A Few Good Scientists
Let me tell you this: If it weren’t for scientists like me, you’d still be worshiping fire as an angry god. Every convenience in your life is thanks to us, so when we tell you something, you should just nod your head like you comprehend what we’re saying and shut up. And right now I am telling you those emails are unimportant.
Oh, that’s not good enough for you. You want us to explain them. You think you’re entitled to the truth.
You can’t understand the truth!
Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to have scientific equipment on them to gather data, and that data studied by men with computers. Who’s going to do it? A layman like you? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for the global warming skeptics and curse the climatologists. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know — that the crushing of data contrary to global warming, while tragic, probably saved grant money. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to the layman, creates scientific consensus. You don’t want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don’t talk about on Twitter, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall studying those measurements you can’t even begin to comprehend.
We use phrases like “peer review,” “overwhelming consensus,” “settled science.” We use these phrases as the backbone to a life spent studying something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket made by synthetic fibers my science creates, then questions the manner in which I provide that science! I’d rather you just said, “You’re such a genius!” and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a lab coat and crunch data. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you’re entitled to!
Of course we hid dissenting data! We had to. So as not to confuse your simple minds from understanding the greater truth that man-made global warming is real! Now, excuse me; I have science to do.
There won’t be another Krypton on my watch.
As a fellow scientist, a Computer Scientist, let me just grant you the highest accolade I know, “Mega Dittos” Sir. Thank you, thank you, thank you for finally telling them how we scientists really feel. I just wish I had a son to launch into the void to show you just how much your article means to me. Another one I mean.
The most important part of the scientific method, to me, is the weeping for joy! Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Well I guess he told us, man were we wrong. Now where did I leave that sun tan lotion? That and I’m going to start buying lake front land outside of Moosejaw!!!! Sure to be a hit come 2050.
If i didn’t know this was sarcasm (parody), it would raise my blood pressure. Unfortunately, this is also illustrative of the attitude of the AGW cultists.
Speaking as a retired “lab coat wearer” myself, I firmly believe in James Burke’s statement in “Connections”; you must believe that you can understand anything if you put your mind to it. For instance, I could go on for hours about where synthetic fibers come from- it’s a story that started with an Italian chemist, shirt-collars, and billiard balls, and ended with the reason Germany had enough explosives and propellant powders to fight on for four years in WW 1 when their own estimates at the start said they only had enough for four months. (Google “Antonio Sobrero”, “Haber-Bosch process” and “rayon”.)
Science is not a religion, and its practitioners are not priests. When they act like same, they should be fired. Period. Dot. That sort of behavior puts them in the same category as the ufologists, “contactees”, and other devotees of the belief that The Space Brothers Are Coming To Save Us All- Or At Least The Faithful Who Are Superior.
An argument from authority has no place in science, either. If someone really is an authority, they should be able to explain their findings in plain English and more importantly support their work with data. When someone says, “You are too stupid to understand the data”, my response is “And you’re not? Let’s compare IQs, shall we? If yours is no higher than mine, explain your conclusions.”
If they refuse to release the data, or claim that it was somehow lost or destroyed, they are behaving unprofessionally. I guarantee you the lab I worked at still has reports and raw data printouts with my initials on same, from several decades ago. They’re probably on a hard-drive now, but they’re there. That’s how you do real science; I’m not sure the AGW crowd understands this.
As for their unwillingness to admit error, a real scientist is always ready to say those three little words, “I was wrong”. One of our old “Murphy’s Laws” goes “Experiments should be repeatable- they should all fail the same way”. Any scientist worthy of the name knows the meaning of the word “Oops”, trust me. (To say nothing of the word, “DUCK!”)
If the AGW crowd claim that they (1) are absolutely right, (2) have no anomalous results in their data, (3) cannot produce their raw data, and (4) have the right to refuse to share their data with anyone who disagrees with them even slightly- then they’re selling snake oil, not doing science. And more importantly, they know it and are hoping nobody else catches on.
I don’t mind when “believers” in Grays or Nords do this, as most people ignore their demands for “immediate action” on (Fill In The Blank) on the quite sensible grounds that they are both unable to justify the actions they demand and are acting nutty into the bargain. But when people with actual qualifications act in this way while demanding that absolute power be granted to (opportunistic) politicians as a result, I do mind it- very much indeed.
I expect a bit more from them in terms of rationality- not to mention respect for the human race in general.
clear ether
eon
…yet you troglodytes cling to everything you can use to second-guess us.
Proud Troglodyte
You have the luxury of not knowing what I know — that the crushing of data contrary to global warming, while tragic, probably saved grant money.
A lot of grant money, a big ole boatload of grant money.
We use phrases like “peer review,” “overwhelming consensus,” “settled science.” We use these phrases as the backbone to a life spent studying something. You use them as a punchline.
Well, dude, for a long time I’ve read of the politics surrounding the whole “peer review” thing and the politicization of what does, and does not, get published in “scientific” journals.
Just try getting published when you don’t know the right folks or stroke the right backs.
The phrase “peer review” is sounding as diminished as the science around the hypothesis of AGW.
I hope all of the holier-than-thou pretentious scientific types are proud of the blemish they have inflicted onto science which, in the case of the theory of catastrophic AGW, is better described as scientism, not science.
