For Scientists, an Exploding World of Pseudo-Academia

Nasty............

I think this is a representative of schools in general.

It is going to be very difficult for anyone who is just seeking the truth.

A scam by any other name.

You mean the whole climate change emails, falsified data, and made up study reports debacle and stuff a while back wasn't a red flag to be watching out for pseudo-academia agendas to begin with?

Close. But you left out the word "denier".

Try a site entitled "Climate Change Daily"...you will find some strong denier arguments and as with this site some regular contributors ...I check in on it periodically but not daily ..generally i sit on the side of sceptics feeling the earths place in the universe is more a function of biology/and astronomical influence with our suns influence being the most profound.Mass balance when comparing humanities paltry output of pollutants compared with both biological and earth made(volcanoes for example) sources of similar or worse atmospheric pollutants is giving far too much weight to human sources in respect to climate change in my opinion...Note this is not peer reviewed but to me at least logical.

Go to 'Watts Up With That'. They were the first to analyze the ClimateGate memos and reveal the fraud and coercion the is the hoax of ACGW.

I looked, also went and looked at Mr. Gore's Climate 101 Video.

I lost allot of faith in Bill Nyes, but I recall when Gore won the Nobel prize and how he was praised on what a great man he was. When I questioned it, I was promptly put down, and was given a taste of GW fanatics, which made me even more skeptic to question GW.

I could not make people understand, that sure the temperature was rising, but the cause is what I questioned.

But it was! Thats how it all started and we found out about it. What is amazing is the amount of real science institutes being involved in the scam being put forward!

I had some example in my Ocean Acidification post the other day. Pretty nasty indeed!

"A parallel world of pseudo-academia"

Wow, so there is proof of a multi-verse after all.

And I just wrote hours ago that there wasn't.

Is this the Big Pseudo-Bang?

This will give Snopes plenty to do.

so in part others besides academia are willing to share ideas and insight without peer review..i predict academia will lose its status and there is the rub getting into their,how should i put it delicately,cloistured towers of privilige at taxpayers expense these days..OH for the days of tweed jackets,cardigans,pipes eh gentlefolk of the established learned profession..You are too slow to share in an age of lightening information transfer...Problems with this less than peer reviewed model for sure but then lets take just the pharmaceutical arena and look at what clap-trap they have gotten away with and continue to get away with regardless of the academic experts in their area..The academic experts have grown too muted...and insular and that at taxpayers expense is no longer justifiable.

We are all cogitating individuals are we not ?

Lets put it this way my esteemed follow.

It has nothing to do with tradition.

Its not discussing or brain storming ideas that are untraditional but what it has to do with is is trying to give legitimacy to a illegitimate thesis, pseudo-fact, ect..........

And then having legitimate ethical colleagues and their reputations and using their hard work to accomplish it, to use they reputations to legitimise their intent, misled them and then having them pay for it.

There seems to be an ethics issue here, and its the people without ethics that are having a hard time seeing the real issue here.

I paraphrase from Jeffery Bell (research librarian) in the article '.....easy money, little work, low barriers.......' Now the elite of 'modern' education bemoan the fact that their students have learned and applied so well, that words have no meaning and can be changed to match the movement of society's whims. Indeed, the worm does turn.

nice paraphrase.

Take heed martin wolf

Arrogance dims the seeker of truth..funding may come and go...human nature to understand is in the flow...of all our tomorrows ...unless of course the wielders of the power..chose to snuff out this momentous hour..when idea exchange is so prolific..and take it back to the arcane who have now grown so threatened by the very nature of exchange.... of information no longer quite so profane..

"I could not make people understand, that sure the temperature was rising, but the cause is what I questioned."

As many here know my back sorry in these debates I admit I started out on the believing side and being that I like to get into a good debate I did my best to research the facts, figures, and numbers behind everything I could get my hands on to supply my own hard hitting ammo in the fight so to speak.

What a big load of backfire that was for me. The more I read and learned the more I came to find far too much of the AGW climate change data was wrong, missing, or highly worked over and almost none of it was ever properly weighted against the estimated values of nature.

Unfortunately for me I try to follow fair scientific method and accept that what I thought was right turned out to be not so and what I thought was wrong carried more weight that it is getting credit for.

To be honest too much of what we humans do doesn't break through the average noise levels of natures numerical actions and a lot of what we do that does is actually by natures standards highly beneficial although rarely what ever sees the light of day by the media or the believers side.

Sure we humans do some bad things that need to be changed but we also do a huge amount of good plus the present theories have a second side to them that is not all the doom and gloom that the believers side would have everyone believe.

Toss in all the politics and agendas of those who feel that further change will take away power and convenience from them and give to others and I have no choice to but change my views. I really don't like the idea of my working harder and paying more so that others can keep what they have at my expense. Especially when the other side of the change appears to favor me far more than inconvenience or work against me!

Do I think we humans have an influence? Well yes but then statistically the lint in my pocket is influencing the readings on my bathroom scale too. (Ignoring/tossing out the fact that I am already fully dressed when I do the measurement of course. But that's a "different weight" so we don't need to count that.)

And some people have an awful lot of lint in their pockets..... ;)

Back when I was allowed to teach children I used to tell them that almost anyone can learn from his own mistakes, but smart people learn from other people's mistakes. That's why smart people study history. We all know the old saw (Einstein's?) about insanity being doing the same thing but expecting a different result. I submit two examples to support my thesis that insanity is rampant in academic and political circles. The politicians "know" that burning fossil fuels causes global warming. They would like us to reduce our use of such fuels, expecting to reduce global warming. Sorry, but that experiment had already been conducted. During the Great Depression of the 30's fossil fuel consumption was greatly reduced (30%?) as steel mills and factories shut down. Yet that period was the time of maximum recorded global warming. Does anyone explain why it is sane to repeat that experiment? For the last five years the politicians and the media have told us that they know how to reduce unemployment with more of the same economic policies, stimulus spending. Yet, the president with the best record by far for reducing unemployment in peacetime was Harding. When the "Progressive" Wilson left office in 1921, unemployment was worse that it is now (some say 15%). After Harding's "return to normalcy", in a year unemployment was down to less than 3%, an enviable record. Why don't the "smart" people in DC and the WSJ and NYT and the universities bother to read history and ask, "What did Harding do?"

Too much Lint in their eyes, ears and money in their pockets.