July 14, 2010
— Ace I'm cynical. I think I'm even more cynical than most of you, and that's saying something.
So when I read that a Penn State investigation had "cleared" Michael Mann of wrongdoing, I assumed, of course, it was a whitewash, but I also assumed that they at least, you know, claimed things like "while the evidence is provocative, there is not enough to prove a case against Professor Mann..." That is, I thought they'd at least dress it up in that sort of judicial language, and rest their claims on the case not being established beyond a reasonable doubt, and so on.
Well, that's what I assumed.
Have you read this?
This, my dear friends, is amazing.
Recall that one of the biggest knocks on climate "science" is that it never makes a prediction that can be verified (actually, it does, but they're always wrong), but that "proof" of its veracity comes from the fact that everyone's models agree with everyone else's.
So, in other words, we know the theory is true because people who believe in the theory agree with other people who believe in the theory that the theory is true.
Look, the models they make, based on the same assumptions they agree on, all say about the same thing! Q.E.D. That's Latin for "How my ass taste, bitch?"
Right? So that's a big problem right there. There is no proof of this except that the people pushing it all agree with each other.
Now, if you can believe it (and I still can't; this is stunning) this is precisely the reason they claim that Michael Mann cannot possibly be guilty of scientific malfeasance.
Honestly, if you haven't read this, get ready to catch your falling jaw.
The Penn State inquiry exonerating Michael Mann -- the paleoclimatologist who came up with "the hockey stick" -- would be difficult to parody. Three of four allegations are dismissed out of hand at the outset: the inquiry announces that, for "lack of credible evidence", it will not even investigate them. (At this, MIT's Richard Lindzen tells the committee, "It's thoroughly amazing. I mean these issues are explicitly stated in the emails. I'm wondering what's going on?" The report continues: "The Investigatory Committee did not respond to Dr Lindzen's statement. Instead, [his] attention was directed to the fourth allegation.") Moving on, the report then says, in effect, that Mann is a distinguished scholar, a successful raiser of research funding, a man admired by his peers -- so any allegation of academic impropriety must be false.You think I exaggerate?
[Quoting the "investigation's" conclusions; emphasis added:]This level of success in proposing research, and obtaining funding to conduct it, clearly places Dr. Mann among the most respected scientists in his field. Such success would not have been possible had he not met or exceeded the highest standards of his profession for proposing research...
Had Dr. Mann's conduct of his research been outside the range of accepted practices, it would have been impossible for him to receive so many awards and recognitions, which typically involve intense scrutiny from scientists who may or may not agree with his scientific conclusions...
Clearly, Dr. Mann's reporting of his research has been successful and judged to be outstanding by his peers. This would have been impossible had his activities in reporting his work been outside of accepted practices in his field.
In short, the case for the prosecution is never heard. Mann is asked if the allegations (well, one of them) are true, and says no. His record is swooned over. Verdict: case dismissed, with apologies that Mann has been put to such trouble.
Once more, with feeling: We know Michael Mann couldn't be guilty of scientific misrepresentation because the same people he conspired with to misrepresent science gave him awards for misrepresenting science.
Also, that crap about people in the field being in disagreement with Mann and there opinions therefore absolving him? Mann and his cronies conspired specifically to keep dissenters out of the field by denying them publication in scientific journals.
[Here's where the clip of the Orang-Utan Priest/Scientist/Tyrants doing the see no evil/hear no evil/speak no evil thing when confronted with "blasphemy" would go, but frickin' people don't load important clips like this on YouTube]
Question: Is this really at the beginning of Planet of the Apes?
I have no memory of this scene at all. My first memory is of the ship landing in the lake, and then the apes chasing them.
Is this a deleted scene? Or do I just never actually see the beginning of the movie?
Posted by: Ace at
02:57 PM
| Comments (178)
Post contains 734 words, total size 5 kb.
Posted by: MAJ O at July 14, 2010 03:01 PM (ThQkB)
...if I kill a guy, the charge of murder would be preposterous simply because I have successfully left so many people alive.
I see what they did there.
Posted by: g at July 14, 2010 03:01 PM (QcdUG)
Posted by: TXMarko at July 14, 2010 03:03 PM (Qbo1l)
We say he's telling the truth, because he says what we feel is right, so therefore he's telling the truth.
And besides, lots of people who have lots of money to give us also think he's telling the truth. If people with money (George Soros, Warren Buffet, etc) think he's telling the truth, then who are you to disagree, peons! Be gone!!
Posted by: Boots at July 14, 2010 03:03 PM (06JTY)
Posted by: Person of Stupid at July 14, 2010 03:04 PM (I+7Zv)
Posted by: Typical Pulitzer Prize-winning Presstitute at July 14, 2010 03:04 PM (obXYX)
Put bluntly, the entire "theory" is a fucking joke.