Well, whatever the critics say, Algoreism has fixed one of the major problems of science, the “Garbage In Garbage Out” conundrum. Thanks to the brave CRU, we now have Garbage In, Hockey Sticks Out.
Um, well, uh, I guess, when you put it that way, OK, I’ll be quiet from now on.
Can I have my Cheetos back?
I too am on the side of science.The MSM that has sensationalized raw data into a public outcry is so wrong they should be hanged.Thanks for the clarity.
Frank, you are truly awesome. You have opened my eyes and shown me the truth.
Little known fact:
Col. Nathan R. Jessep served as bosun on the U.S.S. Higgs early in his career.
Then he transferred to the Marines.
Also: FIRST!
Absolutely excellent article!
From what I have been reading on the subject for the past few years, this is exactly the attitude taken by the “grant winners” re Global Warming.
When one can tell me to drop my skepticism because it is settled science – yet not divulge their monetary gain from that opinion, I get somewhat suspicious.
And thank you, academicians, for processing our Science like you process our cheese. Which is yummy.
I read this entire piece as if hearing Dr. Sheldon Cooper (as played by Jim Parsons on the excellent show The Big Bang Theory) delivering this in some kind of debate forum or symposium. It makes it even funnier.
What gives it that odd little melancholy twist is thinking that there are probably a few people who would say much the same (in spirit) as this piece and mean it with utter 100% seriousness.
So sorry for my hubris in doubting the GW thing.
You’re correct. I’m a hopeless dolt, a member of
the unwashed masses. Completely incapable of understanding
something so complex. Geeze, I always thought that the sun
warmed the earth. I’m so ashamed of my ignorance.
Who would have believed that one third of one percent of the
air we breath has Something in it as destructive as carbon
dioxide ! Even when our Supreme Court declared Co2 to be a
pollutant, did I take heed ? No. I was so blinded by my
right wing ideology that I just couldn’t accept it for if I
did than I would have to admit that everything I know is
wrong.
I’ll never doubt again..baaaaaaa baaaaaa
You want the truth? You can’t understand the truth!
The first true thing to be published here. Its like the first step in a twelve step program.
To 11. Pullus Iulius
lol thats a great line.
Cheeto drool was genius, Frank.
Climate Science 101
A Climate Scientist had fifty frogs.
He lined them up at one end of his laboratory.
He then took a Cricket Bat and created a sudden noise behind the frogs after which he carefully measured the results.
In his book he wrote: ‘Frogs when startled by a sudden noise tend to jump an average of ten feet.’
He then randomly cut one leg off of each frog, he lined them up again and created the same noise with the Cricket Bat and observed the results again.
In his book he wrote: ‘Frogs with one leg cut off when startled by a sudden noise tend to jump an average of seven and a half feet.’
He then randomly cut a second leg off of each frog, lined them up again and used the Cricket Bat to create the same noise again.
In his book he wrote: ‘Frogs with two legs cut off when startled by a sudden noise tend to jump an average of five feet.’
Continuing he randomly cut a third leg off of each frog, lined them up a fourth time and using the Cricket Bat created the same noise.
In his book he wrote: ‘Frogs with three legs cut off when startled by a sudden noise tend to jump an average of two and a half feet.’
Realizing he was on to something he proceeded to cut the final leg off of each frog, he lined them up again and grasping his Cricket Bat created the same noise again.
With no reaction from the frogs he continued to slam the Cricket Bat to make his noise in progressively harder strokes.
In his book he wrote:
‘The correlation is undeniable.
You can see the deterioration with each leg being removed.
Without question the final result is that with all four legs cut off;
Frogs become completely deaf.’
Maybe someone can get to the real meat (or hickory smoke-infused tofu, for the vegans) of this matter: What the hell is a carbon offset?
The best I can tell, is that it’s like a pennance for a sin. The sin/carbon doesn’t disappear, any more than energy is neither created nor destroyed, but simply changes form.
Decreasing CO2 decreases food for plants. We want more plants to make more food and oxygen for us. We should, therefore INCREASE CO2, then, right?
Science!
14. Goy:
You’re really regressing here, moho. Can’t open a comment thread on PJM anymore without seeing posts where you inmpersonate a regular. Maybe you think it’s clever – could be as you’ve always shown a middle schooler’s approach to discussion and they would – or maybe it’s because your posts are under the moho the marching moron aren’t getting out of moderation.
Whatever your rationale, you really need to cut down your trolling of PJM to just a few hours a day and at least TRY to get a life.
“Little known fact: Col. Nathan R. Jessep served as bosun on the U.S.S. Higgs early in his career.”
So you’re saying Jessep actually was the Higgs bosun?
No wonder he felt like a particle of God.
#3 Eon: Excellent comment.
Your mention of James Burker reminds me of another common fallacy. Discussions of “Climate Change” reveal a flaw that is all to common in scientific circle: Reification. For any of you who might have attended any Ivy League college, reification is simply the acting of treating an abstract concept as if it were a real object. “Climate” is a perfect example. Climate is nothing more than a general categorization of annual weather patterns. In the northeast US, we experience hot summers and cold winters are are said to have a temperate climate. It sounds fine to say “Climate change”, but from a scientific standpoint, it is meaningless: Climate doesn’t DO anything.
