Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This has already been covered in a different thread.
His article was rejected from a journal and he's upset.
That's the whole story.
That is clearly not the whole story, unless you are willing to simply dismiss evidence that doesn't comport with your narrative. Is that your common practices?
The guy said he received hundreds of emails. He was called a 'defector,' 'crybaby, and a German physicist compared his joining the think tank to someone joining the KKK. He felt like he had to resign from the thinktank, and he did.
This is a bizarre debate format for a science. It really is more like a debate between a medieval cleric and group of heretics.
That is clearly not the whole story, unless you are willing to simply dismiss evidence that doesn't comport with your narrative. Is that your common practices?
The guy said he received hundreds of emails. He was called a 'defector,' 'crybaby, and a German physicist compared his joining the think tank to someone joining the KKK. He felt like he had to resign from the thinktank, and he did.
This is a bizarre debate format for a science. It really is more like a debate between a medieval cleric and group of heretics.
Oh I am sure scientist make fun of other scientists all the time, this isn't anything outside of normal. And this guy is being a "crybaby."
That's been going on for as long as the planet has been orbiting the Sun. Or, as long as it's had a climate, at least.
And man has never had the slightest influence on it.
Even the leftist loons who scream about how we have to use government to change everything, go back to the stone age, etc., to prevent some unknown catastrophe, have never been able to come up with even ONE study or example that backs up their claims.
What's funny is that, when they do name some study, it invariably turns out to be nothing but a bunch of long-winded claims which, finally, refer to some other "study" for proof. And what is in that other "study"? You guessed it - more long-winded claims, and eventually a reference to yet another study. And you can guess what is in that one, too.
The leftist global-whatever loons have been insisting on impending doom, and the urgent need to give government massive powers to change every bit of our lives to "avoid" that doom, for at least 40 years by my count. Literally billions of dollars have changed hands - usually into their hands - all over the world. And they still haven't come up with one shred of proof that man has had the least bit of influence on the climate changes that happen regularly around us. Nor is there any proof that man can do anything to change it.
***40 YEARS*** of screaming, caterwauling, and doomsaying. All without the slightest proof. Just references to references to references, ad infinitum. And demands that they be given complete power over all of us, and that we send more and more of our resources to them, to change what they cannot change.
Leftist loons are screaming about how we have to go back to the stone age? Well, that's odd....I haven't seen anyone advocating that, leftist or otherwise.
Surely you could find something to back up your statement? Anything at all? Thanks.
"I asked Prof Bengtsson to substantiate his allegations by clarifying the number of scientists who had allegedly been pressurising him to the point that he feared for his safety. I also requested to see the full text of the reports of the scientists who had peer-reviewed his rejected study due its scientific "errors." He did not respond to my request for comment
Thanks for posting this - no fatwa would be complete without a Guardian no-holds-barred character assassination.
This is a bizarre debate format for a science. It really is more like a debate between a medieval cleric and group of heretics.
This is exactly what it is like. You keep the BS out of science. A hypothesis is disproved by showing evidence to the contrary, not by burning the researcher at the stake. Fear should have no place in science. Free thought should not be discouraged; it should be encouraged. If it's wrong, evidence for its error is shown. It's clinical. It's professional. If it cannot be proven to be wrong, no conclusion is made until evidence one way or the other is presented. Lighting crosses on fire is not acceptable in science. Neither is popular vote.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
