Clyde E. Stauffer earned a Ph.D. in biochemistry at the University of Minnesota, has done research at Procter & Gamble, and has been involved in more applied science for the last 30 years.
PING!
Another established scientist speaking out. As mentioned in other articles, its the senior scientists who are speaking up regarding the global warming scam, those who already have established reputations, have tenure or are nearing retirement. The younger ones, though they may agree with naysayers, speak their doubts only to colleagues, avoid publishing their opinions and speaking out in meetings, except as questions to presenters.
The intimidation is real and as the author says threatens livelihoods and does not contribute to the advancement of true science, characterized by presenting a hypothesis and testing it for validity. Science and all mankind is the loser as a result.
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
New!!: Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
Being heard is not identical to being hired.
As for being published... that costs money. Who pays?
This is Humean nonsense.
Hey I followed the link, but can not find the part of the article that was “snipped” out.
In the 16th century, the Church was going on what THEY knew at the time, without internet access, television, and widespread publications, amounting to pure ignorance on their part. With what we know today, and the info we have access to that disputes pinko junk science, we are witnessing a true inquisition.
That’s my biggest gripe with Big Science. Rather than keep an open mind, they pull stuff like this.
Look what they did to astronomers, et al who agreed with some of Velokivsky’s theories.
This is great news! Hopefully more and more scientists will start crawling out of the woodwork and doing the same. Bravo Dr. Stauffer!
When I was a kid, after much to do, they banned cyclamates in soft drinks because they were determined by scientific experiments to be the most carcigenic substance known to man. Now they say cyclamates don’t even cause cancer.
Imagine that, that any thinking person could look at the universe in all it's beauty, order, and complexity and come to the conclusion that it was created instead of just happening.
Dontcha know that it makes more sense to declare that everything appeared out of nowhere, all on its own, exploded itself, organized itself, established its own laws, and gave rise to complex, intelligent life, all just by chance? Really, to think that someone could have designed and created it. How silly....
Being heard and being given equal respect are two different things. Good science always drives bad science out in the long run, and just because it’s a new theory or explanation does not mean it’s good science.
Sometimes it is.
But every new explanation or theory should be attacked relentlessly. If it stands up, it moves into the good science category.
It sounds like Guillermo’s problem is not that he couldn’t get heard, but that he was heard and judged short of his school’s tenure standards.
The proponents of intelligent design need to propose some testable hypotheses, conduct research based on them, analyze the data, and publish the results in a manner consistent with usual scientific procedure. Until they do so, 99.99% of scientists are not going to recognize ID as science.
The refusal to play by the same rules as everyone else, not their supposed challenge to CW, is their problem. They ought to stop whining and get to work.
bookmark
INTREP
For later...
~~AGW ping~~