At this point, the climate change/global warming advocates are asking us to believe that they can predict the weather accurately for 10 years from now when most of us realize the weather can’t even be predicted with true scientific accuracy for one week from now.
When do we get to the “All kneel before Zod” part of science. I want to make sure I get my degree finished before then.
Sorry about that message Goy, there’s someone running around here impersonating me.
23. Commuter:
This is getting downright pitiful. Like I said, moho, you really need to get a life. I wouldn’t bet on your success, but you need to at least try and being a sophomoric blog troll is no way to start.
Is it time for PJM to have an actual user name system?
Adam, I agree. I think it should also be a pay only site, so then we can get rid of some of these brainless trolls as well.
Don’t call me a layman, I’m a scientist…and you’re under arrest you son of a bitch.
Stephen – Sheldon rules! He would destroy in a global warming debate! Although nobody would understand him or know which side he was on and everyone involved would be too insulted to listen.
Hilarious! Heh heh heh! Pay no attention to the cooling temperatures or the increasing glaziers (or the many regular and irregular warming and cooling cycles of the earth over the past billion years). That’s not real! Also, pay no attention to Al Gore or George Soros behind the curtain. We’ve got the real data locked in a safe place and you’re too ignorant to understand it anways. We’ve simplified / reduced the original data so you can understand it and then threw away the original data since it wasn’t necessary to retain it (we understand it in our giant brains and you simpletons wouldn’t have understood it anywas). Trust us since we stand on the wall!!!!
Here is how MIT professor of meteorology Richard Lindzen ended a piece in the WSJ.
Consider the following example. Suppose that I leave a box on the floor, and my wife trips on it, falling against my son, who is carrying a carton of eggs, which then fall and break. Our present approach to emissions would be analogous to deciding that the best way to prevent the breakage of eggs would be to outlaw leaving boxes on the floor. The chief difference is that in the case of atmospheric CO2 and climate catastrophe, the chain of inference is longer and less plausible than in my example.
Like most professors, Taan, this guy seems to be used to not being challenged on his silly metaphors:
Our present approach to emissions would be analogous to deciding that the best way to prevent the breakage of eggs would be to outlaw leaving boxes on the floor. The chief difference is that in the case of atmospheric CO2 and climate catastrophe, the chain of inference is longer and less plausible than in my example.
Here’s the thing genius. Before you go about even finding the causal chaing, STOP LEAVING BOXES OF EGGS ON THE FLOORS. No wonder you idiots worship such lunacy.
STOP LEAVING BOXES OF EGGS ON THE FLOORS
Sweet pea (whoever you are pretending to be at the moment)…the box on the floor didn’t contain eggs.
Reading challenged ?
Richard Lindzen is a professor of meterology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has been a critic of the hyperventilators of AGW for decades.
You might actually learn something if you read this, it’s very good as a straightforward explanation of climate forcing and also mentioning how poorly understood are the dynamics of climate and, even, greenhouse gases.
Caution, read slowly and carefully so as not to appear a jacka$$.
The Climate Science Isn’t Settled
“…STOP LEAVING BOXES OF EGGS ON THE FLOORS…”
He didn’t leave a box of eggs on the floor, just a box. His wife, who likely wasn’t paying attention to what was on the floor in front of her, tripped and fell against his son, who was carrying a carton of eggs.
Before you go about critizing metaphors for causal “chaing,” you should learn how to read the information that you are given.
# 18, Thor, seems to understand more science than those that believe it’s settled. Fascinating. My theory is, we should all do our part to reduce our carbon footprint, by stopping exhaling.
In responce to Thor Dec4 8:43AM
I’ll just put more silly stuff in the pot.
Just filled up the gas tank in my car.
Ten percent ethanol, the pump disclosed.
Here’s the silly part…..
Ethanol has less combustibility than gasoline.
That results in less gas milage. Which translates
to a sooner trip to the gas station to again re-fill.
More sillyness…bear with me…
Ethanol is nothing more than moonshine whiskey.
Only even MORE pure. The manufacturing process is
identical except that for fuel purposes, it undergoes
an additional process to remove all water and condensation
possible and THEN a poison is intentionally added to make
it un-drinkable. So, then….
I used to make my own beer. After cooking and cooling the
wort, the yeast was “pitched”. A few hours later those millions
of yeast cells start to make oodles of CARBON DIOXIDE !!
THE VERY THING THAT “CAUSES” GLOBAL WARMING !!!!!!!!!!!
This gas bubbled out of the fermentation lock en’MASS !!!
How much Co2 must be produced by the manufacture of ethanol fuel
by the gazillions of gallons ???????
Dirty little secret ?
Even mORE sillyness….
All this ethanol motor fuel is made, now get this, from….
CORN !!! A food staple which could feed MANY hungry people
in many poor nations. THIS IS A SIN !!!
The result is higher corn prices in the USA.
My food shopping $$ attests to this. But I can suck it up
IF it helped starving people from poor countries to have more
food on their dinner table. BUT NO…
We (the USA) are making MOTOR FUEL OUT OF FOOD !!!!!!
AND it’s being subsidised by the government because, if left
to compete in the open market, it would fail miserably.
I’m tempted to say that farmers here should be ashamed of themselves
but they have their own families to feed.
