e-mail inquiry to release report
And some people wonder why folks have doubts.
Question everything
The Independent Climate Change Email Review was set up by the University of East Anglia (UEA) after more than 1,000 e-mails were hacked from its servers.
Climate "sceptics" claimed the e-mails showed that UEA scientists manipulated and suppressed key climate data.
But these accusations are largely dismissed by the report.
The review found nothing in the e-mails to undermine Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports.
Climate change scientists have been cleared of any wrong-doing after a six month investigation unveiled that professor Phil Jones did not fudge data to try to silence skeptics.
Muir Russell, who led the investigation, found that scientists at the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia did not do anything to change or alter critical data and they still produced work in a "rigorous and honest" way.
Leaked climate e-mail inquiry to release report
And some people wonder why folks have doubts.
Nothing Amazing at all.Amazing what you can glean from an investigation yet to be released.
LONDON — An independent report into the leak of hundreds of e-mails from one of the world's leading climate research centers on Wednesday largely vindicated the scientists involved, saying they acted honestly and that their research was reliable.