It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Top University Stole Millions From Taxpayers By Faking Global Warming Research

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 04:26 AM
link   
Well here we are again, with another unfolding climategate style scandal in the Global Warming field. This just highlights what everyone critical of the AGW scene has been saying from the beginning! This is a top university lying to get funding! Oh and the government, what were they doing? Turning a blind eye! Taking what the university was saying with faith lmao.

Lying scumbags can be found here

Now is this definitive proof that AGW is a load of non-sense? No, not claiming that but hopefully people will start to look a little more closely and not take everything at face value just because someone in a position of authority says so.

BTW I did search and couldn't find this posted yet, which I found pretty surprising.

Original story breaker
edit on 25-10-2016 by Meee32 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 04:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Meee32

After I read how propaganda forces of the TPTB lowered the mean temperatures of the earth's climate records so that today's temps would show a bigger increase I basically gave up believing anything they or the government is pushing.. Maybe I am wrong in thinking that way, maybe not...regardless no amount of tax increases and job losses will make it go away...IMO



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 05:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Meee32

This is too funny - I wonder if they get "penalized and/or fined"



Many papers CCCEP claimed to have published to get government moneyweren’tabout global warming, were written before the organization was even founded, or were written by researchers unaffiliated with CCCEP Read more:



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

Yes there are a million and one reasons to not trust the government at all... Look at how people on here blacklist sites, for example natural news, why do they do it? Because Natural news has been found lying or twisting stories many times. I think they are right to black list such a site or at least be highly skeptical of it. Why isn't the same token used against politicians and government in general?

The first Climategate should have been enough to be honest but here we have yet another scandal, I just hope some believers will pause for thought.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 05:10 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

My betting is the same result as the first climategate, there will be an inquest and despite all the evidence that even the public themselves can see they will be exonerated of any wrong doing. Or at the worst a slap on the wrist.

Just completely unbelievable to be honest and as you say, too funny! XD



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 05:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Meee32

Actually...the reasoning will be...and is...this shows nothing to disprove AGW...it was just a false claim of ownership.

It talks of making claims to articles and research that wasnt theirs and also referring research that has nothing to do with
Climate change.

To be honest...that really has nothing to do with the entire AGW thing. It's simply theft of research by this organization.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Considering the AGW theory itself is based on research, the fact that a University faked climate research certainly does have something to do with the theory. To state otherwise is to be completely ignorant (unknowingly or willingly) of how a theory is developed in general.

Folks don't get it both ways. Either the research is evidence of a theory and therefore can hold up to scrutiny, or the theory is unsupported by research.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck





the fact that a University faked climate research certainly does have something to do with the theory.


But they didnt fake any research...at least I'm not seeing it. They just claimed other people's research as their own. These other's people research is what promotes AGW. This org should certainly need to be punished for it by denying grants. Again...they havent manufactured any research...just claimed it as their own.

It's theft at worst...
edit on 25-10-2016 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly


It's theft at worst...

... and intellectual dishonesty at best.


The government never checked CCCEP’s supposed publication lists, saying they were “taken on trust,” according to the report.
Source: dailycaller.com...

This is the larger issue. The faked research was blindly accepted by the government. That is not an isolated incident; it is an indication that research was not vetted, and that research supporting political agendas is an easy way to obtain funding. Of course, if you pay people to say something and simultaneously refuse to question what they say, people will say what you want. That is intellectual dishonesty.

I honestly don't see how anyone can read this and not question all of the research being done in the field.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Kaspersky blocked the site due to abad security certificate,for whatever that's worth. But I managed to read the first paragraph and it said nothing about faking research only that they stole research in order to defraud the government. That's a totally different thing than what the headline states.

Dailycaller.com just made my # list (something that should of been done long ago).
edit on 10/25/2016 by Kukri because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Meee32

What research was faked?



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Why didn't you quote the rest?