When a box of corn flakes costs 4 bux and the farmer gets about
2 cents for that corn, verses ten times more for fuel manufacturers,
well, what would yOU do ?
Summary… Ethanol fuel manufacturing is makes MANY TIMES MORE
Co2 than it’s supposed to eliminate.
The pure folly if this is sickening
I don’t know what’s funnier (in an ironic kind of way): this article, or the fact that some people actually think it’s a serious article! Even worse are those that think it’s serious and AGREE with it!!!
Its true. I did read it too fast and thought that the box contained the eggs. What strikes me as humorous is that keeping boxes off the floor would be the first thing anyone with a half a brain would do anyway. In fact, this was an even dumber metaphor than I thought. If there is anyone who, when presented with the same chain of events, would continue to leave boxes or other items on the floor after their wife and son were both involved in an accident around it, then go with God–he looks after idiots and puppies too.
There is no doubt that greenhouse gases cause warming, its the reason the earth is not a ball of ice to begin with. Whether or not current climate changes are caused by our emission of greenhouse gases is another question entirely. Obviously, like the non-retarded father who keeps boxes and roller skates out of the hallway, a good place to start is to limit our own production of greenhouse gases until we are sure. This is how anyone with a brain lives their life.
Look Sara, its really not fair to blame me. I just re-read the whole thing and I still find it surprising that its supposed to be humor. I really think the author should stop calling it a humor column; that really distorts the actual definition of the word.
In your penultimate paragraph you absolutely nail the problem with the current generation of scientists.
“Excuse me I have science to do.”
It always amuses me when they talk of “doing science” as if it is akin to doing a bit of gardening, doing some book keeping or doing the cooking. People who talk about physics, chemistry etc. I can relate to but a science is a formal body of knowledge. So when people use the word is if saying it endows the speaker with occult powers something is wrong.
taanstafl
Nothing better to do than hang around attempting to impersonate other posters ?
A sad and lonely guy
Eyeopening, hysterically (and ironically) funny article.
Carbon offset? Easy. Think ENRON.
@#3 Eon
I am so glad to read your quote. I teach a hands on chemistry class for 2nd and 3rd graders. The hardest thing to get them to do is to make a hypothesis. They don’t want to be wrong. I am constantly telling them that Scientists are wrong all the time, and when they find out they are wrong, they take what they learned from their experiment and carry on. We also use the word “oops” a lot. One of the reasons I teach 2nd/3rd is because I don’t want to use the word “DUCK!”
Mr Fleming-I suggested the same thing to Dr John Coleman in another PJM article Im suggesting to you. You guys know who the decent scientists out there are. Im sure there are many of them. I myself am a military trained weather tech who after my service days were over went into private weather forecasting. It takes prominent scientists like a John Coleman, a Max Mayfield,a Dr William Gray, or a Dr Josh Wurman, maybe even someone like a Dr Ted Fujita, to speak out on this subject. Folks whose name does have some kind of a public profile. The folks on media outlets like the Weather Channel are compromised by who owns them(NBC, soon to be comcast cable) and all the government grant money they receive, and the plain and simple fact that too many of them are nothing more than political and ideological whores. Im glad to see some decent scientists like yourself and Dr Coleman are speaking out, along with Lord Christopher Munkton. The more we can get the merrier, particulary if someone with a high public profile will take down the phonies like Al the Whore Gore and the rest of the environmental communists.
Just for clarification:
Does everyone here realize that JorEl was a FICTIONAL character from a COMIC BOOK???
I guess this does explain how the “climate scientist” came to be, though…
Great tongue – in – cheek piece. Realy captures the attitude of our “scientific elite”.
I second the motion for a user system to protect the identity of responsible users from childish trolls whose arguments can not stand the light of day.
Loved it, but I can’t believe that COL Jessup would be caught dead in a ‘fairy white’ lab coat, and certainly not while conducting science 300 yards from 4000 Cubans who are trained to kill him.
Don’t think for one second that you can go down there, flash an e-mail and make him nervous.
And I would appreciate it if you would address me as “Doctor” or “Professor.” I believe I’ve earned it.
Great Quotes:
1. “There is no such thing as ‘Science.’ There is only that which quickly becomes practical engineering and the remiander, which is merely unfounded speculation.”
In other words, if it ain’t made you rich by producing something useful then it ain’t worth crap.
2. Said by one of the top experts on electromagnetism after a night of tossing and turning following hearing the news of Bell’s invention of the telephone: “Dammit! If Bell had known anything about electromagnetism he would have realized that what he was trying to do was impossible!”
3. Said by one of my college physics professors, a man who was on the team that discovered the neutrino: “Every physicist in the word knew that going to the Moon was impossible, but they did not bother to tell the engineers, who in their ignorance went ahead and did it.”
“Even worse are those that think it’s serious and AGREE with it!!!”
You mean like the majority of climate scientists apparently seem to do?
Now, I am pretty sure a majority really don’t agree with it, but you know, it’s kind of like how we keep hearing that the “majority of Muslims” don’t believe in violent Jihad. It’s just that we never hear that from the “majority of Muslims” – what we hear from them is usually silence.
