COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

The Greatest Scientic Fraud of All Time

nerfhearder said:
Yes they do apply. Blogs are as protected as anything else. Fair use says you can quote them tho.
Click to expand...
Only to limited extent and you can't do a wholesale C&P. And they must be attributed.

Miles was another person who didn't understand copyright, whining about people linking photos, after having a post deleted where he copied a photo and uploaded it to lit.
 
Ishmael said:
(edited)
If you can't produce the data, the research and the claims are bogus.

Ishmael
Click to expand...
That is exactly what I am asking for. Where is the data to show that money is the motivation for the global conspiracy of scientists to defraud governments?
 
someoneyouknow said:
☝ completely missed the point— reflecting either total ignorance or utter failure to comprehend GISS homogeneity adjustments.
Click to expand...


GISS%20Jan1910%20and%20Jan2000.gif



​
 
phrodeau said:
That is exactly what I am asking for. Where is the data to show that money is the motivation for the global conspiracy of scientists to defraud governments?
Click to expand...

OK, one more time. It's not as if I haven't explained this for over 12 years now.

First of all there are the researchers themselves. Literally billions of dollars of grant monies have been shoveled to these guys over the past 2 decades. Those monies represent job security and tenured positions. Tremendous power and prestige. And the fact that all of that government (tax payer) money has been awarded to the hucksters is not lost on them. Believe it or not even PhD's know where the money is going and farm it with diligence.

The professional politicians see this whole hoax as a means to also grab more money AND even further control the populace. When they control your health care and energy use they have you by the balls. Go read the Communist Manifesto, it's all outlined in that one little pamphlet. And I'm NOT suggesting that they're Communists, merely that they recognize a good political formula when they see one.

As Trysails little cartoon indicated, the shitholes of the third world AND the UN see the hoax as an opportunity to raid the industrialized worlds wallet, meaning the taxpayers. The UN has been searching for years for a way to directly, or indirectly, levy taxes for their own use to 'distribute' as they see fit. Translate that into buying votes, raising their own army, and last but not least, lining their own pockets (as if they haven't scalped enough as it is).

The taxpayers monies are driving a research agenda with a long term political goal in mind.

I hope that Trump institutes a policy that dictates that for every single dollar granted to the current crop of researchers that a dollar is also granted to those doing the counter-research. Let's have a real debate on the subject.

Ishmael
 
So if the current research is science-based, peer-reviewed and backed by evidence, what would counter-research be?
 
phrodeau said:
So if the current research is science-based, peer-reviewed and backed by evidence, what would counter-research be?
Click to expand...

How can ANYTHING be "peer reviewed" if the researcher refuses to make the meta-data available. And just who are these 'peers' anyway? Why it's the ones getting the research grants, that's who. They all know from whence the bounty of dollars flow and they can't cut a colleague off at the knees without becoming paraplegics themselves. It's like Sacco lying and Vanzetti swearing to it.

Fully 70% of ALL the research grant monies given away on Carter's "war on Cancer" were pissed away on dead end, and borderline fraudulent, research. A great deal of those grants were politically directed depending on the influence of the various congress critters. Fortunately outside the gross waste of the taxpayers dollars there were no broader societal issues at stake. No real opportunity to grab control of the citizens life. There is far more at stake here than the mere wasting of the taxpayers dollars.

Ishmael
 
All those climatologists who're so brilliant at bilking the government for those billions in grant money they're getting so wealthy from would never be smart enough to say they are doing counter research so they could keep bilking the government.
 
Ishmael said:
Well, I can certainly name two that aren't going to have any money. Michael E. (I'm a Hockey Stick) Mann, and Prof. Andrew (I need a lot of grant money too) Weaver.

If you can't produce the data, the research and the claims are bogus. The moral being that if you're a huckster and someone calls you a huckster, don't sue them for libel.

Mann in the poor house now

Ishmael
Click to expand...

That doesn't answer the question. If this is such a massive, and so far successful fraud, where are all the climate scientist living in Trump-esque opulence?

I don't see anyone cashing in. Except maybe Al Gore. He's not a scientist though, but a media twat.
 
"counter-research"

Heh. Cart before horse by definition.

Whether current climate science is also cart before horse or not, doesn't change that.
 
Liar said:
That doesn't answer the question. If this is such a massive, and so far successful fraud, where are all the climate scientist living in Trump-esque opulence?

I don't see anyone cashing in. Except maybe Al Gore. He's not a scientist though, but a media twat.
Click to expand...

If you knew shit about academia you wouldn't be asking such a stupid question.

Ishmael
 
irksomesauce said:
See there, trysail? Blatant violation of the 5 paragraph guideline and no cite for the copyrighted source it was c&p'd from.
Click to expand...
Looks like you're not aware the bible is public domain.
There were no copyright laws when it was written, and even if there were, it would have expired around 1500 years ago.
 
Ishmael said:
If you knew shit about academia you wouldn't be asking such a stupid question.

Ishmael
Click to expand...