Period.
Full stop.
Posted by: DocJ at July 14, 2010 03:06 PM (AWzOz)
Posted by: bulwark at July 14, 2010 03:06 PM (swBPc)
Why are you wingnuts having trouble with this?
Oh because you're all racist, creationist assholes.
Posted by: Charles Johnson at July 14, 2010 03:07 PM (X/Lqh)
It's more correct to say that the theories behind GW can't be proven false instead of " it never makes a prediction that can be verified". The most important scientific method is that all theories can be proven false with new data.
Posted by: EC at July 14, 2010 03:07 PM (iWj1i)
Posted by: Landru at July 14, 2010 03:09 PM (GHpB7)
This, not ironically, is what the old "jury of peers" used to be.
Get 6 guys to say you didn't murder the person they saw you standing over with a bloody knife, dripping hand, and torn clothes.
JUSTICE!
Posted by: s'moron at July 14, 2010 03:10 PM (UaxA0)
And that most unscientific exercise applies to all false dogmas, as obvious in liberally Marxist politics as anywhere in academia or philosophy.
Posted by: maverick muse at July 14, 2010 03:10 PM (H+LJc)
Hey, now...calm down. Don't blame the Joe Pa and the Nits for these dishonest Bozos
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 14, 2010 03:10 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: Capt. Louis Renault at July 14, 2010 03:11 PM (obXYX)
In todays world I think Herr Hitler would be successful and judged to be outstanding by his peers.
Seriously, science is on life support. I recently received my last issue of Smithsonian, the 40th Anniversary Edition and it is nothing but leftist green bullshit with dire warnings about the end of the planet unless we act now!
Yes it's been going that way for a while but the earth sciences have been completely corrupted and it's PISSING ME OFF!
Damn. I need a beer.
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 03:11 PM (9BzMV)
Posted by: maverick muse at July 14, 2010 03:12 PM (H+LJc)
Posted by: Michael "Otter" Mann at July 14, 2010 03:13 PM (9hu1I)
That's like being a nominee for Teacher of the Year. I didn't even know that "proposing research" was an official category. LOL.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 14, 2010 03:13 PM (Qp4DT)
Reid hasn't the class to even mimic your shock that illegal aliens work in Nevada.
Posted by: maverick muse at July 14, 2010 03:13 PM (H+LJc)
We believe in one Holy Academic and Doctoral Church.
We acknowledge one degree for the for the bequeathing of knowledge.
We look to the rising oceans, and the death of the world to come Amen.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 14, 2010 03:13 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: dr kill at July 14, 2010 03:14 PM (w9bVp)
Posted by: dr kill at July 14, 2010 03:14 PM (w9bVp)
Without a pipeline of funds coming to my department, I would be forced to work in an IHOP instead of just shouting in one.
Posted by: Doctor AMY BISHOP!!! at July 14, 2010 03:15 PM (Qbo1l)
We know Evolution is true, not because of scientific evidence which is on its FACE against the theory of evolution, but because we as "very smart scientists," cannot imagine, nor indeed, accept any other way species have come about, even though life appears to be designed, we cannot admit a designer, therefor evolution MUST be true.
See how this has bled into hard sciences now, or like climatology, stuff that cannot be absolutely measured as the processes are too complex for our technology to model, but hey, I have an agenda, and what better way to put in into a white lab coat and pedal it to the consumers.
Posted by: Jehu at July 14, 2010 03:15 PM (ECUd1)
Mr. Mann, you know how to propose the research...you just don't know how to conduct the research. Anybody can just propose it...
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 14, 2010 03:15 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: Michael "Otter" Mann at July 14, 2010 03:15 PM (9hu1I)
I call this the Age of Decree.
Our rulers simply decree shit and by definition it is so.
For instance, the economy is in recovery. Obama has created 10 million jobs. There is no such thing as islamic terrorism. And the new green economy will create jobs and prosperity for all.
Posted by: i'm blowing my little vizoola at July 14, 2010 03:15 PM (Wzli+)
Posted by: sTevo at July 14, 2010 03:15 PM (zIUsq)
Posted by: Michael "Otter" Mann at July 14, 2010 03:17 PM (9hu1I)
Posted by: GarandFan at July 14, 2010 03:17 PM (6mwMs)
Posted by: Andrew Sullivan at July 14, 2010 03:17 PM (Uysm3)
Reid hasn't the class to even mimic your shock that illegal aliens work in Nevada.
That's because the common rattlesnake has more class than The Dingy One.
Posted by: steveegg at July 14, 2010 03:17 PM (obXYX)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat ( Nobel Prize winner ) at July 14, 2010 03:18 PM (NuAIL)
Posted by: steveegg at July 14, 2010 03:18 PM (obXYX)
Posted by: Jehu at July 14, 2010 03:20 PM (ECUd1)
Wasn't Miami Vice a Michael Mann fictional series also?