We are currently in between ice ages. Nuclear Weapon proliferation is a more urgent dilemma. At U.C. Berkeley we know we’re between between ice ages. China’s carbon output forced the drop from its four level in history peak in 2004, and we are cooling. Carbon is a double edged sword — it creates cooling and our atmosphere, but it also increases atmospheric acidity. In 1970s the Nixon creation of the EPA, and increasing strict measures to clean up the air led to the increased heat index observed by the climatologists. By the early 2000s China and other mid-industrial eastern civilizations began pumping out carbon for their modernization — this has led to a cooling trend. Al Gore is not a scientist. Please leave this to academics.
I am 19 years old. You could push and shove the periodic table straight through my head and I wouldn’t even notice its passing. But what I do understand, which conveniently fits into this topic, is war. I joined the U.S. Army at the age of 17, and a month hasn’t gone by when some idiot peacemaker tries to ‘help me understand’ why i shouldn’t serve my country. I as a soldier, I have no excuses for what I do. I perform my duties to the letter so that little terrorist trying to blow me up in Iraq or Afghanistan isn’t parking car bombs on your highways.
People now a days are so gosh damn skeptical and all knowing that you cant even argue with them. They are ILLOGICAL and INCOHERENT and just plain IGNORANT when it comes to the niddy gritty of war, as well as the finer details of science.
People don’t understand why we do our job. Nor will they unless they dedicate themselves to it as I have done: Just as you scientists have done. I use a M2M16 Assalt rifle designed and built by you scientists, and I dont care if its made out of steel or titainium, or the amount of grains a single round uses, or the chemical composition of the butstock; I just know that if i keep it clean, and have a steady aim it will do its job just fine. I don’t need to know anything else because it just doesnt matter when it comes to defending this great country. That kind of information is worthless to me.
The one thing that we as a species suffer from is a lack to prioritize and be satisfied. If we as consumers need to know something scientific, pick up a Consumers Digest and it will tell you everything you need to know. The fact is unless you actually plan on becoming a scientist, you just don’t need to know the finer details. You just don’t.
Now should we be concerned? Sure. Its human to be concerned and thoughtful of these things. We are a curious people. But if you want a really good example of flamboyant rambling, go onto Youtube and look at the comments left by these ‘thinkers’ and you will get a taste for how vague people can be.
Jgood8:
Those people who say that our society has become too politically correct are completely right. You are an idiot. People who can’t think for themselves or ask questions are perfect cannon fodder. Just make sure to get yourself killed before rising in the ranks; you’ve already said you have no inherent ability to think for yourself. The best use you could put yourself to is to jump on an IED and save some members of your cohort who can actually think for themselves and serve some purpose other than transporting a trigger finger.
There are two kinds of people in the world, they are either good or evil.
Hitler and Stalin had to have their scientists and psychiatrists and
power hungry elitists to carry out their hideous reigns of terror..many a good man died at the hands of one wearing a white lab coat..many brilliant people were killed and imprisoned and tortured in the most unimaginable
manner because they dared to stand up for truth and not bow to liars in power…all governments and all professions are made up of invidual human beings. Some of these people are good but some are very bad people void of compassion. Obama spoke today about the lack of jobs and every other
word encompassed his green/red propaganda. He is the mouthpiece of lying
people who want to silence all good men everywhere with their honey-coated
poison…homeless people are sleeping on the streets of New Orleans this cold wintry night where the city is broke in spite of all the billions of dollars that flowed into the city coffers after Katrina…redistribution of wealth at its finest and now it’s business as usual and the homeless and outcasts sleep on the street with nary a MSM phony in sight..they only
show up for sensationalism that the left thrives on in this country..In order for ruthless men to succeed they must create divison and ignorance..
they do it through programs that are guaranteed to produce dependence on the very government that supports these programs with other people’s money.
People like me are always silenced first…too bad the generations behind me are not taught Communism 101 in the first grade with all of its tricks and ploys that lead to enslavement and the slaughter of freedom loving
men and women especially compassionate God fearing people who truly love their fellow man. The good scientists are a part of this diabolical scheme
if they remain silent and do not challenge this dogma being given the status of a world religion, Man is the author of his own destruction when
he sells his soul for a bowl of gruel served up by an “all caring” government. I choose freedom and refuse to be enslaved. I will not be silent as I see my country under assault from within. Thomas Moore said that only a fool believes in utopia, because utopia does not exist; and only a
fool would believe that the earth can be managed by anything as finite
as a human’s concept of a globally controlled population taxed into oblivion, grovelling at the feet of “green gods and goddesses”…ehm? I seem to recall an ancient people known as druids..and another enslaved
civilization taxed, broken under Caesar that eventually fell when the young men would no longer take up their swords and shields and follow corrupt
evil old men into battle. Hitler had the support of the military and the
industrial leaders and used the scientists and doctors to carry out a large part of his “final solution”…Stalin’s world worshipped at the altar of
atheism and collectivism and redistribution..it was a failed system that
could only be sustained through brutal force and decrying any opposition
as insanity followed by mental and medical torture. No, population control and redistribution of wealth and global governance and enforcement regulations controlling the very air that we breathe will be a far sooner
destruction of humanity and its vain attempt to become God than any climate
change. Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds adored by fools and statsmen. I learned this phrase in grammar school when children were taught
not brainwashed and warehoused and set up for failure.
How dare us? Tell ya what, when you smart folks can project some semblance of vertical synapse activity collectively in order to secure your data impermeably by virtue of a single $400 server then who are the idiots Mr. Fleming?