I know of no perfessers with golden loos and stretch limos. But I'm happy to be proven wrong.
 
trysail said:

What is particularly sleazy about this is the FACT that the quotation is from a COMMENT made by Dr. Curry appearing on her website. Quoting a comment from a NON-COPYRIGHTED blog is clearly not a violation of anything. A link was given to the comment ( https://judithcurry.com/2017/01/03/jc-in-transition/#comment-833254 ).

There are sleazeballs at work.

My post should not have been deleted. Whoever did it, didn't do their homework and, obviously, fell victim to porky-pies originating with those who intend to suppress facts.


​
Click to expand...

Judith Curry's site is a WordPress blog, which does claim copyright for their bloggers.

6. Copyright Infringement and DMCA Policy.

As Automattic asks others to respect its intellectual property rights, it respects the intellectual property rights of others. If you believe that material located on or linked to by WordPress.com violates your copyright, you are encouraged to notify Automattic in accordance with Automattic’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) Policy. Automattic will respond to all such notices, including as required or appropriate by removing the infringing material or disabling all links to the infringing material. Automattic will terminate a visitor’s access to and use of the Website if, under appropriate circumstances, the visitor is determined to be a repeat infringer of the copyrights or other intellectual property rights of Automattic or others. In the case of such termination, Automattic will have no obligation to provide a refund of any amounts previously paid to Automattic.
Click to expand...

https://en.wordpress.com/tos/

while i didn't see your post, before it was deleted, if it violated the 5 paragraph literotica rule, you were wrong in copying and posting it. the only one playing victim here is you. of course, doing accurate research for things you disagree with seems beyond you.
 
about_average said:
...
Click to expand...

BTW: since you pride yourself on thinking yourself so knowledgeable, are you going to correct neci's stupidity, or you going to let her slide, too, just because you like her rag's stink better than you do trysail?
 
Last edited:
Liar said:
I know of no perfessers with golden loos and stretch limos. But I'm happy to be proven wrong.
Click to expand...



Meet Jagadish Shukla.


Science Agency Eyes Climate Change Professor’s Use of Millions From Taxpayers 3/23/16


The National Science Foundation’s inspector general appears poised to look into Jagadish Shukla’s management of federal grant money, much of it from the science agency itself.

The science agency has its own rules and guidelines governing grants, which would be applicable to the millions Shukla, 71, received from the agency.

“The longstanding cozy relationship between [government] grant-makers and grantees makes them blind to even the most obvious conflict of interest,” Bonner Cohen, a scholar with a free-market think tank in Washington, told The Daily Signal.


Shukla, a professor at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., led the charge by 20 college professors to urge a federal investigation aimed at scientific skeptics who differ with their views on climate change.

At the same time, Shukla, his wife, and his research center were awash in taxpayers’ money, according to an internal audit by the university on which The Daily Signal previously reported.​


​
 
about_average said:
Looks like you're not aware the bible is public domain.
There were no copyright laws when it was written, and even if there were, it would have expired around 1500 years ago.
Click to expand...

I didn't come close to even inferring the Bible is copyrighted. But you do know many versions of it that are published, both in book form and digitally on the internet, are fully covered by copyright law, right?

Where do you imagine the poster c&p'd his from?

trysail at least had the courtesy to cite where he stole his more than 5 paragraphs from.

See how it goes, trysail? Same crime, you get deleted and the other doesn't, and the ones attacking you will defend the other for doing the exact same thing.

The cunts on this Board don't like what you post, trysail. That's all it's about.
 
trysail said:
Meet Jagadish Shukla.


Science Agency Eyes Climate Change Professor’s Use of Millions From Taxpayers 3/23/16


The National Science Foundation’s inspector general appears poised to look into Jagadish Shukla’s management of federal grant money, much of it from the science agency itself.

The science agency has its own rules and guidelines governing grants, which would be applicable to the millions Shukla, 71, received from the agency.

“The longstanding cozy relationship between [government] grant-makers and grantees makes them blind to even the most obvious conflict of interest,” Bonner Cohen, a scholar with a free-market think tank in Washington, told The Daily Signal.


Shukla, a professor at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., led the charge by 20 college professors to urge a federal investigation aimed at scientific skeptics who differ with their views on climate change.

At the same time, Shukla, his wife, and his research center were awash in taxpayers’ money, according to an internal audit by the university on which The Daily Signal previously reported.​


​
Click to expand...

Not really sure what you're saying here. Are you saying Shukla was taking taxpayer money that he was supposed to use on research and bought himself fancy things and faced consequences for doing so?

It sounds like you're making the case that scientists don't get rich off of grants.
 
Liar said:
I know of no perfessers with golden loos and stretch limos. But I'm happy to be proven wrong.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty high bar to "prove you wrong" about a standard no one is claiming but you, frodo, and spidey.

So no employees, contractors, politicos, or anyone else does anything remotely dishonest to enrich themselves as long as the level of theft, bill-padding, corruption or dishonesty does not get them a golden toilet in a limo?
 
Conager said:
That's a pretty high bar to "prove you wrong" about a standard no one is claiming but you, frodo, and spidey.

