When the Soviet Union collapsed, thousands of Russian nuclear scientists were put out of work. President Bush was urged to hire them to keep them out of trouble, but of course the US government always thinks it is more cost effective to spend trillions trying to put the cat back in the bag later. As a result of foolish decisions in Washington twenty years ago, North Korea and Iran are both nuclear powers now.
Fast forward. Scientists have families to feed, and like the rest of us will do whatever they have to to keep the money coming in. The US and other western governments pay tens of thousands of them to produce a pre-determined global warming result, and of course the scientists do it faithfully. Some might actually even believe their own BS.
If any interested parties have a financial stake in not seeing carbon taxes or Obama’s backdoor destruction of the economy through the EPA, they should be willing to pay. As long as scientists have no other options for keeping their families fed, they will do exactly what they need to do.
The Goracle vehemently disagrees with you, you fossil fuel funded FUDster, you.
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/178431-al-gore-to-rick-perry-climate-science-isnt-about-the-money-#.TlgXlmk3lVs.twitter
“This is an organized effort to attack the reputation of the scientific community as a whole, to attack their integrity, and to slander them with the lie that they are making up the science in order to make money,” Gore said in an online interview.
“These scientists don’t make a lot of money. They are comfortable, as they should be, but they don’t make a lot of money. That is not their motivation for doing what they do,” Gore added.
I think there are at least 4 types of climate scientists these days:
1. Genuine interest in climate science and trying to advance the SOTA.
2. Genuine socialist/communist, using climate science as a vehicle to change society.
3. PhD in ecology, forestry, sociology, psychology, etc, historically starved for grant money, clinging to the climate change bandwagon.
4. Clinical narcissist, using climate catastrophe bandwagon to gain notoriety.
They don’t make a lot of money. Just enough to keep them on the government dole.
Some who end up in climate modeling actually wanted to become climate modelers. Talked to a modeling guy working in industry who expressed such a wish. I told him “You would have to be a good liar for that” but i don’t think he understood.
So, modelers who love complicated models and believe in their models are naturally drawn towards climate modeling these days – that’s where the fun is for them.
Modelers who love their models but don’t believe in them go into finance.
I think there’s confusion between ‘climate scientists’ and ‘computer programers’….
…all you hear from climate scientists any more is “our most reliable model”
Climate science was just another field for computer programers to go into…
…and the pay is basically the same for them
Indeed. And programmers will program what they are asked to program. Its a hard science. If you want an equation of 8+8 = 15. I can make that happen. Every time. The ‘Harry read me’ file was a perfect example of such programing and the programmers that do such.
and i can do it in many different languages too!!
including languages that only contains special symbols like #@$!%^&
DirkH-
“Modelers who love their models but don’t believe in them go into finance.”
🙂
I can also be very lucrative. I doesn’t matter if the model predictions are right, but rather if the wealthy client *believes*.
U talking to me.
But I do love my models, since before day trading hated and then loved and then hated again
Oops-
DirkH-
“Modelers who love their models but don’t believe in them go into finance.”
🙂
It can also be very lucrative. It doesn’t matter if the model predictions are right, but rather if the wealthy client *believes*.
Just another piece of news you never heard of.
http://www.globalwarming.org/2010/10/15/renowned-physicist-resigns-from-american-physical-society/