Now that this UEA episode has been exposed after being woven into this historically insurmountable vertical expensive infrastructure in global perpetuity you have the impudence to bash those who are merely looking for a cogent explanation? Especially after your colleagues dumped the original code setting aside these damning emails, how is one supposed to react? How dare YOU is more appropriate. It’s the job of your sector to synthesize the material using confirmed data to explain in simplistic terms your conclusions. If you can’t do that you have failed. We know, you don’t, trust us? Who do you think you are? I don’t know you, your values, work habits or integrity, just show us the goods and we’ll show you the money. This arrogance is appalling. With this self serving article you have effectively called bona fide skeptical America a bunch of idiots. I employ over 23,000 folks and simplicity my friend must be a priority in order to reach the common goals of a large corporation or in the alternative the congruency of a nation. The same dynamics’ are at work here as well of which your sector failed miserably and I would venture to say irreparably.
So, if you don’t mind I’m going to build a snowman with my Daughter here in Galveston, Texas. Pffft.
Geez, Frank, I think you’re the funniest guy on the web and I know leftists have no sense of humor but what’s with the seriously brain-damaged types who get so inflamed by your humor? I thought only Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin could make a liberal’s head explode. Keep up the good work!
51. jgood8:
Just so you know, some a$$hole – moho by current consensus – has been impersonating posters at PJM the last week or so. I’d never say, (or think, or feel), what this blog wh@re wrote while impersonating me in #52. Chances are, he’ll continue so keep that in mind when interpreting posts. If it’s something no decent person would say, it’s this demented sh!teater, not the poster whose handle he’s hiding behind.
40. tanstaafl:
‘A sad and lonely guy’
Yes, he is. Waste of oxygen.
ROFL. That’s just great. A great satire!
I did not eat that bannana split.
#48 RWE: As a practicing engineer I applaud your notable quotables showing the very real disconnect between the ivory tower researchers (i.e., the “true” scientists) and those of us (lowly engineers) who are merely practitioners (and sometimes considered heretics – since we don’t need to know the whole entire theoretical basis for stuff but just enough to build something useful that’s reasonably cost effective in a timely manner) who rely on knowledge of science (i.e., proven repeatable and predictable – unlike global warming / climate change) and mathematics (tools) to design and develop “things” to benefit human kind. Of course the word benefit can depend on one’s own interpretation (e.g., weapons, robots, cars, aircraft, telecommunications networks, computers, buildings, life saving medical equipment, etc.).
Jgood8 – The fact the utterly worthless piece of s*** who posted at # 52 had to hide behind somebody else’s name (in this case ‘Commuter’)before he could scrounge up the nerve to hit ‘submit’ says all that needs to be said.
As an aside, you can tell from the tenor of fake Commuter’s comments he has never served in the military and is consumed with a visceral hatred for the United States. In other words, he’s one of life’s losers.
Alwyr: I actually have great respect for the military, though like Dick Cheney, I felt my skills could be put to better use elsewhere. Its douchebags like Jgood8 that I can’t stand. The best thing they could do, as I said, is make sure they take a bullet for one of the brave and rational people who’ve joined the military to serve their country and who plan to do something useful after they serve. At best, people like Jgood8 are the veterans who become petty criminals after they get out of the service. As I said, nothing hurts our country more than this politically correct stupidity, where any comment about a military person is taken as a criticism of the military. As PJM notes on a regular basis, this political correctness has lethal consequences.
#54 Tina – Dear, this is SATIRE! It’s funny! The first clue was the fictional account of the end of Krypton! You got bent out of shape for nothing, because Fleming is saying the exact same thing that you are… via satire. And I thought only the Leftists had no sense of humor! Hilarious!
As I said Marc, it did seem satirical, but the satire seemed unintended. I know that its “supposed” to be humor; the problem is its just not funny. PJM could do with some writers with talent.
As I said Marc, this does seem snotty. But it’s the closest I’ll get to PJM finding me funny. Over and outed.
Its true enough to any who’ve read my postings. I’m a real bore, lol
“You want the truth? You can’t understand the truth!”
Please wake up and pay attention pajammers!
Alchemists were said to have the secret of turning sea water into gold. Algorists turned CO2 in to gold.
Superman’s adopted father was not a “hillbilly.” The proper term of disparagement for a midwesterner is “hayseed.”
Carry on.
Rkae:
First of all, he was Superman’s adoptive father. Secondly, hayseed doesn’t capture the unctuous ignorance and bigotry of hillbilly. While hayseed connotes a charming, if dim, rustic, no such term is sufficient to describe the mouth-breathing adherents to this kind of doctrine.
Carry on.
Ok, time to change my context.
I may have been a wee bit over the top. Too aggressive. Sorry I should have humbled my self a bit more before I typed comment 52.
It was a bit wrong for me to say that anyone is to ignorant. However, I still stand with the fact that (which i should have stated a bit more firmly) you wont understand the sacrifice and hardship until you go through the pains and sacrifices yourself, and thinking that your over critical insights will help when your not a professional yourself is like leaves blowing in the wind.
However that doesn’t mean you cant be insightful. That’s how scientists, artists, singers, and so on became great because they were insightful, and slow to criticize.
Here is a good example. Lets say your a avid fan of a football team, and you idolize everything about them. You believe that your team is the best in the world. Say your team makes a blunder; like they have a perfect season but then make a small mistake that costs them the Super Bowl. Naturally you as a super supporter would be outraged that the team could possibly make a blunder at all, and you start shouting, and sending emails, telling people that they suck because you believe that they let YOU down: A fan out of a million who is trying to preach to the quire. The problem here is that (theoretically) you hold your team in such high esteem that if they make a mistake at all, you feel like they let you down intentionally. That is what the article is trying to say, and then we believe that we have the right to criticize and correct just because they, the PROFESSIONALS, made a mistake. The fact is is that we all have professions, but what scientists and I as a soldier is trying to say is that if you don’t know or cant fully contemplate the finer details of the issue, don’t pretend like you do and harass them with your misinformation as if they were intending you personal harm. If its not your profession, don’t think your in the right to criticize because your not. What I was trying to prove is that we all have our own professions, but trying to pretend you are a professional of a subject completely alien to you is just a wast of their time as much as it is yours. Accusations like that don’t do any good for anyone.
(One more thing, Commuter 61. You are a gosh damn powerful example of what this whole thing is about. How dare you or anyone say that my fellow soldiers and I don’t sacrifice enough or it isn’t good enough for the American people. If you think you can do better JOIN THE ARMY AND SHOW US, OR SHUT THE HELL UP. Your comment to me is insignificant because your just another one of the many irate fans trying to tell me how to do my job when you have absolutely no idea at all how to do it your self. All you have are IDEAS how to do it, and honestly they SUCK and do NOT work. I’m not saying my blanket comment was any better, but thinking that all soldiers retiring or are still in the army are petty criminals just makes you an ass and just as ignorant as I claimed in comment 52. I can ether do a good job, or a half ass one. Its plain idiotic to shun away and insult your protectors of this nation. With the amount of hate mail we are getting, we could really do you all a favor and just stop all anti-terrorist activities, and let you deal with the road side bombs, rpg’s, and numberless dead we pick of the side of walls because of these terrorists. So think before you comment, or if something does go down I’ll just let them shoot your ass. I risk my life to preserve human life and keep the bad guys off of American soil. From what I have seen, and know about war, you don’t want it to be here. But I sure as hell don’t have to save everyone, especially if they don’t want it Commuter 61. Anyone saying that defiantly isn’t getting the point of my context.)
Paraphrasing a qwuote I found amusing from someone smarter than I:
“When forced to choose between publishing and perishing, most academics will make the wrong choice!”
If you think you can do better JOIN THE ARMY AND SHOW US, OR SHUT THE HELL UP.
Sorry, try as you might to turn this into a criticism of the military, its a criticism of you.
I know plenty of people who’ve been in the military throughout the decades, in war and peace–I’d say at least ten, if not more. I know several people who’ve been through in the past eight years, and I have a close relative in the Marines who just did a tour in Iraq and probably will do another in Afghanistan.
I’m pretty sure all would agree with me that you are exactly the type of person who makes military service more dangerous than it has to be in a crisis, and more grating and annoying than it should be during downtime. Indeed, you seem to fit exactly the kind of profile they’ve all complained about the most through the years, as if you’re the composite asinine one out of ten soldier who somehow got into the military, though they’re hung like an adolescent, dumb as a post, and cowardly as a kitten. Loudmouth, you’re on top of–the other qualities seem to escape you. Again, I have great respect for soldiers. I just don’t consider you one, and most soldiers I know wouldn’t either.
$10 Billion Dollars & More per Year For a Fraud?
Canadians are interested in results of what is going on about Climategate in Canada! As it has to do with our lives,lifestyle whether or not we are going to be living in a Democracy or under a Dictatorship?
Jim prentice has stated & PM Harper advocates this as well otherwise Prentice wouldn’t be uttering it”Canada will be paying it’s fair share of Carbon Emmissions! To the tune of $10 Billion per year!” Really, we are already $70 Billion in debt thanks to Michael Ignatieff & the Liberals who up’ed the anti to the Canadian debt load on stimulus!
This begs the question where Jim Prentice plans to dig the $10 Billion per year out of? Did somebody say more Tax?
What is so disheartening about that is the fact that now it’s been found that the whole Climate Emission scam has been proven to be Fraudulent as credible Scientests around the world who were previously locked out of putting their work and findings forth by Jones of East Anglia University and the CRU,were pushed out of the picture with thier observations and experiment results on Climate Change found that not only is the earth not heating up in reality it has been cooling since the 1960’s!
How much more fraudulent can this Scientific Data be? The United Nations and the Globalists are using this false Data at Copenhagen, to transfer our wealth to third world countries? Yet Environment Minister Jim Prentice and Prime Minister Stephen Harper feel so generous with Canadian Tax payer dollars that they are willing to toss in $10 Billion per year on the “hot air” that Ban Kai Moon and Pompus PM Gordon Brown and the rest of the Criminal Rogues that are involved in this bogus Carbon Emission Treaty! As the Bible says,”A Fool and his money are soon parted”! To request that PM Harper doesn’t sign the Copenhagen Treaty, causing Canadians to lose their Sovereignty and Freedom email the PM at: pm@pm.gc.ca,Protest Copenhagen Treaty http://www.gopetition.com/online/32485.html
There are four reasons the UN and IMF, Global Elitist Members Re: Ban Kai Moon ( Who has openly expressed his stong desire for Global Governance ), PM Gordon Brown, Bilderberg Member Henry Kissinger, Senior Bilderberg Member David Rockefeller as well as an unprecedented number of Dictators that run various countries who are members of the United Nations this Copenhagen Treaty that was designed to acquire four goals, the least of them being climate improvment or protection as Lord Moncton has stated!
