Global Warming The debbil made me do it

On 2008-03-13, Dan Luke wrote:
To see how wrong this is, all you have to do is see how scientists who dare
to disagree and to try to publish research that would disprove the theory
are excommunicated by the scientific community.
So you really believe it. The Great Conspiracy is Silencing the Seekers After
Truth!

No conspiracy needed, just observation. A scientist who sees what happens to
others who try to publish disproving research is not going to be inclined to
try it himself. The rest of them just know that their grants depend on
supporting the concept.

You need to check the crowds you're running with.

I don't believe in guilt by association.

Nobody is right 100% of the time.
Only when they agree with you, right?

I'm not right 100% of the time, either. OTOH, when I see scientists
excommunicated (and I use that word quite deliberately) for daring to
publish in opposition to the idea that man is somehow wrecking the global
climate, my hackles go up.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

"Jay Maynard" wrote:

No conspiracy needed, just observation. A scientist who sees what happens to
others who try to publish disproving research is not going to be inclined to
try it himself. The rest of them just know that their grants depend on
supporting the concept.

Right: they're all cowards lying for money. Very believable.

You need to check the crowds you're running with.

I don't believe in guilt by association.

Nobody is right 100% of the time.
Only when they agree with you, right?

I'm not right 100% of the time, either. OTOH, when I see scientists
excommunicated (and I use that word quite deliberately) for daring to
publish in opposition to the idea that man is somehow wrecking the global
climate, my hackles go up.

1) Who's been excommunicated, and by whom? Let's see some hard evidence.

2) Apparently, you don't know how reputations are made in the modern
scientific world. By going along with the crowd? No; by publishing something
new that changes established theory.

3) You are still dodging the central flaw of your conspiracy theory: that
tens of thousands of scientists and their professional associations are
perpetrating a hoax. That is simply nuts, for the same reason all such
conspiracy theories are nuts.

On 2008-03-13, Dan Luke wrote:
3) You are still dodging the central flaw of your conspiracy theory: that
tens of thousands of scientists and their professional associations are
perpetrating a hoax. That is simply nuts, for the same reason all such
conspiracy theories are nuts.

No, I explained it. No overt conspiracy is needed, just observation of the
results of publishing science contrary to the AGW dogma.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

"Jay Maynard" wrote:

3) You are still dodging the central flaw of your conspiracy theory:
that
tens of thousands of scientists and their professional associations are
perpetrating a hoax. That is simply nuts, for the same reason all such
conspiracy theories are nuts.

No, I explained it. No overt conspiracy is needed, just observation of the
results of publishing science contrary to the AGW dogma.
--


Sorry, John; it won't fly.

You still have to believe that the thousands of peer-reviewed research
papers that have been published are faked. That's just silly.

And, once again: who has been excommunicated? What did they publish?

"Dan Luke" wrote in
:


"Jay Maynard" wrote:

3) You are still dodging the central flaw of your conspiracy theory:
that
tens of thousands of scientists and their professional associations
are perpetrating a hoax. That is simply nuts, for the same reason
all such conspiracy theories are nuts.

No, I explained it. No overt conspiracy is needed, just observation
of the results of publishing science contrary to the AGW dogma.
--


Sorry, John; it won't fly.

You still have to believe that the thousands of peer-reviewed research
papers that have been published are faked. That's just silly.

And, once again: who has been excommunicated? What did they publish?


If i ever want my image carved in granite on the side of a mountain, Mt
Rushmore style, I will definitely commision you to do it.


Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote:

If i ever want my image carved in granite on the side of a mountain, Mt
Rushmore style, I will definitely commision you to do it.


Ya think i'm knocking any chips off?

"Dan Luke" wrote in news:13tiqn5rn2lif15
@news.supernews.com:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote:

If i ever want my image carved in granite on the side of a mountain, Mt
Rushmore style, I will definitely commision you to do it.


Ya think i'm knocking any chips off?




Nope. THe mountain will only be made of granite though./




Bertie

Whoops.

"Jay," not "John"

my apologies