Public Funded Global Warming Scientists Are Hacks

[Labrocca]

Yes...I said it.

Let's look at some logic here. If a person was an excellent scientist they would be working in the private sector making a TON of money. Now let's say you are an unemployed research scientist. Where could you get some money? Hmm..how about a government grant? Yeah that's right.

If you are a scientist you can milk the global warming debate for many thousands if not millions. And the more people that debate global warming the more funding that gets put into the pot.

I can't imagine the day of a global warming scientist. They most likely hang out by their pool and if they get a tan that's proof the earth is warming because of oil (tanning oil most likely).

What a freaking joke global warming scientists are.

Also they are most likely weather men that couldn't get job telling people it will be Sunny and Warm tomorrow because they are nerds. I see terms like Climate Scientist...isn't that a weather man? WTF is a Climate Scientist!

I just found a nice site where scientists are arguing about global warming and whose research is bullcrap.

http://www.realclimate.org/

They can't agree on much it appears. Which means each of them needs more funding for more research. I bet some get funding just to prove or disprove other research.

[Buck Laser]

Yes...I said it.

Let's look at some logic here. If a person was an excellent scientist they would be working in the private sector making a TON of money. Now let's say you are an unemployed research scientist. Where could you get some money? Hmm..how about a government grant? Yeah that's right.

If you are a scientist you can milk the global warming debate for many thousands if not millions. And the more people that debate global warming the more funding that gets put into the pot.

I can't imagine the day of a global warming scientist. They most likely hang out by their pool and if they get a tan that's proof the earth is warming because of oil (tanning oil most likely).

What a freaking joke global warming scientists are.


Oh, come on, Labrocca.:cool: You know better than that. The "global warming scientists" you're whining about are nearly all in a universities. Maybe the best of them work in think tanks like the Brookings Institution or the Rand Corporation, but they and the professors are where most of the basic scientific research comes from, and has come from for the past century. The corporations work under this "maximize profits above all" ethic, so they feel the pressure to work in areas that will help the bottom line for their employers.

Academic freedom may piss you off because it lets people you don't approve of say things you don't approve of, but unless there's somebody somewhere willing to underwrite research that doesn't have any immediate applicability, most of the really important discoveries wouldn't have been made.

Think of the Brit back in the thirties who had a thing for studying odd mold and fungi--who, in his right mind, would be interested in underwriting nasty greenish-black stuff? Sheesh! Nevertheless, he found penicillin and laid the groundwork for the antibiotic revolution in medicine.

Most basic scientific research is deadly dull stuff that no practical person would ever be patient enough to bother with--yet I wake up grateful every morning that they do, and that governments and charitable foundations shell out the money for them. Like a good many of us, I owe my life to that dull Brit who discovered penicillin--my appendix ruptured when I was 10, and I'd have been dead for 60 years without it.

[Labrocca]

Not sure where you get the idea I get pissed at academic freedom. Penicillin imho has no basis here in this argument...unless there was 2500 scientists paid to figure out penicillin was a medicine and have a concensus. Science is based on FACT and creating a conclusion based on facts. Even global warming experts leave room in their papers for doubt. They KNOW they can't prove global warming...they need another blank check for X billions for that.

Did you bother to check out that link I posted?

[Buck Laser]

Did you bother to check out that link I posted?


No, I didn't check the link because I figured you were just blathering on about university researchers. I'll look at it, but I'm so fuckin' tired of this ridiculous campaign to diss climate change that I'm pretty grouchy about the whole thing. I don't see the debunkers willing to do much to change their habits of reckless consumption--mostly, they just seem to want their gas-guzzlers, and will latch on anything they think will justify their excesses. I don't expect everyone to buy a hybrid or go for energy-efficient housing, but it seems to me that people need to acknowledge that we're all in the same boat. I guess that's why I feel better when I holler "Eat The Rich!" every once in a while.:D

[Stoner]

Not sure where you get the idea I get pissed at academic freedom

It's just another debating tactic libs use. They think if they say something that's not true or incorrect that it somehow becomes true just because they said it.

Lame.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Science is based on FACT and creating a conclusion based on facts. Even global warming experts leave room in their papers for doubt.

Actually science is rarely absolute, and it's rare they can say "we have definitively proved our hypothesis/theory".

It's just another debating tactic libs use. They think if they say something that's not true or incorrect that it somehow becomes true just because they said it.

Lame.

And what debating tactics do you use?

[Stoner]

And what debating tactics do you use?


That's the difference between me and libs. I don't need to use tactics. I just speak my mind and move on. Libs are the only ones on this forum who feel neccessary to use tactics, lies and deceit when debating. I just let it come from the heart.

[Elrathin]

I don't need to use tactics. I just speak my mind and move on.


Yep we all know you only speak OPINION and not FACT.

[Stoner]

Yep we all know you only speak OPINION and not FACT.


More mirroring from the left.

Do you have anything original or are you just going to use the moveon.org/Kos playbook word for word?

[Elrathin]

More mirroring from the left.

Do you have anything original or are you just going to use the moveon.org/Kos playbook word for word?


It is funny that you cannot refute anything that is being said. Sad really you have to use a word like "mirroring" to try and distract from that FACT.

[Stoner]

It is funny that you cannot refute anything that is being said. Sad really you have to use a word like "mirroring" to try and distract from that FACT.


