Re: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

Quote from: Saltzman Alaric on November 20, 2014, 04:06:45 PM

And how about those Republicans? Just today they decided to pass a bill so that when considering official government policy that academic scientists who know the most about a subject cant weigh in, but experts paid by corporations who want to block regulations can. Way to deny those scientist that spend their whole lives publishing in peer reviewed journals. American conservatives are just stupid. This kind of ridiculousness doesn't happen anywhere else in the world.

http://www.salon.com/2014/11/19/house_republicans_just_passed_a_bill_forbidding_scientists_from_advising_the_epa_on_their_own_research/

Also, as far as global warming goes, 97% of all journal articles that are peer reviewed agree that there is indeed global warming.

The debate in these journals is not weather the Earth is warming, all reasonable scientist believe that. The debate is whether it is fast or slow and human caused or nature caused. http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

The trouble with 'climate science' seems to be that it is very heavily funded by entities who have certain political interests. Most specifically to 'inventory and control' all of the resources on earth, and a 'crisis' provides a lot of tools to do this. What has happened (fairly demonstrably) is that being on the 'correct' side of the argument ('panic and give central governments unlimited power because we are all going to die otherwise') get grant money and academic fast-tracking. Those who are on the wrong side are induced to exit the field...so a 'scientific consensus' becomes a fairly weak sales pitch when one analyzes things.

The people who do 'make it' in climate 'science' are typically those who are not competitive in academia without some kind of advantage. And if one can invent data or hide and tweak it as needed to achieve an outcome desired by one's patrons, this is a huge advantage. The peer review process and transparency would ordinarily make such activities unreliable, but with a critical mass of similar 'academics' to participate in a closed-loop peer review process which seems outwardly to have some credibility part of the problem goes away. And if one can feed the results of this subterfuge into the sphere of the political patrons for them to make the policy they want, everyone is a winner. But the charade can only take place under the cover of secrecy.

These 'scientist' need to be able to live with themselves, but if they can justify their activities as 'saving the earth' they can get by. Some of the older one's have some trouble with it. In addition to Hal Lewis (a strong willed guy who also 'refused to sign the McCarthy era loyalty oath on principle' and paid the price at the time) Freeman Dyson who was studying global CO2 levels before it was cool is also calling bullshit.

Anyway, this secrecy and scientific corruption thread seems to be what the Republicans are pulling on. If it's effective it means that there really is a problem here. And the reaction from the 'panic now' side is even more evidence that there is quite a lot that is quite rotten here.