Posted by: ziptie at July 14, 2010 03:20 PM (ljAGw)
"This is misleading and out of touch with reality. The proof that the planet is warming to dangerous levels because of the amount of greenhouse gases that humans are pumping into the atmosphere is overwhelming.
"Climate-gate" and other so-called investigations have been pushed forward by the denialosphere: a hodge-podge of industry front groups, fake scientists, conservative activists, deniers, and cranky, contrarian journalists who've decided to set reason aside and go on constant attack mode despite the facts."
And then another commenter goes on to blame the stupid American media for perpetuating the idea that global warming is not occuring. Seriously.
When I read comments like this I begin to wonder if maybe those crazy countries that liked to occasionally commit massive acts of ethnic cleansing might have been on to something after all.
Posted by: Winston Wolf at July 14, 2010 03:22 PM (gLNLT)
Posted by: Techie at July 14, 2010 03:22 PM (zbH+i)
hey Jehu,
Evolution is not the antithesis of creation.
Evolution happened, get over it.
The world is more than 8,000 years old.
That, or you have to deny the accuracy of atomic clocks, the measurable speed pf light, the existence of matter, and all sorts of convenient things.
nothing in evolution excludes a Creator from setting up the rules to result in sentient species evolving.
I say this as a fairly devout Christian
Posted by: s'moron at July 14, 2010 03:22 PM (UaxA0)
When they announced this "investigation" I fully expected this kind of result. But not to fear, you would get and even more stupid whitewash if it was done by Pigsnout Waxman and his committee.
Posted by: Vic at July 14, 2010 03:23 PM (/jbAw)
There are no tanks in Bagh..., oops, wrong script.
There is nothing wrong with our data. There is no (brrrrr) evidence that Glob-b-b-b-b-b-bal Warm-m-m-m-ming is-s-s-s-s-s-s n-n-n-n-not...will someone please turn on the heater?
Posted by: Baghdad Bob at July 14, 2010 03:23 PM (obXYX)
No, Pinto was the pedophile who defiled the Mayor's daughter. Otter was the man-whore who bedded Mrs. Wormer.
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 14, 2010 03:24 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: denny crane at July 14, 2010 07:21 PM (I+7Zv)
Pinto was with the little girl, numbnuts.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 14, 2010 03:24 PM (Qp4DT)
Posted by: JackStraw at July 14, 2010 03:25 PM (VW9/y)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat ( Nobel Prize winner ) at July 14, 2010 07:18 PM (NuAIL)
Presactly! That's why CO2 is the perfect Satan. The average person can't see it or it in their hand but by God if the scientific community forms a consensus pronouncing it to be the Gaia Killa and that we're the ones blowing it into the atmosphere, well you better repent by paying taxes, sinners!
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 03:25 PM (9BzMV)
I'm frankly a little surprised that none of you came to me, given my status as a part-time climate scientist, at least to glean some insight into the complex thought processes and reasoned analyses used by us climate scientists to arrive at a conclusion such as this...
I got nuttin'.
Other than the drugs...
nuttin'.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 14, 2010 03:25 PM (r1h5M)
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at July 14, 2010 03:25 PM (554T5)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 14, 2010 03:26 PM (5jbD3)
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 14, 2010 07:15 PM (y4B2y)
One of my favorite Seinfeld scenes.
Posted by: Tami at July 14, 2010 03:26 PM (VuLos)
The upside is once lies are exposed you can clearly see the truth and base your lives and societies on that truth.
Posted by: Jehu at July 14, 2010 03:27 PM (ECUd1)
Posted by: MAJ O
Um, they're going to have to do a fuck-load more than that to get me anywhere near their position.
They have to demonstrate that the warming is caused by human activity that releases CO2. They have to show with a high degree of certainty that these emissions directly affect the climate, and that the rise in CO2 over the last 60 - 70 years is because of that activity.
Warming is only 1/3 of their hypothesis. They tell me it's hot outside, it's our fault, and they deserve endless grant money in order to tell us to lie down and die? Hell no.
Posted by: Garbonzo the Garrulous at July 14, 2010 03:27 PM (oL8lS)
I understand that you're upset that we have exonerated Mr. Mann but you have to understand, any man whose balls taste like Skittles, which Mr. Mann's I can assure you do, cannot possibly be guilty of the charges leveled against him. Not following me? Try to keep up; Skittles are not found in nature they are manufactured by people using...wait for it....science. Mr. Mann's balls taste like Skittles which are made by science therefore Mr. Mann's very balls taste like science thus proving once and for all that Mr. Mann is not guilty. On a related point Mr. Mann's ass tastes like Reese's filling.
