NO no no ... please don't drop off from this discussion. I'm thoroughly
enjoying this discussion.
Robert L and Robert M, please continue this discussion and continue putting
out facts. It's about time somebody knowledgeable took the time to correct
all these anthropic global warming crap that keeps on cropping up out of
nowhere. It's like cockroaches, you can't seem to kill them all. Like
cockroaches, there're persistent, yucky and totally useless.
Jed, is one of those people who complain loudly about the bias in the Hot
Fusion community against cold fusion, but he himself remains oblivious to
the fact that he suffers the same malady when it comes to his pet theories.
And he appeals to "majority authority" as vehemently as hot fusion
researchers appeal to their "majority" status. One big difference though,
these Hot fusion scientists probably know that they are being biased but
continue in it for finanacial reasons (ie. Research grants), but Jed is
simply deluded, blind and biased for no reason at all. No amount of facts,
statistics and/or sound experiments will convince a person like Jed, It a
religion to these people.
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert McKay" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:How bad is this news? Jed Rothwell
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:43:59 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Robert McKay wrote:
I dont doubt that.. the climatologists themselves arent going to
benefit much either way (although Im sure many of them make a modest
livings out of it - and thats not nothing these days). Theyre merely
needed to produce those tedious reports.. they just need to keep
churning out talking points to keep the issue alive.
Look, that is ridiculous. People do not act that way! A person does
not spend 5 or 10 years slaving away to get a PhD without being in
love with the subject. You dont do that just to get some meaningless,
dead-end job churning out fake data for corporations for 60 hours a
week.
I'm not saying they don't believe in what they're doing.. there must be
lots of legitimate data showing climate change.. the climate does change
after all. The point I was making that is that the climate science is
simply irrelevant to understanding global warming / "the climate change
issue" which is better understood as a political and financial phenomenon.
I'm already regreting entering the discussion.. so I'll drop it, it
doesn't seem like we'll be reaching any kind of concensus. :)
Rob
