Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prof Fired (from think tank) For Calling Global Warming ‘Unproved Science’ Stands Firm
The College Fiix ^ | June 18, 2014 | Dominic Lynch, Loyola University Chicago

Posted on 06/18/2014 7:20:09 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last
To: Rides_A_Red_Horse

“Climate Justice” is a socialist dog whistle. Anything “justice,” economic, social, political, whatever...it’s all a dog whistle. It means “steal by government force from those who produce and give to a protected political class that does not.”

Which is a fancy term for “Armed Robbery.”


21 posted on 06/18/2014 7:55:23 AM PDT by henkster (Do I really need a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2

Don’t reject the precipitate with effluent.
Science is a God’s plan for His creation (yet through a “smokey mirror”). We just get to observe...critically.


22 posted on 06/18/2014 8:00:41 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alteration: The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rides_A_Red_Horse
So what the hell is “Climate Justice?”

Translation: Give me your money.

23 posted on 06/18/2014 8:05:50 AM PDT by El Cid (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: henkster

It runs deeper than a simple political dog-whistle...Climate Justice has undertones of racism and reparations.
Americans of European decent cannot (EVER) be the beneficiaries of “climate justice”.

Even the quasi-Appalachain trailer park family of 6 in the fall-out zone of the steel foundries in Gary, Indiana.
No how, no way.


24 posted on 06/18/2014 8:06:40 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alteration: The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

“Disproved”, not “Unproved”.


25 posted on 06/18/2014 8:11:07 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Radicalized via the Internet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

When you hook up the AGW arguments to the discipline of Scientific Method they fall completely apart.


26 posted on 06/18/2014 8:15:46 AM PDT by immadashell (The inmates are running the asylum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

An entire generation has been brainwashed that AGW theory is proven fact, not theory.

If America wasn’t doomed without this, is certainly is with this. But we were doomed when the 60’s liberals began running things. Obama has accelerated this process many times over, and Obamacare is the final nail in the coffin sealing the deal.

The sad thing is that these school kids are not to blame because they are being brainwashed. That won’t make it any easier on them when they are subjected to the totalitarian oppression that is coming.

Every day now I give Thanks to God that I was born in the 50s and not now. I will be dead and gone before the totalitarian oppression is installed. Well, I hope I will be dead and gone.


27 posted on 06/18/2014 8:30:20 AM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (Free goodies for all -- Freedom for none.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

As soon as I saw “Institute of Policy Studies” I knew the guy was doomed. “Climate justice” is just another hideous malapropism that uses the emotive term “justice” to justify forcible redistribution of wealth.


28 posted on 06/18/2014 8:42:48 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rides_A_Red_Horse

Climate Justice is another term for Marxism.

Pray America wakes up


29 posted on 06/18/2014 9:12:52 AM PDT by bray (Palin/Putin 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: immadashell

Yes, the Scientific Method will disprove AGW arguments each time. The last 15 years or so totally disproves the hockey stick curve.


30 posted on 06/18/2014 9:45:06 AM PDT by Techster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The “True Believers” can’t risk being exposed as wrong; their entire life/values are underpinned by these fantasies.


31 posted on 06/18/2014 2:04:31 PM PDT by Renkluaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
Read Dr. Tim Ball's new book, "The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science." Anyone who still believes in Al Gore Warming after absorbing those facts is either a fool or a zealot.

I must disagree with the last word of that sentence/paragraph.
A zealot is willing to die for his set beliefs.

A fanatic, on the other hand, is willing to destroy and kill for his set beliefs; huge difference.

These non scientists are actually fanatics.

32 posted on 06/18/2014 2:59:31 PM PDT by publius911 ( Politicians come and go... but the (union) bureaucracy lives and grows forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Techster
The last 15 years or so totally disproves the hockey stick curve.

The weather did not.
The incompetent misuse of statistical analysis did the fraudsters in.

Others proved mathematically, that the procedure the fraudster used, even using random data for input, would Always yield a hockey stick shape.

33 posted on 06/18/2014 3:02:50 PM PDT by publius911 ( Politicians come and go... but the (union) bureaucracy lives and grows forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Techster
Yes, the Scientific Method will disprove AGW arguments each time.

A proper scientific theory will not merely make predictions, but rather will present a *means of predicting* what will happen based upon what has happened. For example, given the temperature and pressure of a gas in a sealed container, Charles's Law will allow one to predict how the pressure will change if the temperature rises but the container does not expand. I don't think most AGW arguments even rise to the point of being well-formed scientific theories, much less ones that are backed by evidence.

34 posted on 06/18/2014 4:02:13 PM PDT by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: publius911

That’s an interesting distinction and I’d agree with you except this definition describes zealots as fanatics, among other things:

“Zealot: a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in pursuit of their religious, political, or other ideals.

“synonyms: fanatic, enthusiast, extremist, radical, young Turk, diehard, true believer, activist, militant;
bigot, dogmatist, sectarian, partisan”


35 posted on 06/18/2014 5:13:49 PM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
And why should we believe that all scientists are pure as the driven snow and not possibly susceptible to ideological or other corruption?

Because they are not pure. They have been corrupted. President Eisenhower warned us about this very thing over 60 years ago.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields.

In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation
January 17, 1961

Ike was a very smart man. He saw this coming.

36 posted on 06/18/2014 7:16:42 PM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

You got that right! Good tagline.


37 posted on 06/18/2014 9:56:56 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Obama's smidgens are coming home to roost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: supercat

Totally agree with your last sentence. The mere fact that their argument depends so great on about .04% of the atmosphere.


38 posted on 06/19/2014 9:00:46 AM PDT by Techster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson