Here's one scientist's story about what happens when science goes against those with the money and power.
How are we to know if the accepted science is real or just backed by the most money and power?
Global warming
- Thread starter jsasker007
- Start date
How are we to know if the accepted science is real or just backed by the most money and power?
Bill
Administrator
4wanderingeyes
5 year old buck +
I remember the threat of the new ice age. I also can remember my aunt and uncle quit farming in northern MN because the growing season was shortened to much to grow crops.
jsasker007
5 year old buck +
As soon as they tried to connect a global issue with a woman's preferred product....all of a sudden hair spray wasn't on the list or in the spotlight with the HFC's. Yeah, it's easier if they get their way.
This is the coldest the St. Louis area has been for an extended period since I was in diapers 38 years ago. I do know that it's pretty easy to show that our winters of late have not been this cold, and we have had less snowfall. I also know we've been on this planet for a small fraction of the time it's existed, and we've been recording accurate data for an even smaller fraction of that time. Maybe we're causing irreparable harm, maybe we're just in the middle of a cycle in an earth that's done this many times before us, and will continue to do it after us.
Politicizing things one way or another helps nobody. Everyone has an agenda, and it usually means money. So instead of saying I agree with or disagree with global warming I go with this:
Leave things nicer than you found them. I think most of us here can agree that it will help. We aren't making new land.
Politicizing things one way or another helps nobody. Everyone has an agenda, and it usually means money. So instead of saying I agree with or disagree with global warming I go with this:
Leave things nicer than you found them. I think most of us here can agree that it will help. We aren't making new land.
Unfortunately it literally has to show up at their front door one day. That’s one thing so insidious about it... it’s just slow enough we’re very likely to wait to take real action before it’s too late; there’s a very reasonable argument we’re at that point already. Hopefully the grandkids will have to deal with the worst of it rather than us. If we’re dead, who cares, right.
GoldenTriangleIL
5 year old buck +
Nail on the head here. Every person on this thread relies on the scientific principles, knowledge, and rigor that created the device they are using to browse this thread. However they will not accept science if it challenges their way of life. Many have claimed it’s simply not possible for man to cause climate change. If there is no data or research that could convince you, then your position is not rational. There is no global conspiracy amongst thermometers. There is overwhelming evidence that mankind is contributing to global warming (which can manifest itself with extreme cold temps). The real debate lies in what impact climate change will actually have and if there are any viable solutions. Destroying our economy while “developing” nations continue with business as usual is not a viable solution.
I hope that I am wrong, and that the overwhelming majority of scientists have falsified their data to attract all that grant money as opposed to providing the real data to the fossil fuel industry which has limited resources to pay for such research.
I hope that I am wrong, and that the overwhelming majority of scientists have falsified their data to attract all that grant money as opposed to providing the real data to the fossil fuel industry which has limited resources to pay for such research.
Given the gravity of the problem, you and me both, I’d be ecstatic to find out it was the greatest lie ever told to humanity, I’ll eat crow all day. Problem is, it sure seems legit.
TreeDaddy
5 year old buck +
dogghr
5 year old buck +
Now see there you go accepting media projection while not researching both sides of the argument. As everyone knows , and Catscratch will give his highly scientific studies to back me up, wheat definitely is the superior grain.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
4wanderingeyes
5 year old buck +
You can’t even argue this, it is settled science that oats is better. I read it on the oatsdaily website, so there is no disputing it.
Bill Loser
5 year old buck +
Right there at the front door! "Honey could you please get thedoor?"
"Sure, HONEY, ITS THE CLIMATE CHANGE MONSTER! QUICK GO BUY AN ELECTRIC CAR SO HE GOES AWAY!"
LOL.
There is NO irrefutable data or statistics showing that himams have anything to do with change. But there is miles of data showing the climate has been changing for as long as the earth has been around.
We are all going to freeze to death...... no we’re gonna burn up......no, it'll be more nasty weather......no, its less snow, now its to much snow, wheres the rain? We need more rain!!! NO now thats to much!!!!!
Its a joke that never ends with some people.
My vote is screen, then tube, then cage with chicken wire the bottom 2 feet. If you dont do that you are not truly a habitat guy.
Natty Bumppo
5 year old buck +
Global warming and climate change are hot button issues to be sure...highly politicized right down party lines. There can be no doubt the world is getting warmer, correct? Is the struggle then whether this change is human caused or not?
Here's my take...it's the teacher in me. I know it's not quite as simple as this. But it helps.
It's kind of like the old saying..."I'd rather live like there is a God, and find out there isn't, then act like there isn't, and find out there is."
I'd rather we assume global warming is real and take action to try to stop it....and if in the end it was all based on false data or a great lie...well, we will have wasted time and energy. Assuming it's not real and then being wrong about that assumption is the worst case scenario.
