Settled Science, Hardly

Turns out scientists were manipulating data to make it look like global warming is increasing at a faster rate than it actually is. But, but, I'm told they would never do anything like that, what gives?
https://reason.com/blog/2017/02/06/climate-scientists-manipulated-temperatu
Original article.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...rs-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html

From Dailymail....

Yep, you always hear that phrase when it's a study that, say, "proves", gays all want to rape children, then you find out the guy with the "impeccable reputation", got fired a decade ago for shoving radical Jesus-freak shit into their curriculum.

Nope, not falling for it.
I'll wait until the actual real facts and evidence come out, not a bunch of sneer-faced hearsay.

Here's a nice rebuttal.

http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/news/more-fake-news-in-the-mail-on-sunday/

Okay, this thread is probably going nowhere, so I'll usurp it to discuss something that's been annoying me about climate denialists.

Let's go right after their stupid narrative.

The narrative in their head, is that a cabal of commie pinko scientists, in an attempt to hobble and/or destroy energy companies, because....reasons, invented global warming to scare monger the populace into accepting wind towers and the electric car.
...that would have to be built by corporations...that compete with each other for bids and customers....said competition being for profits...
...but somehow, communism.
...yeah....

And the only way we know of this conspiracy, is because of "brave whistle-blowers".
That typically work for oil companies...

No cognitive dissonance holding that story in your head?
None at all?
How do you hold the disjointed pieces together?
Do you use liquid bullshit, or creamy bullshit?

My thing is, what the hell does climate science have to do with political ideology? I know there are a lot of exceptions, but I think it's fairly safe to say that by and large the farther right you go, the less likely you are to believe in climate change, and vice versa. How does that happen?

It makes even less sense than, "I'm a liberal, therefore I think Chick Fil A sandwiches taste bad. "

Strongly held political beliefs affect people's perceptions of the world around them. It happens with every issue.

Congress prefers extra chunky.

Consider the political stripe of the majority of oil and coal company execs, hedge-fund managers, etc. IOW, who stands to benefit from the rape and pillage of natural resources. Add a religiosity that tends to subscribe to the Rapture, and they intend to drive their SUVs to a Judgment Day that's right around the corner, so why shouldn't they gobble up everything in sight while they wait?

ETA: Dayton put it more simply. "If we use up all the oil, Jesus will grow more!"

And, BTW, "settled science" is an oxymoron.

Who said anything about communism, dummy? Has it ever occurred to you that green companies have agendas too or is it only the evil oil companies?

Murica.

But also the right is having hot monkey secks with Big Business, who has a vested interest in suppressing the data so they can not pay for infrastructure to reduce emissions.

I don't think the politicians are nearly as stupid on this issue as they come across.

I like me some Chick Fil A.

All two locations in San Diego are way out the way of places I usually go to, though, but they've got the best criss cross fries of any chain restaurant.

I never said that. Nor did I indicate anything remotely like that.

Picture you're rich, old, selfish, spoiled, and entitled.
You're on your way out, you don't give a fuck about what happens after you croak, and you don't want your lifestyle to change by one little molecule.
Also, you hate the poor, so fuck them.
Is someone like that likely to care about the environment?
Haha!
Nope!

Now, imagine you're a moron.
Do you think you're gonna be susceptible to the rich, old, selfish, spoiled, and entitled guy's propaganda?
Hell yeah!
Especially if you polish it up with promises of "you can be me too!", and sprinkle on some conspiracy thinking.
Cuz conspiracies make everything look sexy.

NOW, picture you're poor, helpless, stuck in a shit factory town, and nursing a tumor in your belly from drinking factory runoff.
And you're a reader.
Which political direction do you think your compass is gonna swing then?

All right then, that was easy to figure out, wasn't it?

Wow, you really do see these people as mustache twirling villains, don't you?

Nope, just short-sighted, and in a bubble.

There are very few saints in business. I don't dispute that.

At the end of the day, I'm gonna side with practices that won't pollute the air we breathe, pump sludge into our drinking water, allow carcinogenics into our food or waste the few resources we have.

Oil will run out eventually. Whether that happens in ten years or a hundred is up for debate, but that's something anyone with working neurons should want to plan for. And certainly no one should want to breathe in sooty, dirty air. Look at what happened in China when they forced their factories to shut down for a few days for various events. There are a shit ton on photos on Google for that:

https://www.google.com/search?q=chi...N3_7RAhUExlQKHfu0CDsQ_AUIBygB&biw=360&bih=512

Perhaps the left are plagued by group think, a self-reinforced nod to each other that their way of thinking is best for everyone, bolstered by a like-minded media. Not all the lefties think eating meat is murder. Not all of them think "PIV" sex is always rape. Not all of them think a spike in an old tree is worthwhile if it mutilates a person to reprieve the tree being cut. But those are the fringes, there are so many other more orthodox left views supported only by theory and "consensus" (again, of the like-minded, basically).

Cheating at NOAA to hide data that suggests the warming took a pause around turn of century is no different than Mike's hockey stick trick - scientists are flawed human beings like any other, just as many are incompetent, mediocre, petty, or simply want to keep their jobs as with every other industry, but society attributes some mythic, religious-like trust in "science" that's only pierced by a skeptical, reasoned, inquiry.

You mentioned religion as a factor in denying climate change. Perhaps you can elaborate.

Already planned for Anna. Nuclear fission.

By the time the oil "runs out" (if it ever actually does) nuclear fission technology will be centuries old and well established.

Further down the road, nuclear fusion.

Yet further down the road (but not as far as people think) antimatter power generation.

Much further down the road (if necessary) harnessed singularities.

????where???

"If"?

Dumbass.

...which is why the majority subscribe to the belief in an invisible space wizard, and his zombie carpenter son....cuz they love science so much...

Apparently all scientists are Spock to the leftists.

I'd rather hedge my bets on someone who may or may not be Spock over say, the children of Vaal.

And good science shows proof. Not everyone else will understand it, but those who do can perform the same experiment and figure out for themselves if there's validity to the argument or not.

My brother is one of those regions types who thinks that because there is always new conclusions being made in science that the whole field is full of BS. I'm glad he hasn't any children to poison with creationist rubbish.

Can you show us the data by which you reached that conclusion, or is it just the "alternative fact" du jour?

Dumb threads are dumb. What is this the three billionth claim of this happening with every single mother fucking last one of the previous claims proven to be false? It is a regular denialist claim which always fails. It is their SOP.

It happens due to a deliberate propaganda campaign because the GOP sucks the cock of the lobbyists from the companies effected. It worked the same with their denial that smoking harmed health.

Ah, so this is the typical "applying standard statistical techniques to make your data better means the data has been manipulated and is worthless and this is clearly evidence that all of climate science is a conspiracy".
As I suspected.

Regardless of whether measurement artifacts and confounding variables are screwing with the surface temperature measurements, any claims of a global warming pause become obviously ridiculous when you remember that the ocean is part of the globe too.

You actually think there's data out there where leftists compared scientists to Spock?