Climate change expert sentenced to 32 months for fraud

a reply to: Masterjaden
Turning a blind eye to the actual data because of sensational stories is plain stupid.
I have yet to see any actual evidence for the deniers side that makes any sense, instead the turn this into a political debate and rely on strawman arguments to support their claims.
There is no excuse for someone capable of thinking for themselves to reject the observed phenomenon of human induced climate change.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Gravity is also only a theory. Go jump off a tall building and then try to tell me gravity is only a theory, therefore something we can ignore.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Gravity is also only a theory. Go jump off a tall building and then try to tell me gravity is only a theory, therefore something we can ignore.

actually Gravity is NOT a theory, there are theories to DESCRIBE what gravity IS, but itself is not a theory

Fail again

a reply to: Simmderdown
And you fail by not actually taking the time to examine the plethora of data we have that indicates human activity is indeed causing significant climate changes. Instead you are trying to make this into a sub college level debate while ignoring the actual science.

Don't take my word for it, information is available here: www.skepticalscience.com...

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Simmderdown
And you fail by not actually using the time to examine the plethora of data we have that indicates human activity is indeed causing significant climate changes.

Don't take my word for it, information is available here: www.skepticalscience.com...

My only post here, where Did I say anything about Human activity and Climate change

Boy you people sure like to put words in peoples mouths

Ps that link was about global warming not Man Made global warming, its not the same

BRB i need to run to the store

a reply to: Simmderdown

Of course Gravity is a scientific theory - it is still evolving, and as we receive more data on how gravity interacts with nature, that theory will also evolve (there is still much to learn on how gravity actually functions, there are scientific theories based on observations, but those theories are still ever evolving). Arguing something when you don't seem to grasp basic definitions (or refuse to, and would rather argue semantics) smacks of ignorance. A scientific theory is not the same definition as the vernacular use of the word "theory". This has been expounded on numerous times, on multiple scientific topics, but people would rather argue semantics rather then actual data - arguments based on emotion rather then logic are easier to grasp, they don't require any type of "work", like actually looking at the data from an impartial view point.

a reply to: Syyth007

Gravity is not a theory, it exists

THe ideas on what it IS how it behaves is another story

General Relativity is a THEORY of Gravity

Theres a difference

but thanks for trying telling me that I dont know what im talking about

While laws rarely change, theories change frequently as new evidence is discovered. Instead of being discarded due to new evidence, theories are often revised to include the new evidence in their explanation. The Theory of General Relativity has adapted as new technologies and new evidence have expanded our view of the universe.

So when we are scientifically discussing gravity, we can talk about the law that describes the attraction between two objects, and we can also talk about the theory that describes why the objects attract each other.

originally posted by: jrod
This person being a scumbag fraud has NOTHING to do with human induced climate change.

Neither do humans.

originally posted by: jrod
To say this incident somehow makes one lose faith in the scientific community is just plain STUPID!!!

How can it not cause somebody to lose faith? A lie is a lie, and when somebody lies it is natural to lose at least some trust and faith in them that they will not do it again.

a reply to: Simmderdown

And general relativity doesn't fully explain how gravity interacts with reality, quantum field theory is also another scientific theory on gravity that helps explain interactions that general relativity doesn't, but quantum field theory still doesn't explain all of the interactions of gravitational effects - which will be corrected by future observations, and future scientific theories. Our theories on gravity will change with data and observation, as will our theories on climate change. Still, those scientific theories are backed by observation, data, and reproducible results, which is much different then the layman's use of the word theory. Gravity is real, as is Climate change. Our scientific theories on their causes/interactions will evolve with refinement of the data.

a reply to: bronco73

I just posted a link with a plethora of evidence that suggests that human are causing the climate to change.

Unless you provide some actual evidence, your one liner that suggests humans are not causing climate change is nothing but a smelly opinion.

I hope you realize the soot from that exhaust contributes in large quantities make a dimming effect, and hence cooling. Not all of man's dirty activities contribute to global warming.

originally posted by: jrod

I hope you realize the soot from that exhaust contributes in large quantities make a dimming effect, and hence cooling. Not all of man's dirty activities contribute to global warming.

thank you for showing exquisitely just how bi polar mad made climate change people are

ITS COLT "MAN MADE!"

its HOT "MAN MADE!

HAHAH thats brilliant

a reply to: Simmderdown

And thank you for your distraction. Do you not think humans are causing climate change?

Evolution is also just a theory, and there arent many if any who will tell you that is only a theory.

a reply to: jrod

Do you not think humans are causing climate change?

Climate change is a very broad term, you need to be more specific. If you are talking about man-made global warming then I would have to say it's very unclear whether human activities actually have a large impact on the average global temperature. Even you have explained how certain particulates in the atmosphere reflect light back into space and cause a dimming effect. We are also seeing increase sea ice around the Antarctic and as a result of the increased carbon dioxide levels we are actually seeing increased greenage around the planet.

