Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 11/28/2009 5:59:37 AM PST by tje
A UN scientist is declaring that his three fellow UN climate panel colleagues "should be barred from the IPCC process." In a November 26, 2009 message on his website, UN IPCC contributing author Dr. Eduardo Zorita writes: "CRU files: Why I think that Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred from the IPCC process."
Zorita writes that the short answer to that question is: Short answer: "Because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore."
Zorita indicates that he is aware that he is putting his career in jeopardy by going after the upper echelon of UN IPCC scientists. "By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication," Zorita candidly admits, a reference to the ClimateGate emails discussing how to suppress data and scientific studies that do not agree with the UN IPCC views.
(Excerpt) Read more at climatedepot.com ...
from article, there is a voice of reason
Disband IPCC? Scientist from U. of East Anglia Suggests 'UN IPCC has run its course...politicizes climate science...authoritarian, exclusive form of knowledge production' - Mike Hulme Excerpt: ClimateGate reveals science has become 'too partisan, too centralized...more usually associated with social organization within primitive cultures'
I've been meaning to go to Goodwill and buy some stuffed toys to throw. It's not the TV's fault, why destroy it?
If you want to keep pressure on the fraud, it is helpful to not just go after the MSM to finally cover it, but also go after all the funding sources for the scientists who were committing fraud.
These sources (U.K., U.S., international) are either directly public monies (NSF, etc.) or at least supported by our tax dollars indirectly (even if U.N. monies). The public should demand the that climate research sponsors suspend all funding immediately where infromation suggest impropriety, and puruse a return of monies from the funded institutions where any fraud occured. I guarantee that will get attention and fast-—money talks.
UN IPCC contributing author Dr. Eduardo Zorita writes: "CRU files: Why I think that Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred from the IPCC process... Because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore."Or in the first place. Thanks hennie pennie.
Stick a fork in it. Global Warming is Done.
This looks like the science about AGW was never really considered by the current batch of climate researchers. The paper by the 2 German physicists shows that trace gases couldn’t contribute to an atmospheric Greenhouse effect.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2395852/posts
I don't know about barring them from further work in science. I'd be willing to let them wash lab glassware. That way they could actually contribute beneficially to the field.
Now that the entire Global Warming scam has been exposed, "unsustainable development" will be the Marxist's next boogie man to scare the sheeple with. What is "unsustainable development" you might ask? Why it's what happens where ever capitalism takes place, wealth is created and communist control freaks lose control over people's lives.
I don't know about barring them from further work in science. I'd be willing to let them wash lab glassware. That way they could actually contribute beneficially to the field. "He who fails to observe the least of these data management practices, and teaches others to do so, is the least in the kingdom of theory, and he shall be assigned a place below the experimentalists, verily, even with the lab techs."
Monckton 4:17
Cheers!
I don't know about barring them from further work in science. I'd be willing to let them wash lab glassware. That way they could actually contribute beneficially to the field.
"He who fails to observe the least of these data management practices, and teaches others to do so, is the least in the kingdom of theory, and he shall be assigned a place below the experimentalists, verily, even with the lab techs."
Monckton 4:17
Cheers!
Well, being an experimentalist myself, I appreciate that.
When I worked in R&D for "ye major chemical company", our location had the math modeling group and the chemical analysis group under the same manager. It was one of the jobs of the chemical analysis group to determine how to experimentally validate the math models by actual measurement, sometimes inventing entirely new instrumentation and methods to do so.
I've always thought that that was a bright way to arrange things.
global warming bump
The theoreticians like to look down their noses on the experimentalists -- but without meaningful or reliable data, there's nothing to base the models on or compare them to.
And the experimentalists have to know enough of the theory to set up experiments for the meaningful things.
Cheers!
The theoreticians like to look down their noses on the experimentalists -- but without meaningful or reliable data, there's nothing to base the models on or compare them to.
And the experimentalists have to know enough of the theory to set up experiments for the meaningful things.
But most theoreticians couldn't set up or maintain a successful lab to save their grants.
Cheers!
HIDE THE DECLINE is the name of their game. It has brought them fame and forune
Oh, I realized that. I'm quite comfy with my place in the "pecking order".
"The theoreticians like to look down their noses on the experimentalists -- but without meaningful or reliable data, there's nothing to base the models on or compare them to."
In the chemistry business, the analytical chemists (I R WUN) are the bottom of the pecking order, then organischers, inorganischers, and at the top, the physical chemists. But it chaps their butts to have to call in an analytischer to set up and/or fix their hardware.
"And the experimentalists have to know enough of the theory to set up experiments for the meaningful things."
One reason I love analytical chemistry is that it allows you to work on so many DIFFERENT things. I've done atomic spectroscopy, molecular spectroscopy, sensor research, and now I'm doing microfluidics. Always something new to learn.
"But most theoreticians couldn't set up or maintain a successful lab to save their grants."
True, and I think there are problems with shoe-laces, too. I'm sure the theorists were ecstatic when Velcro closures came on the market.
Alright, now that's JUST TOO PERSONAL.
(In the early 90's, I tuned an IBM RS6000 workstation to run a molecular dynamics code to within 10% of the speed on a Cray...but in the real world, once plugged an extension cord into itself and wondered why the appliance didn't come on.)
Cheers!
Alright, now that's JUST TOO PERSONAL.
(In the early 90's, I tuned an IBM RS6000 workstation to run a molecular dynamics code to within 10% of the speed on a Cray...but in the real world, once plugged an extension cord into itself and wondered why the appliance didn't come on.)
Cheers!
Of course they are. They are (self-deludingly) looking at their past successes.
Remember Manuel Miranda? He was the senate staffer who discovered back in 2002 that Democrat strategy memos were available on the shared senate computer system for all to see. These memos described Democrat tactics to smear and destroy Bush’s judicial nominees with lies and talking points provided by radical left-wing lobbyists. One memo even characterized Miguel Estrada as dangerous because, as a Latino, he would be difficult to stop if he was ever nominated for the Supreme Court. Estrada HAD to be stopped, these powerful groups instructed the Democrats. And he was.
Anyway, when the story broke big time in 2004 guess what the Democrat “mainstream” newsrooms focused on? That’s right - - the surreptitious viewing of the Democrat memos by Republicans (oh, the outrage of it!). The “scandal” became known as “Memogate”. The nefarious SUBSTANCE of those slimy Democrat memos was spiked in favor of reporting the “dirty politics” of the Republican staffer Manuel Miranda for reading and leaking those Democrat strategy memos. Incredibly, thanks mainly to Republican cowardice, the rats and their newsrooms got away with it!
Well, here we are again. The Democrat newsrooms briefly thought (and some are still hanging on!) that they could make the “Climategate” scandal all about the “illegal hacking of the CRU servers” (oh, the outrage of it!) and dismiss the fact that the leaks exposed one of the most massive and costly political frauds of all time. The fact that the Democrat newsrooms’ diversionary tactics didn’t work this time speaks volumes about the rising power of the internet (yayyy, Free Republic!), talk radio, and the dominant cable news network, Fox News.
Just fifteen years ago, this story would never have seen the light of day. It staggers the mind to wonder how much fraud the leftist scumbags and their Democrat newsrooms got away with over the decades. This is a story that won’t go away not matter how hard the rat newsrooms ignore it.
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.