Now, now… it’s not a lie because thousands of scientists would have backed its claims once they got the funding.
But Rand, science isn’t done by consensus! 😉
In a perfect world the next President, who would have been elected on a platform of liberty and prosperity, will seek out and give the magnificent bastard who outed the Climategate e mails the Medal of Freedom.
And a billion dollar stipend for saving the country 100 times that in losses.
seek out and give the magnificent bastard who outed the Climategate e mails the Medal of Freedom.
I’d be happy if they prosecuted the people who committed this fraud.
“… the magnificent bastard who outed the Climategate e mails …”
Two to one it was Ian “Harry” Harris. Even if it wasn’t we owe him a debt of gratitude.
You know, I don’t remember signing up for a Behavioral Modification Experiment or Therapy … or my Government doing it either.
But that’s what Mike Hulme and Martin Mahony are saying (“…The other experiment is also one which has not before been attempted. It is a worldwide socio-cultural experiment to see whether the whole panoply of human behaviours, preferences and practices can be directed towards achieving one over-arching goal: to change the terms of Revelle’s experiment by bringing the worldwide emissions of greenhouse gases under directed management….{p.2-3}) is going on.
But what’s really damning is when he lets the cat out of the bag where the Mass News Media can find it that it was really only a few dozen Climate and related scientists that formed the ‘Consensus’ (“…Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous. That particular consensus judgement, as are many others in the IPCC reports, is reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies; other IPCC authors are experts in other fields….{p.10-11}) instead of the ‘over 2,500 Leading Scientists that had been reported to the People, Advisory Panels, Courts, Agencies, Governments, the World-at-Large….
As posted to the Nature FB page Comments when they posted:
“As climate scientists battle climate sceptics, they should note that we have been here before, say Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway. History holds lessons for how researchers can get their message across.”
Now, now… it’s not a lie because thousands of scientists would have backed its claims once they got the funding.
But Rand, science isn’t done by consensus! 😉
In a perfect world the next President, who would have been elected on a platform of liberty and prosperity, will seek out and give the magnificent bastard who outed the Climategate e mails the Medal of Freedom.
And a billion dollar stipend for saving the country 100 times that in losses.
seek out and give the magnificent bastard who outed the Climategate e mails the Medal of Freedom.
I’d be happy if they prosecuted the people who committed this fraud.
“… the magnificent bastard who outed the Climategate e mails …”
Two to one it was Ian “Harry” Harris. Even if it wasn’t we owe him a debt of gratitude.
You know, I don’t remember signing up for a Behavioral Modification Experiment or Therapy … or my Government doing it either.
But that’s what Mike Hulme and Martin Mahony are saying (“…The other experiment is also one which has not before been attempted. It is a worldwide socio-cultural experiment to see whether the whole panoply of human behaviours, preferences and practices can be directed towards achieving one over-arching goal: to change the terms of Revelle’s experiment by bringing the worldwide emissions of greenhouse gases under directed management….{p.2-3}) is going on.
But what’s really damning is when he lets the cat out of the bag where the Mass News Media can find it that it was really only a few dozen Climate and related scientists that formed the ‘Consensus’ (“…Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous. That particular consensus judgement, as are many others in the IPCC reports, is reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies; other IPCC authors are experts in other fields….{p.10-11}) instead of the ‘over 2,500 Leading Scientists that had been reported to the People, Advisory Panels, Courts, Agencies, Governments, the World-at-Large….
Above quotes from: http://www.probeinternational.org/Hulme-Mahony-PiPG%5B1%5D.pdf
As posted to the Nature FB page Comments when they posted:
“As climate scientists battle climate sceptics, they should note that we have been here before, say Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway. History holds lessons for how researchers can get their message across.”
http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=6115848166&share_id=101485293236904&comments=1#s101485293236904