Nothing wad faked, research was stolen and what you quoted was about who published the work originally and how it was over looked.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Look at people still trying to worm out of this... It really is quite sad... What did they fake? Well they faked work being theirs, ie put their name on it. It is also fraud. I know that is a bit tenuous for some of you... So how about this...



The publication dates of some of these papers on the list are incorrect – giving the mistaken impression that they had been completed after the CCCEP came into existence


They faked the dates...


Some of the papers the CCCEP listed have nothing to do with climate change – such as the reasons why people buy particular items in supermarkets and why middle class people 'respond more favourably' to the scenery of the Peak District than their working class counterparts


They passed off studies that had nothing to do with climate change as if they were, ie they tried to bolster the supporting evidence for climate change with FAKE climate change studies. They were not real climate change studies now were they?

Then there is this...


Academics whose work was misrepresented reacted with fury. Professor Richard Tol, a climate change economics expert from Sussex University, said: 'It is serious misconduct to claim credit for a paper you haven't supported, and it's fraud to use that in a bid to renew a grant. I've never come across anything like it before. It stinks.'


If something or someone is a fraud you can also say they are a fake! A fraudulent painting etc etc... It's not something that is real... That is the point...

But no, you guys are right, nothing to see here, better to just attack the source lol
edit on 25-10-2016 by Meee32 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck




I honestly don't see how anyone can read this and not question all of the research being done in the field.


I do man. I'm not an AGW supporter. I'm just saying...if they truly did cook up imagined reports and studies...then it would be huge. This way...it's just theft.

The AGW meme will stand...sadly. AGW supporters will use this same exact excuse.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Meee32




Well they faked work being theirs, ie put their name on it.


You dont get it...the end game here is to disprove AGW. This isnt doing it.

It would give me orgasmic pleasure to blow that thing clear out of the water...but again...this isnt enough. Some guys will be thrown under the bus and the issue will never be mentioned again. Oh yeah...and this organization...will keep getting govt grants.

Now...if you had some proof that the original research, that was done by "legit" scientists, was cooked...then we have something.


edit on 25-10-2016 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: TheRedneck




I honestly don't see how anyone can read this and not question all of the research being done in the field.


I do man. I'm not an AGW supporter. I'm just saying...if they truly did cook up imagined reports and studies...then it would be huge. This way...it's just theft.

The AGW meme will stand...sadly. AGW supporters will use this same exact excuse.


Read it again, they did pass off studies that were not AGW related, sounds like faked studies to me, no?

EDIT: There was more I mentioned than the one you quoted... Also that is your end game, not mine... I am just pointing out the corruption and hoping it leads people to question more! Even the almighty government was fooled, if they weren't complicit! At the end of the day more studies being linked in favour of AGW the better for them. Doesn't matter if they are real or not.

GOV: Can you do some studies into the economic effects of global warming?

Scumbags: Sure, that will be £9,000,000 please

GOV: No problem...

Scumbags *Change some dates of old studies *Pop in some totally unrelated studies *Pop your name on other peoples studies Here you are sir, the proof you require, climate change is bad umkay...

This equals not fake? But some of them are not even about climate change!!!! lmao
edit on 25-10-2016 by Meee32 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Meee32

No. Studies are real...just unrelated to AGW or CC...whatever you wanna call it.

That's different from faking a study.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Meee32




At the end of the day more studies being linked in favour of AGW the better for them. Doesn't matter if they are real or not.


I know. Now they have to fake outrage.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Meee32

No. Studies are real...just unrelated to AGW or CC...whatever you wanna call it.

That's different from faking a study.


What? Okay lets say that you want a study on artic ice temperature and I hand you one about home freezers, that is not faking a study in your mind? Okay yes the freezer study is real but not in relation to artic ice! In that context it is fake! No?



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Meee32




At the end of the day more studies being linked in favour of AGW the better for them. Doesn't matter if they are real or not.


I know. Now they have to fake outrage.


This we can agree on XD



new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join