So no employees, contractors, politicos, or anyone else does anything remotely dishonest to enrich themselves as long as the level of theft, bill-padding, corruption or dishonesty does not get them a golden toilet in a limo?
Click to expand...

No, but the thread stars, is even titled, with a silly hyperbole. I'm merely following it's lead.
 
Liar said:
No, but the thread stars, is even titled, with a silly hyperbole. I'm merely following it's lead.
Click to expand...

No, I think you very much outdid your self. In this country, the Democrat strategy of divide and conquer according to how much someone makes was a plan formulated to defeat Mitt Romney. Democrats the way they tend to do, were still banging that drum to their detriment with a candidate who easily could afford gold-plated toilets and limousines with money she got directly for influence-peddling and giving speeches at Goldman Sachs.

Here you Frodo and Spider-Man are all trying to imply that highly paid grant recipients and employess of grant recipients are not highly paid because they don't have gold plated toilets.

They aren't in the 1% but they certainly are in the top half of earners by a large margin. Median income in this country has been flat not so for people in government jobs and Academia which is essentially supported with government guaranteed, loaned money that's realistically, never going to be paid back. Median income in the US is $51,000. That's per household. I don't have the number handy but more than half certainly of us households contained two earners that means the actual median wage is somewhere in the neighborhood of 25K a year. There's not a grant researcher in the US that's being paid anything close to that.
 
Conager said:
No, I think you very much outdid your self. In this country, the Democrat strategy of divide and conquer according to how much someone makes was a plan formulated to defeat Mitt Romney. Democrats the way they tend to do, were still banging that drum to their detriment with a candidate who easily could afford gold-plated toilets and limousines with money she got directly for influence-peddling and giving speeches at Goldman Sachs.

Here you Frodo and Spider-Man are all trying to imply that highly paid grant recipients and employess of grant recipients are not highly paid because they don't have gold plated toilets.

They aren't in the 1% but they certainly are in the top half of earners by a large margin. Median income in this country has been flat not so for people in government jobs and Academia which is essentially supported with government guaranteed, loaned money that's realistically, never going to be paid back. Median income in the US is $51,000. That's per household. I don't have the number handy but more than half certainly of us households contained two earners that means the actual median wage is somewhere in the neighborhood of 25K a year. There's not a grant researcher in the US that's being paid anything close to that.
Click to expand...

The top dogs ARE in the top 1% and virtually all of them are in the top 5% when discussing researchers in the hard sciences and engineering.

Ishmael
 
Conager said:
No, I think you very much outdid your self. In this country, the Democrat strategy of divide and conquer according to how much someone makes was a plan formulated to defeat Mitt Romney. Democrats the way they tend to do, were still banging that drum to their detriment with a candidate who easily could afford gold-plated toilets and limousines with money she got directly for influence-peddling and giving speeches at Goldman Sachs.

Here you Frodo and Spider-Man are all trying to imply that highly paid grant recipients and employess of grant recipients are not highly paid because they don't have gold plated toilets.
Click to expand...
No, I'm implying that The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time™ is, at worst, a pretty mediocre one in terms of dividends. There are many more lucurative ways to apply their skills and clout, if scruples weren't in the equation.
 
Last edited:
Ishmael said:
The top dogs ARE in the top 1% and virtually all of them are in the top 5% when discussing researchers in the hard sciences and engineering.

Ishmael
Click to expand...

And the rest of them whether trying to do actual scientific research or doing incompetent or dishonest work are hoping for more prestige and more money as they grind out yet another study that had the conclusion written before the "science" was done.

There's no way in hell during the last eight years anybody was going to get grant money for any study that had anything but the stated goal of demonstrating the need for reduced carbon emissions.

That doesn't have anything to do with science.
 
Liar said:
No, I'm implying that The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time™ is, at worst, a pretty mediocre one in terms of dividends. There are many more lucurative ways to apply their skills and clout, if scruples weren't in the equation.
Click to expand...

Such as?

What "skills?"

What "clout" other than tbe fact that they are specifically in the hot-button field of the coming ice-age, I mean global warming, I mean climate change.

Climate-gate shows there are no scruples amongst some of the most quoted scientists in the field.

It's exactly like Rathergate... When he got caught with absolutely forged documents he claims that although those documents were forged the real documents exist he just doesn't happen to have them. Although Rather can probably afford a gold-plated toilet and a limousine he wasn't doing it just for the money either. He was doing it for the prestige. Rather still teaches journalism. Which is a joke in and of itself about both the state of journalism and academia.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Non-social man wonders where to go to meet the right kind of woman...
Replies
11
Views
443
StrangerDuJour
S
F
Richard Lewis, who mined life and neuroses for dark comedy, dies at 76
Replies
0
Views
80
FL30
F
Stewart_Pidd
How would you spend your last bit of time on Earth?
Replies
13
Views
275
thør
thør
VelvetGentleman
Looking for the title of an old porn flick (bonus anectode within)
Replies
4
Views
1K
VelvetGentleman
VelvetGentleman
Bigtitsbitch1000x
Boobies part 1
Replies
19
Views
3K
Bigtitsbitch1000x
Bigtitsbitch1000x
Back
Top