If a scientist wants grant money, he will follow the party line. This puts all scientific research in question, because the government is paying for it.
Powerful words. Many of us here at FR have said that the money breeds corruption. These so-called "scientists" are nothing but elitist frauds bilking the public largess. Those involved should be jailed.
If they are Libs/Progressives they have no morals to begin with. Liberalism & morality are mutually exclusive.
Far more lucrative to follow the mob than to take a principled stand aginst this sort of enviro-quackery.
Physics is not a primary field of global warming research, though it should be, and that is the problem. 99% of physicists who pursue research are doing so in main line areas of physical phenomena that have absolutely nothing to do with global warming whatsoever. It is their "c" students in freshmen physics for everyone who went into environmental research.
Most physicists watch this nonsense and are appalled at the shody research being done. Mind you - most physicists would also agree that climate research is worth doing, but worth doing well. Whether or not it is an issue that man can or should do anything about is far from a settled issue. It is an open question that can only be answered with better data and better theory.
Hal Lewis is well known and respected within the physics community. In no sense is he putting his reputation on the line.
Furthermore, he did not resign his post. He resigned from the American Physical society, which is supposed to be a professional body where physicists exchage research findings, and discuss issues common to the physics community. Unfortunately, the governing body of the APS had become somewhat cowardly and banal in the face of the Goreons, and that is what Hal is taking a stand against.
For instance when a number of prominent physicists took a stand on the issue, previously, as Hal mentions, the then President of the APS, Cherry Murray, instead of using the membership to engage the scientific debate that should have happened, launched an investigation into who "leaked" the APS email list to those physicists who used it to send around a communal letter. She was soundly denounced for this Stalanistic tactic and completed her term under a cloud of resentment. Hal mentions this.
Physicists don't take public stands as often as they should. But they do know when they seen nonsense, and don't believe that intellectual skullduggery should be allowed to continue just because they are being paid off.
Excellent.
In the 70s, department chairs were issuing queries like Who here can contribute to a program in Developmental? Later in the decade it was more like We all know something about Special Education.
By the 80s scientific integrity in my field was eroding, with much publicized revelations of corruption, accompanied by semi-justifications such as Newton fudged his data. It seemed to me the problems with integrity were directly tied to the crucial importance of obtaining government grants relevant to projects like Head Start.
By the 90s the field had attracted a number of people whose primary interest was political and social action. As one admitted to me, as far as psychological research goes, its integrity was less important to him than its power to support his political view. Amazing that anyone would feel comfortable with such an admission, but that was the nineties.
So I have no trouble believing that in this decade Physics is as Hal describes: the corruption has moved up the hierarchy to infect the purported guardians of integrity.
HOORAY Harold Lewis! Great thread. Thanks to every poster.
bookmark
