Cool the World By Firing Fake Scientists

Townhall.com ^ | November 24, 2014 | John Ransom

[Kaslin]

First you couldn’t use fossil fuels because they put carbon into the atmosphere.

So no car or air conditioning for Africans.

Then it was meat that was forbidden for being an emitter of greenhouse gases. So no protein for them either.

And now…corn, wheat, soybeans and, presumably, breathing.

I guess Africans will just have to die.

“A new study published in the journal Nature shows that levels of Carbon dioxide will be on the rise in the Northern Hemisphere,” reports the publication Design and Trend, “due to summer heat and the tail-end of the growing season. This will release CO2 in parts of the growing season.”

Apparently there is nothing that we can stop the onslaught of greenhouse gases either.

"This study shows the power of modeling and data mining in addressing potential sources contributing to seasonal changes in carbon dioxide" said Liz Blood, program director for the National Science Foundation's Macro Systems Biology Program, who supported the research. "It points to the role of basic research in finding answers to complex problems."

Actually it points to the basic flaw that modeling and data mining have in trying to “manage” complex systems like “weather”.

Because the last time I looked the country that grows the most corn was having a record cold spell and global warming had stopped completely.

The problem we have is that most of this supposed modeling and data mining is based upon supposition and distortions that include and misuse the the words “could,” “should,” “will,” and “science”.

Here are just a few other examples:

The journal Science has now “predicted” that we will see a fifty percent increase in the number of lighting strikes if global warming remains unchecked.

Yes, and Comrade Doctor Roy “predicted” that Tampa Bay would upset the Bears.

Bears win 21-13.

But still, poor results don’t stop bad predictor—right Comrade Doctor?

The World Bank, which last time I checked was a BANK, not a scientist, says that global warming could “significantly worsen intra- and inter-generational poverty in multiple regions across the globe."

More extreme storms, dogs sleeping with cats, according to the models from the same central bankers who thought sub-prime loans were a swell idea.

“The bank said it is already likely that average temperatures will rise 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) from pre-industrial levels,” reports Phys.org, “based on the built-in impact of past and current greenhouse gas emissions.”

The bank says?

Does anyone else see the irony here?

I guess they haven't really considered the effects global cooling might have.

Probably not, because they are too busy reading about the sap that will drip in gobs and gobs on their new car—but not in Africa because they won’t be allowed cars, or food-- as reported by NBC, because of global warming.

“But that’s just one example of what could happen in a warmer world,” says NBC. “Some species do better at the expense of others — and the beneficiaries might be real pests.”

Every day the public is bombarded with reports that say woulda, coulda, shoulda on global warming. And the longer the interval between the “predictions” disguised as science are, the more certainly the disastrous consequences.

And the fact that policy makers want to rush measures to combat these “predictions” is the tip off to many who should know better.

You want to help reduce “intra- and inter-generational poverty in multiple regions across the globe”?

Cool off some fake scientists. Better yet fire them.

[The Sons of Liberty]

Cool the World By Firing Fake Scientists

Fake scientists proliferate to get huge "study grants". Some grants are commissioned by companies wishing to "prove" their product is superior, does no harm, etc., with biased and expected results. Almost all studies these days must be reviewed with a jaundiced eye because of the big bucks involved.

[SMARTY]

You beat me to it.

There are MILLIONS given to universities and colleges annually for research into ‘global warming’ and the lack of any benefit in return for what is literally squandered is scandalous.

That much should be spent on control of disease, etc. where REAL problems are known and documented.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Love the headline. I must come back and read this later so this is my bookmark.

[hal ogen]

Unfortunately, there are many “scientists” who degrade science by following their political persuasions and, mainly, seeking grant money to further their causes through faked “science”. These degenerates should be fired, beaten into submission with their worthless dissertations and forced to roam the wilderness in sack cloth, begging for forgiveness. They do not produce data from their research...only more Gruber.

[The_Reader_David]

The obvious solution (which, alas, no one will accept) is for funding agencies to reject out of hand all research proposals that purport to seek or to provide long-term prediction of non-linear dynamical systems (e.g. weather, the global economy) for the same reason that patent offices reject out of hand all submissions for perpetual motion machines — it’s impossible.

[duffee]

“Fake scientists proliferate to get huge “study grants”. Some grants are commissioned by companies wishing to “prove” their product is superior, does no harm, etc., with biased and expected results. Almost all studies these days must be reviewed with a jaundiced eye because of the big bucks involved.”

“Gruberstats”, they’re worth big bucks, manufactured by our top universities.

[pepsionice]

Perhaps what we need to do...go off to Honduras...pay some university there for a fake science degree, calling ourselves Doctor-So-V-So, do a fake report or two, and then get some political folks to hand over some fake study grants, then lounge in New Orleans for six weeks while we produce the fake report.