There's a lot of evidence that the numbers are being manipulated anyway, this guy isn't the only untrustworthy scientist in the field. Global warming is only one specific type of climate change and not even experts can agree that it's actually happening or that it poses a real problem for us. We should be worrying more about things such as oil leaks, overfishing, toxic waste dumps, nuclear disasters, hardcore deforestation, etc. Those things really change our climate in a tangible and observable way.

Top MIT Scientist Mocks New UN Climate Report

Professor’s fellowship terminated for speaking out on global warming in the Wall Street Journal.

Yet another scientist, this one a Nobel winner, says Obama is dead wrong about climate change

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

No you really are not using any science to back your opinion up. Also the sources you provide are bunk.

The first link featured Richard Lindzen who is a notorious cliate misinformer and uses his education to justify his opinions instead of actual data and science.

The 2nd link brings me to wattsupwiththat.com, a site that is full of opinion pieces against the 97%+ consensus but again does not have any science or data to back up their claims.

The 3rd link brings us to Ivar Giaever another person recognized by the scientific community has a misinformer.

Do you have any actual data(science) that backs up the notion that humans are not responsible for significant changes to this planet's environment and climate?

Let me reiterate, opinion pieces do NOT count as data.

a reply to: jrod

The 2nd link brings me to wattsupwiththat.com, a site that is full of opinion pieces against the 97%+ consensus but again does not have any science or data to back up their claims.

Well there is very good reason to question that so called 97% consensus, it's clearly far too high to be a true consensus on such controversial science, and when one looks into the methodology used, the calculations are clearly biased to give a higher percentage. The consensus is much lower than 97% when you do the calculations properly. The following video goes into detail on this topic:

The 3rd link brings us to Ivar Giaever another person recognized by the scientific community has a misinformer.

It seems to me that any scientist who questions global warming research is instantly classified as a misinformer, so it hardly means much for a global warming skeptic to be ostracized by the scientific community. But in this particular case I think you are wrong, Ivar Giaever may be considered a crack pot by many climate change researchers but not the scientific community as a whole. He has made important contributions to science and even won a Nobel Prize for his work on electron tunnelling.

He is absolutely correct when he says global warming is becoming a new religion. People have such unwavering faith in such unclear science and it's not healthy at all. I think people have a tendency to latch onto global warming because it makes them them feel good, like they are protecting planet if they believe in global warming, and the people who don't believe must be evil or careless fools who don't know enough about science. They get some sort of self-righteous ego boost from it and then adopt a holier than thou attitude against anyone who stands on the opposite side of the debate.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Awesome a youtube video that is merely another biased opinion, thank you.

The 97% consensus has been independently confirmed by a number of different approaches and lines of evidence.

Ivar Giavar is not a climate scientist, he has admitted he knows little about climate science. In fact he is supported by the Heartland Institute.

Also the Antarctic Ice sheet may take up a little more area, however we have observed that the actual sheet is getting thinner. Regardless, on this planet we are observing a net loss in our ice caps.
While the interior of East Antarctica is gaining land ice, overall Antarctica has been losing land ice at an accelerating rate. Antarctic sea ice is growing despite a strongly warming Southern Ocean.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Gravity is also only a theory. Go jump off a tall building and then try to tell me gravity is only a theory, therefore something we can ignore.

Are you OK? Gravity a theory??? Show me where gravity is a theory. And if you can't...they your statement is either a lie or stupidity. Your choice.

Man made global warming or climate change is the argument. Or let me rephrase that...paying to be able to do things that pollute is the topic. The government wants to be in a position to charge corporations for the amount of pollution they can produce. It is nothing but another way for the government to take money from businesses which ultimately takes money from us...the employees. It also gives the government power of the powerful corporations the same way healthcare gives them power over the people. One day...government can tell a corporation to support something the government wants and if they don't...take away their ability to pollute...which takes away their ability to exist.

This is a power play. This is more control by an out of control corrupt government consisting of both the left and the right. This is control of your life to make you do what they want...or else. Plain and simple.

Want to prove me wrong...want to prove man made global warming. Show me a proven fact that man has significantly contributed to the natural cycle of the planet's warming. Not opinions...not theories...proven facts.

You know...like gravity

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: beezzer

Wow.

I used to respect you as a poster, but never again.

That post was completely out of line.

I find it stupid and ignorant to deny man's role in climate change

And I find it stupid and ignorant to speak in absolutes on a subject that is not fully understood yet.

Agreed, and add the chemtrails, oops I meant CON-trails to the mix, that apparently climate change scientists NEVER MENTION.

Because they have no effect on the matter whatsoever.