Here's my take...it's the teacher in me. I know it's not quite as simple as this. But it helps.
| Global Warming | Humanity Acts | Humanity Takes no Action |
| Real and human caused | We save the planet | We lose our planet |
| Not happening | We waste time and resources | No effect...life goes on as normal |
It's kind of like the old saying..."I'd rather live like there is a God, and find out there isn't, then act like there isn't, and find out there is."
I'd rather we assume global warming is real and take action to try to stop it....and if in the end it was all based on false data or a great lie...well, we will have wasted time and energy. Assuming it's not real and then being wrong about that assumption is the worst case scenario.
Knehrke
5 year old buck +
I'm reading lots of great perspectives here, lots of stuff to think about. Except that cages trump tubes. That's so self-evident, it's beyond dispute.
I think that one of the mistakes scientists have made over the years is to cling too strongly to dogma. It makes us look inflexible. Science is by nature self-correcting. Theories that don't hold water are eventually replaced, and central to scientific inquiry is the tenet that we can never prove anything, we can only move closer to the truth by disproving what we think we know.
My entire career has been about challenging dogma. While is doesn't play well to the crowds to have scientists questioning scientists, I think that transparency, rigor, reproducibility, and the imperative to question faulty logic or bias is foundational to the process of discovery, and ignoring these concepts lends to the public's distrust. Without naming names, I can refer to fifteen years of effort in the area of scientific fraud and ongoing work documented clearly by sites such as RetractionWatch and PubPeer. I truly believe in challenging the system, and I've done so from within repeatedly.
Nevertheless, I also feel that it is important not to dismiss everything we read because we've been disillusioned by hypocrisy and agenda-driven science. Righteous indignation is a powerful emotion. It's easy to harness that power in the face of abject lies. But it also breeds contempt for honest folks who are working their hardest, and alienates potential allies. I see the left do it with weaponized outrage. I see the right do it in response to cancel culture. I see myself do it in reaction to what I perceive as ill-informed viewpoints, to my shame.
So, I'm trying to integrate what I've read here - some great comments and really well-thought out arguments - with what I believe to be true. Because that's the process. I think. But definitely cages...
I think that one of the mistakes scientists have made over the years is to cling too strongly to dogma. It makes us look inflexible. Science is by nature self-correcting. Theories that don't hold water are eventually replaced, and central to scientific inquiry is the tenet that we can never prove anything, we can only move closer to the truth by disproving what we think we know.
My entire career has been about challenging dogma. While is doesn't play well to the crowds to have scientists questioning scientists, I think that transparency, rigor, reproducibility, and the imperative to question faulty logic or bias is foundational to the process of discovery, and ignoring these concepts lends to the public's distrust. Without naming names, I can refer to fifteen years of effort in the area of scientific fraud and ongoing work documented clearly by sites such as RetractionWatch and PubPeer. I truly believe in challenging the system, and I've done so from within repeatedly.
Nevertheless, I also feel that it is important not to dismiss everything we read because we've been disillusioned by hypocrisy and agenda-driven science. Righteous indignation is a powerful emotion. It's easy to harness that power in the face of abject lies. But it also breeds contempt for honest folks who are working their hardest, and alienates potential allies. I see the left do it with weaponized outrage. I see the right do it in response to cancel culture. I see myself do it in reaction to what I perceive as ill-informed viewpoints, to my shame.
So, I'm trying to integrate what I've read here - some great comments and really well-thought out arguments - with what I believe to be true. Because that's the process. I think. But definitely cages...
If (big IF) the changes in weather that we are seeing are human driven, what is it that the average Joe American is supposed to do about it? I've planted tens of thousands of trees. I don't fly in private jets....like Al Gore and many others who say humans are killing the world do. I drive less than 12K miles annually. I recycle when feasible.
So what I am supposed to do? Buy a Tesla and make Elon Musk even more wealthy? Install solar panels in a state where the sun shines less than 60% of the time? Install a windmill so it can leak oil and kill birds? These aren't realistic solutions for the average American.
So what I am supposed to do? Buy a Tesla and make Elon Musk even more wealthy? Install solar panels in a state where the sun shines less than 60% of the time? Install a windmill so it can leak oil and kill birds? These aren't realistic solutions for the average American.
Last edited:
I cannot morally vote for a party who supports infanticide
Bill Loser
5 year old buck +
You can do nothing, thats the overall point from both sides. All the dems want is your money and power, Republicans right now are to stupid to know what they want.
Thats what it comes to. Give us your money, we can spend it better than you because we are morally superior to you. Why ? Because we said so!
Thats the unfortunate fact if life. What made up emergency can we come up with to keep the sheep scared enough to give is more money?
Thats what it comes to. Give us your money, we can spend it better than you because we are morally superior to you. Why ? Because we said so!
Thats the unfortunate fact if life. What made up emergency can we come up with to keep the sheep scared enough to give is more money?
