"I wouldn't go into the Adminsitration building, boss, there's gorillas in there"
Posted on 02/10/2017 1:59:42 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
I took a course in college with a renowned geneticist who taught all the pre-meds (I was not pre-med). He was brilliant, hilarious, highly philosophical, and passionate about the vocation of science. In answer to some artless "why not?" question from one of us about changing some protocol of investigation, he spat back a two-word answer: "Secret research!"
"What?" I asked.
"Secret research!" he hissed again with volcanic disdain, and would elaborate no further. Forty years later, I finally got it. "Secret research" means men of science trying to escape showing their results. It's for mediocrities and scheming tyrants like the Soviets, who built their entire agricultural policy around Lysenko, the fraudulent plant geneticist--because they liked the idea of both plants and men adapting to the decrees of the Central Committee. The Party literally starved tens of millions of people--many intentionally, and many not--because Lysenko's fraudulent theories didn't work. The Party blamed the Soviet crop failures on 70 years of bad weather.
Secret research is being unwilling to spread your cards on the table like every other man. In science, as in poker, neither the consequences of a) research results or b) a full house, king-high, are knowable until after you've revealed them. Someone may beat you. Or the experiment may show something you never expected, because of a random fact you wouldn't have noticed--except that you followed the rules and measured and reported what you were supposed to, diligently trusting in the scientific method. Some unexpected corner of your work might change lives, change history.
Science pursues truth. Therefore it is a holy vocation, and a trust placed on the investigator. Therefore science and its results don't belong to you, or to me, or anyone. Except under special circumstances in wartime, that's why we have no right to practice or tolerate secret research.
The Trump Administration should keep a copy and also transfer data copies to independent third parties just in case these liars try and change or hide the data as they did at the University of East Anglia in te UK.
Block Chain Technology seems a perfect fit for archiving sensitive data.
Hard for a peer-review when the peers can’t see the data.
What part of what they are doing violates the FRA?
You have to read carefully what they are doing. It is a total nothing-burger.
They are downloading stuff that is already archived on the false presumption that the Trump administration will “destroy evidence.”
They are simply playing to a hysterical audience who want to believe a lie.
How Orwellian.
This who control the past, control the future.
actually for decades before Obama, to be a government science worker was seen as a “not good enough for real science” job.
Can I get the raw data Mann used to create the hockey stick global warming graph? Still no?
Harambe? I thought he was dead. Damn, I have to change my FB profile pic.
Post of the day. Thanks!
If these people are really preserving data, then I have no problem with that. If there is something else going on, then it’s time to find out what that is.
Why don’t they save instead the raw temperature data collected by the temperature measuring stations.
My understanding is that the original raw data has been lost, and the only data extant is the ‘corrected’ data. No one knows exactly what corrections have already been applied to it, and then keeps getting further corrected.
That should be a crime, deleting the original measured data.
“They are downloading stuff that is already archived on the false presumption that the Trump administration will “destroy evidence.”
what they are really doing is hiding the evidence of their data manipulation to support their false religion of climate change. when some congressional committee went after NOAA’s climate data to ascertain whether their was any manipulation, NOAA went to great lengths to not comply, as if it were medical records protected by HIPAA, and i’m not sure whether they ever complied. if they were confident in their data and methodology, why wouldn’t they want people to see their data?
I read a lot of books by Richard Fireman and one of them he discussed how the scientific method is very important, even for old experiments that are accepted as fact. His example was the rat maze that is used in all kinds of experiments. He wondered how bulletproof the maze was for doing testing.
People just setup a maze and use it, they never think about the possibilities that maybe the rats can hear very minute differences in the sounds their feet make in certain areas of the maze and other factors. He actually did some testing to prove these things out. I have to read it again but his point was that it is important to question and test and retest everything, and look at other peoples results too!
That’s funny considering the leading proponents of AGW magically “lost” their data when the skeptic scientists asked for it in the hockeystick temperature graph scandal.
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.