(1.) To de-industrialize Sovereign Countries ( No Jobs keep you dependant on State ) ( 2.) Take your money and assets – Hence, Fraudulent Carbon Emmissions and Carbon Gases for Carbon Credits and Carbon Taxes! (3.) Take away your property (4.) Take away your Sovereignty and Freedom!
Check out what Government is doing behind your back at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU
TEN MYTHS of Global Warming
MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.
FACT: Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas (“heat islands”), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas (“land use effects”).
There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.
MYTH 2: The “hockey stick” graph proves that the earth has experienced a steady, very gradual temperature increase for 1000 years, then recently began a sudden increase.
FACT: Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the “average global temperature” has been rising at the low steady rate mentioned above; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.
The “hockey stick”, a poster boy of both the UN’s IPCC and Canada’s Environment Department, ignores historical recorded climatic swings, and has now also been proven to be flawed and statistically unreliable as well. It is a computer construct and a faulty one at that.
MYTH 3: Human produced carbon dioxide has increased over the last 100 years, adding to the Greenhouse effect, thus warming the earth.
FACT: Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout geologic time. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased. The RATE of growth during this period has also increased from about 0.2% per year to the present rate of about 0.4% per year,which growth rate has now been constant for the past 25 years. However, there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth’s oceans expel more CO2 as a result.
MYTH 4: CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas.
FACT: Greenhouse gases form about 3 % of the atmosphere by volume. They consist of varying amounts, (about 97%) of water vapour and clouds, with the remainder being gases like CO2, CH4, Ozone and N2O, of which carbon dioxide is the largest amount. Hence, CO2 constitutes about 0.037% of the atmosphere. While the minor gases are more effective as “greenhouse agents” than water vapour and clouds, the latter are overwhelming the effect by their sheer volume and – in the end – are thought to be responsible for 60% of the “Greenhouse effect”.
Those attributing climate change to CO2 rarely mention this important fact.
MYTH 5: Computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming.
FACT: Computer models can be made to “verify” anything by changing some of the 5 million input parameters or any of a multitude of negative and positive feedbacks in the program used.. They do not “prove” anything. Also, computer models predicting global warming are incapable of properly including the effects of the sun, cosmic rays and the clouds. The sun is a major cause of temperature variation on the earth surface as its received radiation changes all the time, This happens largely in cyclical fashion. The number and the lengths in time of sunspots can be correlated very closely with average temperatures on earth, e.g. the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period. Varying intensity of solar heat radiation affects the surface temperature of the oceans and the currents. Warmer ocean water expels gases, some of which are CO2. Solar radiation interferes with the cosmic ray flux, thus influencing the amount ionized nuclei which control cloud cover.
MYTH 6: The UN proved that man–made CO2 causes global warming.
FACT: In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:
1) “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
2) “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man–made causes”
To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.
MYTH 7: CO2 is a pollutant.
FACT: This is absolutely not true. Nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere. We could not live in 100% nitrogen either. Carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is. CO2 is essential to life on earth. It is necessary for plant growth since increased CO2 intake as a result of increased atmospheric concentration causes many trees and other plants to grow more vigorously. Unfortunately, the Canadian Government has included CO2 with a number of truly toxic and noxious substances listed by the Environmental Protection Act, only as their means to politically control it.
MYTH 8: Global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes.
FACT: There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that supports such claims on a global scale. Regional variations may occur. Growing insurance and infrastructure repair costs, particularly in coastal areas, are sometimes claimed to be the result of increasing frequency and severity of storms, whereas in reality they are a function of increasing population density, escalating development value, and ever more media reporting.
MYTH 9: Receding glaciers and the calving of ice shelves are proof of global warming.
FACT: Glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for hundreds of years. Recent glacier melting is a consequence of coming out of the very cool period of the Little Ice Age. Ice shelves have been breaking off for centuries. Scientists know of at least 33 periods of glaciers growing and then retreating. It’s normal. Besides, glacier’s health is dependent as much on precipitation as on temperature.
MYTH 10: The earth’s poles are warming; polar ice caps are breaking up and melting and the sea level rising.
FACT: The earth is variable. The western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer, due to unrelated cyclic events in the Pacific Ocean, but the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder. The small Palmer Peninsula of Antarctica is getting warmer, while the main Antarctic continent is actually cooling. Ice thicknesses are increasing both on Greenland and in Antarctica.
Sea level monitoring in the Pacific (Tuvalu) and Indian Oceans (Maldives) has shown no sign of any sea level rise.
Finally, governments have devised a way to tax oxygen (there are two oxygen molecules for each carbon molecule). I thought it was only a joke that ‘if they could tax breathing’ then they would. Well they’ve finally taxed oxygen and I guess the next step is going to be population control so as to effectively tax breathing.