Global warming? Not a chance
- Thread starter WVPATX
- Start date
Here's how these things work. They have a big meeting for scientists in a particular field. Anybody or almost anybody can go and present what they're doing. Anybody else can watch or not watch any particular talk. Since there are always a bunch of talks going on at once you have to pick and choose.
This is part of how life is for these scientists. They work on their particular idea, they present it, other people in the field who've gone through the schedule and who feel like they'd be interested in this particular talk based on its title go and watch it and ask questions. The talk are usually short, maybe 12 minutes with 3 minutes for questions. They try to package maybe a half dozen talks on the same general topic together in a session so if you're interested in one particular topic you can go to one place at one time and get nothing but that general topic.
Maybe if someone is really interested they talk to the speaker afterwards and they exchange e-mails and start a long distance e-conversation about the topic.
The whole thing is really kinda cool in a way. These smart, geeky people are figuring out all this amazing, obscure stuff about the world while everyone else is busy watching The Kardashians.
The ideas get out there and get debated and whichever ones are deemed best gain favor. Constant competition. There's no dogma about how Idea X or Person Y is always right, just because it's always right. And that's why they make so much progress in the long run.
The websites pushing politics pick whatever particular item they want from these conferences while ignoring the rest, making it seem as if the few findings they push are important findings that everyone now agrees on. In reality it's a giant mish mash of ideas, being bandied about by a bunch of people.
Here is the website for the conference mentioned in that article. If you have the time and inclination, go check out the many, many different talks and posters given. And this is just one conference on one general subject (Astronomy) in one country (England). This stuff is always going on everywhere in every field. This is how science works, not The Daily Mail or WUWT or Al Gore or Breitbart.
http://nam2015.org/
This is how science works?
Remember Michael Mann's fallacious hockey stick?
Remember Climategate's "Hide the decline?"
Remember those scientists in Climategate conspiring to stop dissenting views in scientific journals? And remarked how they would stop them from peer review?
Remember those scientists that said the Arctic would be ice free right now?
Remember the scientists that claimed the polar bears were dying off, again fallaciously.
Remember NOAA's temperature "adjustments" that are now under investigation.
It's not science anymore, it's becoming a cult.
You're free to show everyone else how being a scientist is properly done. Go for it.
Like I posted, these scientists have all been wrong and have either dramatically overstated their prediction or actually been fraudulent. It's becoming a cult as a recent Nobel Prize winning scientist observed. They are destroying their credibility and doing irreparable harm to true science. BTW, I didn't even post the moronic positions of Billy Nye.
What attacked? He said how terrible all these scientists are so I told him if they're so bad he ought to do it himself. Seems pretty reasonable to me. You're free to do it too if you think the ones already doing it are so bad.
Just out of curiosity, what other branches or aspects of science are all wrong? Or is it just the one that happens to be a hot political issue?
I posted facts. Mann's hockey stick has been thoroughly debunked. Climategate revealed hide the decline and the war on skeptical scientists. The climate models have all been wrong. The predictions of more extreme weather events have been wrong. The arctic still has ice. Polar bears are thriving. At what point do you admit that skepticism is warranted?