View Single Post
Old 02-05-2020, 09:42 PM   #8357 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
redneck's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SC Lowcountry
Posts: 1,608

Geo XL1 - '94 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Boat tails and more mods
90 day: 72.22 mpg (US)

Big, Bad & Flat - '01 Dodge Ram 3500 SLT
Team Cummins
90 day: 21.13 mpg (US)
Thanks: 206
Thanked 1,252 Times in 640 Posts
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
It's a good point to make,and when I think about it,I have to assign conditions/context for differing views.
I believe that some researchers get a hold of some idea and won't let go,even if it doesn't ultimately pan out.People do that.
Some are financed by the fossil-fuel industry,via institutes,some universities, foundations,and fake,non-juried,non-peer-reviewed,science journals,lending their academic credentials,to 'dignify' what otherwise would pass as pseudo-science.There are probably more fake journals now than real ones.
And then you have the 'consensus.' National laboratory folks,university Ph.D.s and their graduate students,maybe even undergrads now,scrapping for funding,just driven by curiosity,and a sense of urgency to solve problems a lot of people don't know they even have.
Reading the actual research papers gives insight into the depths these people will go to,to ferret out some formerly,unknown aspect of Earth science. It's very multidisciplinary in nature,with a lot of cross-pollination of ideas and networking.It's some of the most interesting stuff I've ever laid eyes on.And they're required to share their data as a condition of publishing,plus provide all their methods.It's open,transparent.Referees may require many modifications of a submission before they'll accept it for publication,as the audience could be anyone,and the language needs to be gauged accordingly.
I won't read the IPCC stuff.It's at least one-degree removed from the actual research. I prefer to read the materials straight,no chaser.
Science is probably never 'settled',but I think they achieve a degree of probability which gives them enough confidence to go before Congress and make policy recommendations.
I feel like their sentries,or sentinels,watching my back,doing all the intel,warning about enemies at our gate.I'm really glad they're out there.

That’s unless you’re Michael Mann, the source (godfather) of the whole Global Warming movement. Then it seems that those conditions don’t apply...

Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.
I prefer to read the materials straight,no chaser.
I’m pretty sure a lot of people would like to see Michael Mann’s materials straight, no chaser also.

But he refuses.

According to your post. “It's some of the most interesting stuff I've ever laid eyes on.They’re required to share their data as a condition of publishing,plus provide all their methods.”

However, in the past you’ve said your fine with Mann keeping his data private.

So which is it ?

Share openly ?


Keep Private ?

The two are mutual exclusive...

The Following User Says Thank You to redneck For This Useful Post:
aerohead (02-08-2020)