It's not just a word...it's you and all the other lefties' favorite debating tactic. If you don't like to be called out on it stop doing it and post something intellectual for once.

*doesn't hold breath*

[Elrathin]

It's not just a word...it's you and all the other lefties' favorite debating tactic.

Yes we know the truth and asking for proof is a debating tactic you like to call "mirroring" LOL

[Labrocca]

Fuck...you 2 need to STFU...damn seriously it's like reading 2 second graders going..."my dad can beat up your dad" back and forth...

FUCK!

Stay on topic or get out of the topic PERIOD. I am getting a low tolerance for this crap today.

[bobbylien]

Congrats! You've found a way to discredit anything you don't like to hear from scientists, good job. Why attack their argument when you can simply say they are all corrupt?

As interesting as your little rant was Lab...
In contrast to meteorology, which studies short term weather systems lasting up to a few weeks, climatology studies the frequency and trends of those systems. It studies the periodicity of weather events over years to millennia, as well as changes in long-term average weather patterns, in relation to atmospheric conditions. Climatologists, those who practice climatology, study both the nature of climates - local, regional or global - and the natural or human-induced factors that cause climates to change. Climatology considers the past and can help predict future climate change.

Phenomena of climatological interest include the atmospheric boundary layer, circulation patterns, heat transfer (radiative, convective and latent), interactions between the atmosphere and the oceans and land surface (particularly vegetation, land use and topography), and the chemical and physical composition of the atmosphere. Related disciplines include astrophysics, chemistry, ecology, geology, geophysics, glaciology, hydrology, oceanography, and volcanology.
Climatology is a real science, its been practiced for hundreds of years. Come on, you are starting to sound like CWN.. and I KNOW you are smarter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatology

If a person was an excellent scientist they would be working in the private sector making a TON of money.
I think thats one of the reasons conservatives don't become teachers, scientists or professors. We are much too obsessed with money and can't understand why someone would take a job that pays less than the others. Some people have a passion for what they do. Money isn't everything, though it is a fun way to keep score in the game of life.

[Stoner]

I think thats one of the reasons conservatives don't become teachers, scientists or professors.

I know at least one conservative in each of the 3 fields you listed.

I love false statements.

BTW...what's the point in putting Lab's quote as your sig? Surly it can't be productive. What's the real reason you're doing it?

I'm sure whatever the reason it has nothing to do with making this site better and more productive nor is it something that's going to make people want to be a part of this community.

[bobbylien]

I know at least one conservative in each of the 3 fields you listed.

I love false statements.

I certainly didn't mean that there were no conservatives in those fields. You can't deny that those fields are massively dominated by liberals. I'll try to be absolutely clear from now on. ;)

BTW...what's the point in putting Lab's quote as your sig? Surly it can't be productive. What's the real reason you're doing it?

I'm sure whatever the reason it has nothing to do with making this site better and more productive nor is it something that's going to make people want to be a part of this community.
I thought it was funny. Then he goes on to tell them that they are acting like second graders! :D

[Stoner]

I certainly didn't mean that there were no conservatives in those fields.

Not what you said. I'll refresh your memory.

I think thats one of the reasons conservatives don't become teachers, scientists or professors.

This is why I don't take anything the libs say at face value. They are constantly exagerating facts to fit their political agenda.

I will never understand why people just can't debate from the heart without lying or exagerating constantly.

[piratemonkey]

If you don't like to be called out on it stop doing it and post something intellectual for once.

*doesn't hold breath*



Hello, pot.

I'm still waiting for you to post something vaguely resembling a scientific study... you know one of those 1000's of studies that you think are wrong.

[piratemonkey]

I will never understand why people just can't debate from the heart without lying or exagerating constantly.


I will never understand why people think they can criticize science without producing the slightest shred of scientific evidence.

[bobbylien]

This is why I don't take anything the libs say at face value. They are constantly exagerating facts to fit their political agenda.

I know what I said you idiot. I didn't say there were no conservatives in those fields. Clever of you to ignore the rest of my post though, you are completely incapable of serious debate. Maybe just pointing out the obvious and trying to piss people off. Read the sentence again, nowhere in that post did I say that there weren't any conservatives in those fields.. nowhere.

[Labrocca]

This is why I don't take anything the libs say at face value. They are constantly exagerating facts to fit their political agenda.

I know what I said you idiot. I didn't say there were no conservatives in those fields. Clever of you to ignore the rest of my post though, you are completely incapable of serious debate. Maybe just pointing out the obvious and trying to piss people off. Read the sentence again, nowhere in that post did I say that there weren't any conservatives in those fields.. nowhere.


Great comeback bobbylien...especially since you say this to me.

Why attack their argument when you can simply say they are all corrupt?

So let me see how you like the same response:

I know what I said you idiot. I didn't say they were all corrupt. Clever of you to ignore the rest of my post though, you are completely incapable of serious debate. Read the statement again, nowhere in that post did I say all scientist are corrupt....nowhere.

:D

[Pookie]

There does seem to be some evidence that by industrialization, there are changes in the atmosphere and the environment which may be exacerbating normal climate changes.
However, if we are in fact pouring pollutants into the air and ground, would it not be a good idea to perhaps try to stop this?
Purrs,