The global warming “consensus” has been maintained by silencing scientists through funding. Those who don’t tow the line, don’t get paid. 97% of scientists understand that.
But as more scientists retire, their interest turns towards setting the record straight. Once they are out of the clutch of the government propaganda ponzi scheme, they unleash.
www.nzcpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Global-Warming-Dr-David-Kear.pdf
Reblogged this on Quixotes Last Stand and commented:
Another one of these things that you should take the time to read all the way to the end.
I think that’s “toe the line”
Beat me to it.
As they retire, they are no longer dependent upon a government hand out. So they have their “come to Jesus” period.
I hadn’t appreciated this. The revenge of the old, as alarmists pigeonhole skeptics as just being old laypersons. Especially scientists have a legacy to preserve, and though most were terribly silent instead of martyrs, that puts extra pressure on them to clear their names of this mess later on since history will remember this era’s “science” only too well.
Chemists live and work very long though and aren’t associated with AGW enough for it to concern them, I note, since they already mock softer sciences as being just kind of silly, so climatology is off their radar as much as is anthropology or sociology. Physicists are more on the line due to their clear understanding of systems modeling and its foibles, as are uh, biologists who are fully aware of the carbon cycle that is now being called pollution.
Yet every scientist’s top two journals are Science and Nature and after scientists failed to protest both of their peer review corruptions that allowed Steig’s phony red Antarctica cover and Marcott’s pure artifact hockey stick blade, now all of their work is put in question as to the quality of its peer review. And wait for the massive public backlash against all of science and especially the liberal arts that conservatives have already just tried to defund by 44%. Ouch!
In synthetic chemistry we always reported yields, but about the time I ditched academia, in the related field of nanotech fabrication, hype and mere proof of concept was getting all the attention of these top journals, minus any requirement to even mention how well a procedure actually worked or not. So you train an electron microscope in a tiny area that looks perfect and publish away. My trained obsession with adequate yields was discouraged in a nanotech lab at Harvard. There was pressure to publish and move on rather than build up a kit of perfected procedures you could then use to move up in sophistication with instead of just move on. Hype isn’t corrupt though, just a fast lane policy for industry and slow lane labs to tidy up later. But the really big money attaches to hype, does it ever! Thanks DARPA.
There is a similar thing in biological sciences. It is called the western blot. It should be called as it is – Rorschach. Want to make the case that any protein interacts with any other protein? Western blot. There is nothing you can’t say with it.
People think science is so pure. If they only knew they would be revolted.
Sadly many scientists do not read enough Einstein, or they ignore his sage advice.
“Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.”
-Albert Einstein
Whoring yourself does not increase your value, but it can make you a success.
‘Toe the line’, please!
No, really, it should be ‘toe the line’; look it up.