tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8213262.post6403370389755558667..comments2024-03-25T07:29:08.216-04:00Comments on 2 Political Junkies: How Can There Be A "Climategate II" When There Was No Climagegate I?Mariahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10439330154875628083noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8213262.post-8760662193130166122011-12-03T18:17:42.083-05:002011-12-03T18:17:42.083-05:00WD, the paper is missing two pages, 806 and 807. W...WD, the paper is missing two pages, 806 and 807. We don't know why the author says "that for every case of fraud that became public there were a hundred thousand cases of fraud that did" ... something, we don't know. Or how serious the 100,000 frauds were. <br /><br />The paper seems to deal with medical research fraud, and I would say that I think there is a lot of money involved in medical research, a lot of it in pharmacology or medical equipment. I think the difference with climate change research is that anyone who does get rich due to capitalizing on some aspect of climate change will do so regardless of the efforts of climate scientists, not because of them. People may or may not choose to listen to James Hansen, climate scientist, and reduce their usage of coal, oil and natural gas. If people do reduce or eliminate their use of fossil fuels, someone, let's call him John Smith, inventor, may develop a new solar cell technology, and become rich from it. But there is no particular way that James Hansen would profit. <br /><br />I also think that while individual scientists might be engaging in fraud, even large numbers of them, the entire field of climate science (or geophysics, or whatever you want to call it) would not be engaging in fraud. That's just too silly. The only people who would suggest that are either energy company executives or the people who they pay off. If you want to look for fraud, I suggest you start with the office of James Inhofe. <br /><br />All that said, the notion of formalizing the regulation of scientific research (especially that paid for with government dollars) with rules and oversight developed by lawyers actually sounds fine to me. Anything that further validates scientific research seems like a good idea.EdHeathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09109361235271107574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8213262.post-12276706264019483462011-12-03T10:39:04.120-05:002011-12-03T10:39:04.120-05:00EH and Junkies
FYI: LAWYER TAKE ON SCIENTIFIC FR...EH and Junkies<br /><br />FYI: LAWYER TAKE ON SCIENTIFIC FRAUD..<br /><br /><br />http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1967219<br /><br />For your info/edification<br /><br />Or is the issue closed to further discussion?Winding downhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06479832401305014242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8213262.post-49315998880499852262011-12-03T09:00:11.049-05:002011-12-03T09:00:11.049-05:00EH
Are Scaife and his minions watching you?
Good...EH<br /><br />Are Scaife and his minions watching you?<br /><br />Good cover story in Weekly Standard on climate gate stuff...does Scaife back the WS? Maybe Murdoch?<br /><br />Don't bother with it ..considering the source..Winding downhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06479832401305014242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8213262.post-37091578096141730232011-11-30T21:08:36.018-05:002011-11-30T21:08:36.018-05:00HTTT, equating a climate scientist with a pedophil...HTTT, equating a climate scientist with a pedophile is like replacing one front-running Republican candidate with multiple accusations of sexual misconduct and shaky command of the issues with another candidate with a history of several affairs and hypocritical criticism of entities and politicians he connects to those entities while taking money from at least one of those entities. <br /><br />You conservatives accuse climate scientists, including all the national academies of science of the world, manufactured the climate science hoax to get government research dollars (despite the fact that since government revenues are down while energy industries are setting profit records and therefore if they wanted money it would be a lot smarter of these PhD's to run studies disproving climate change for the Koch brothers). <br /><br />Yet when someone questions Steve McIntyre's motivation for ignoring all the scientific journals and evidence and taking the same side as the oil/gas/coal megaindutrialcomplex, y'all act all sad and weepy that someone dares to suggest that following the money might make sense. <br /><br />By the way, y'all think Julian Assange is the worst criminal in the world for revealing what our government is doing in the world, yet you have no problem with the repeated theft of private emails. It's OK with you if Dick Cheney conceals records of conspiring with energy company executives, yet you want to let the whole world to know about the walking at lunch schedule. Double standard? Oh right, Republican. <br /><br />And why does Steve McIntyre say he is linking to the Atlantic, when in fact he links to the American Spectator? Y'all lie all the time.EdHeathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09109361235271107574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8213262.post-48244631832750405142011-11-30T11:37:53.623-05:002011-11-30T11:37:53.623-05:00Michael Mann is beyond reproach.
"Independent...Michael Mann is beyond reproach.<br />"Independent" investigations performed by Penn State have cleared him of any misconduct or inappropriate behavior in Climategate.<br /><br /><a href="http://climateaudit.org/2011/11/10/penn-state-president-fired/" rel="nofollow">Penn State would never coverup any misconduct or inappropriate behavior by the people they employ.</a> ;)Social Justice NPC Anti-Paladin™https://www.blogger.com/profile/14533575674043719198noreply@blogger.com