Scientists knew a century ago that continents had to move, and that major climate change was natural. It took many decades for the consensus to accept continental drift, and the “consensus” still claims that climate change is man made.
Conclusion : the hockey team is probably the stupidest group of scientists in history.
Steven, we owe you , Steve McIntyre , Anthony Watts , and a very few others for getting the word out about this AGW scam. Before you guys stepped up to face the scam and expose it , we were getting steam rolled by the lies. I knew enough to doubt what the AGW crowd was saying , but I did not know enough to refute it. With Anthony and Steve McIntyre jumping all over the science lies of the AGW crowd and with you pounding the AGW crowd with the historical record we are seeing more and more of the average people come to realize they are being lied to and stolen from in the name of global warming.
Thanks!
I agree, John. Climategate emails and documents that were released in November 2009 exposedthree cancerous growths that had developed and flourished out-of-sight for sixty-four years (2009 – 1945 = 64 yrs).
Why? World leaders reacted in fear to the “nuclear fires” ignited by the sudden release of energy (E) stored as mass (m) in the cores of uranium atoms and plutonium atoms on 6 August 1945 and 9 August 1945 to consume Hiroshima and Nagasaki, respectively.
1.) A cancerous growth of deceit flourished on government science, nourished by generous awards, grant funds and tenure for compliant scientists.
2.) A cancerous totalitarian government used the control of information and advances in electronic surveillance to take control of citizens in the manner George Orwell predicted in a novel written in 1948, “1984”.
http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/
3.)Productive, intellectually honest scientists, like the late Dr. Dwarka Das Sabu [1-6], suffered immense stress [7] and were driven from science.
Here’s an outline of the events that almost destroyed the integrity of science and constitutional government. http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-132
References:
1. D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, “Superheavy elements: Were they present in meteorites?” Trans. Missouri Acad. Sci. 5, 16-21 (1971).
2. O. K. Manuel, E. W. Hennecke, and D. D. Sabu, “Xenon in carbonaceous chondrites”, Nature 240, 99-101 (1972). http://www.omatumr.com/archive/XenonInCarbonaceousChondrites.pdf
3. O. K. Manuel and D. D. Sabu, “Elemental and isotopic inhomogeneities in noble gases: The case for local synthesis of the chemical elements”, Trans. Missouri Acad. Sci. 9, 104-122 (1975).
4. D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, “The xenon record of element synthesis”, Copyright lecture notes for paper no. P58, presented at the 1976 AGU Meeting, Sheraton Hotel, Washington DC, April 14 (1976).
5. D. D. Sabu and O. K. Manuel, “Xenon record of the early solar system”, Nature 262, 28-32 (1976).
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v262/n5563/abs/262028a0.html
6. O. K. Manuel and D. D. Sabu, “Strange xenon, extinct superheavy elements and the solar neutrino puzzle”, Science 195, 208-209 (1977).
http://www.omatumr.com/archive/StrangeXenon.pdf
7.. Dinesh Sabu, Unbroken Glass, a documentary (in progress, 2012)
http://kartemquin.com/films/unbroken-glass
Hate to pick nits, but the hypothesis of continental drift was replaced by the theory of plate techtonics. There is a big distinction between the two, at least for geologists.
The disagreement with Wegner’s theory was a refusal to accept that the continents moved. The semantics isn’t important.
Hey Steven! Like I said, it is a distinction for geologists, AND nit picking. We know what you are saying, I just thought I would throw that out there as an FYI.
Keep up the noble work, driving the alarmists batsh*t crazy! 😉
OK -. You know that I am an ex-geologist?
Hey Steven! There is no such thing as an ‘ex-geologist’! 😉
I knew you had at least some training, and when I was a student my professors cut a clear distinction between the two. The old school drift idea of course assumed heavier continental ‘plates’ plowing thru lighter oceanic ‘plates’. My scholastic experience was that drift was looked upon as a highly discredited idea that was replaced with a much more workable explanation of techtonics.
My professors would never have allowed me to substitute one for the other, as I saw classmates corrected on a regular basis. I have noticed over the years that when and where one attended school can explain the difference in terminology one employs, and that is no slight.
Now I’ve picked this nit to death, and wasted enough of your time.
Thanks for the privilege of posting.
“Conclusion : the hockey team is probably the stupidest group of scientists in history.”
Or the craftiest!!! Follow the Money!!!
the “consensus” still claims that climate change is man made
An earlier Pew poll showed only 19% of Republicans believed in man-made global warming. Adding to an increasing sense that this Pew poll result is no fluke, is a new poll showing only 17% of conservative Canadians (voted for the Tories) “are concerned” about global warming: http://www.660news.com/news/local/article/365630–new-poll-says-global-warming-is-not-a-major-environmental-concern
So, obviously, among the people, there’s is no consensus, none at all, and we could bet this applies to scientists now also.
Steve had the guts to go public at considerable risk and confirm what we suspected about this scam. At some point, the alarmist lies reached a tipping point for anyone with knowledge of weather/climate history.
I agree, Andy, “Steve had the guts to go public.”
Unfortunately, the lives and careers of many of my former students and colleagues were also damaged while I doggedly insisted that eventually “truth will out” !
I refused to even consider “conspiracy talk”, until leaders of the scientific community revealed themselves by their surprising reactions to the Climategate emails and documents that were released in late November 2009.
What a sad, sad state of affairs for our once proud Western scientific community.