right...and ClimateGate never happened and Michael Mann never existed
fact is....yes FACT...is that when your organization be it a state university, NASA, or NOAA relies on the govt's allocation of citizen tax money to fund their, ahemm, research, these fuckers stop being scientists and just start changing the data to fit the premise the govt wants them to end with. If they don't, they lose their funding and cease to exist...basically work their way out of a job. This same manipulation of bullshit global warming data has been going on for decades and continues to be exposed without much fan fare because you global warming nuts gloss it over and keep reiterating a "97% of scientists" tag line that has been long since refuted.
Goddard isn't attempting to prover or disprove anything he's simply taking the data and rhetoric scientists are putting forth and comparing it to what they previously said and their are some very real inconsistencies. this global warming shit isn't science it's taking a premise and backing into it with fabricated numbers when the real numbers aren't proving what your boss is telling you to find
more proof of just how desperate you global warming nutters are ... you're incredibly STILL publishing shit from Michael Mann who was caught manipulating data through a series of emails and charts.
interviewing him for climate change is like hiring kordell stewart to be your quarterback coach but you're so desperate to get wing nuts on your side you'll still publish stuff from a known fraud? insanity (btw, i had to bold the term distinguished...that is some funny shit)
[h=1]Slowdown of global warming fleeting[/h]
By A'ndrea Elyse Messer
April 7, 2014
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- The recent slowdown in the warming rate of the Northern Hemisphere may be a result of internal variability of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation -- a natural phenomenon related to sea surface temperatures, according to Penn State researchers.
"Some researchers have in the past attributed a portion of Northern Hemispheric warming to a warm phase of the AMO," said Michael E. Mann, Distinguished Professor of Meteorology. "The true AMO signal, instead, appears likely to have been in a cooling phase in recent decades, offsetting some of the anthropogenic warming temporarily."
According to Mann, the problem with the earlier estimates stems from having defined the AMO as the low frequency component that is left after statistically accounting for the long-term temperature trends, referred to as detrending.
interviewing him for climate change is like hiring kordell stewart to be your quarterback coach but you're so desperate to get wing nuts on your side you'll still publish stuff from a known fraud? insanity (btw, i had to bold the term distinguished...that is some funny shit)
[h=1]Slowdown of global warming fleeting[/h]
By A'ndrea Elyse Messer
April 7, 2014
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- The recent slowdown in the warming rate of the Northern Hemisphere may be a result of internal variability of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation -- a natural phenomenon related to sea surface temperatures, according to Penn State researchers.
"Some researchers have in the past attributed a portion of Northern Hemispheric warming to a warm phase of the AMO," said Michael E. Mann, Distinguished Professor of Meteorology. "The true AMO signal, instead, appears likely to have been in a cooling phase in recent decades, offsetting some of the anthropogenic warming temporarily."
According to Mann, the problem with the earlier estimates stems from having defined the AMO as the low frequency component that is left after statistically accounting for the long-term temperature trends, referred to as detrending.
Here is another article on the problems with peer review
http://www.economist.com/news/scien...ults-are-looking-shakyand-it-open-peer-review
http://www.economist.com/news/scien...ults-are-looking-shakyand-it-open-peer-review
Peer Review, going just fine:
[h=1]Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers[/h]
http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763
[h=1]Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers[/h]
http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763
Rolltide fucking nailed it.
Read this over and over until you libtards get it through your ignorant thick skulls:
"FACT...is that when your organization be it a state university, NASA, or NOAA relies on the govt's allocation of citizen tax money to fund their, ahemm, research, these fuckers stop being scientists and just start changing the data to fit the premise the govt wants them to end with. If they don't, they lose their funding and cease to exist"
Follow the money trail, and corruption ensues.
Just like everything throughout history. It's called human nature.
"Global warming" is ALL politics and ZERO science. Oh yeah, and big money...REALLY BIG money.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Despite all this, there has been not even the hint of a second thought from the climateers, nor any reflection that their opinions or strategies could bear some modification. The environmental community is so deeply invested in looming catastrophe that it’s difficult to envision a scientific result that would alter their cult-like bearing. Rather than reflect, they deflect, blaming the Koch brothers, the fossil fuel industry, and Republican “climate deniers” for their lack of political progress. Yet organized opposition to climate change fanaticism is tiny compared with the swollen staffs and huge marketing budgets of the major environmental organizations, not to mention the government agencies around the world that have thrown in with them on the issue.
The main energy trade associations seldom speak up about climate science controversies. The major conservative think tanks have no climate change programs to speak of. The Cato Institute devotes just two people to the issue. The main opposition to climate fanaticism is confined to the Heartland Institute, the London-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and a scattering of relentless bloggers who have acquired surprisingly large readerships.
That’s it. These are boutique operations next to the environmental establishment: The total budgets for all of these efforts would probably not add up to a month’s spending by just the Sierra Club. And yet we are to believe that this comparatively small effort has kept the climate change agenda at bay. It certainly keeps climateers in an uproar."
k:Instead of confronting the fact that their cause has foundered mostly of its own dead weight—and the sheer fantasy of proposals for near-term replacement of hydrocarbon energy—the climate campaigners have steadily ratcheted up their bad-faith arguments and grasping authoritarianism. The result is a catalogue of exaggerated claims and appalling clichés, the most egregious being the refrain that “97 percent of scientists ‘believe in’ climate change.” This dubious talking point elides seamlessly into the implication that scientists should strive for unanimity and link arms in full support of the environmentalists’ carbon-suppression agenda."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/climate-cultists_794401.html