You may return to humping your cousins or whatever it is you losers due in your free time.
Posted by: Pennsylvania State University Investigatory Committee at July 14, 2010 03:28 PM (VOigi)
As soon as Cap & Trade is passed the media will pull the same shit they did after the health care scam was passed. They'll come out and say gee whiz maybe this health care climate change bill is going to cost over a trillion dollars after all.
Posted by: i'm blowing my little vizoola at July 14, 2010 03:28 PM (Wzli+)
I have a research proposal. We should research how the judicious application of bacon and double-jointed cheerleaders to my wang can eliminate global warming climate change. Said research will require copious funding, truckloads of bacon and fresh cheerleaders delivered daily.
As this research would most likely be approved by a majority of morons, I expect my Nobel Prize within the week.
That makes about as much sense as what they're peddling.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at July 14, 2010 03:28 PM (P9+0W)
No no no, the mayor is the one who stuck his thumb in the woman's ass.
Remember? She said, "Carmine, you can take your thumb out of my ass, now."
Posted by: i'm blowing my little vizoola at July 14, 2010 03:29 PM (gt3o0)
I'm reminded of the Dean Martin's question to Thornton Melon, the world's oldest living freshman, in "Back To School":
Dean Martin: ...Mr. Melon, I'm only going to ask you once:
[beat]
Is this your work?
Thornton Melon: I can't lie to you, Dean Martin
[beat]
Thornton Melon: ...Yes, it is.
Posted by: Uh, Clem at July 14, 2010 03:30 PM (nZm+s)
Posted by: The White House at July 14, 2010 03:30 PM (MYT77)
No one with an ounce of integrity would use data as suspect as Mann's.
Not unless they knew that their mathy-science would fool their brain damaged voters.
Posted by: MJ at July 14, 2010 03:30 PM (4ZsIQ)
From now on we should call everyone involved in Big Media a minister of propaganda, or MOPtm
You should see what we do with mops.
Posted by: Typical Pulitzer Prize-Winning Presstitute at July 14, 2010 03:31 PM (obXYX)
Or, to paraphrase... he got lots of money in grants for us, so some people who agreed with him gave him awards, which got us more money...
And we find nothing wrong with that...
Posted by: Penn State at July 14, 2010 03:31 PM (H+oXM)
Oh, and you're welcome for the reach-around.
Posted by: Michael Mann at July 14, 2010 03:32 PM (LPL4Z)
Posted by: ace at July 14, 2010 03:32 PM (SsvUp)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 14, 2010 03:33 PM (5jbD3)
Posted by: Pennsylvania State University Investigatory Committee at July 14, 2010 07:28 PM (VOigi)
Thread winner!
Posted by: steveegg at July 14, 2010 03:33 PM (obXYX)
Posted by: Tommy Gunnar at July 14, 2010 03:34 PM (rQTdM)
You cannot both be a devout Christian and be an evolutionist, unless you can somehow reconcile the genealogy of Christ that traces the lineage of Christ back to Adam, which would require the belief that Adam and Eve really did existed. Since the idea of evolution runs completely contrary to the genealogical record, it's one or the other. Stop hedging your bets like a fucking RINO and pick one.
Posted by: I Evolved From a Liberal at July 14, 2010 03:34 PM (gLNLT)
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at July 14, 2010 03:35 PM (554T5)
Posted by: ace at July 14, 2010 03:35 PM (SsvUp)
Posted by: ace at July 14, 2010 03:36 PM (SsvUp)
Or do I just never actually see the beginning of the movie?
Okay, you know what's weird? I'll bet my left nut you can name at least one particular movie that you've never watched in its entirety but have seen bits and pieces of it often enough to know the whole movie pretty well.
For me that movie is THE MATRIX. Never watched it but I haven't seen it all over in about 25 increments and have placed all the pieces together like a jigsaw puzzle. Same with TITANIC.
Posted by: i'm blowing my little vizoola at July 14, 2010 03:36 PM (gt3o0)
Posted by: A.G. at July 14, 2010 03:37 PM (qrKUQ)
We have no admission standards at all. Just sayin'.
Posted by: The Church of Scientology at July 14, 2010 03:37 PM (9hu1I)
Posted by: ace at July 14, 2010 03:38 PM (SsvUp)
We have no admission standards at all. Just sayin'.
Posted by: The Church of Scientology at July 14, 2010 07:37 PM (9hu1I)
I thought you had to be a gullible, rich, insecure celebrity
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 14, 2010 03:39 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: steveegg at July 14, 2010 03:39 PM (obXYX)
Posted by: ace at July 14, 2010 03:40 PM (SsvUp)
Vizoola:
My movie is BladeRunner. I know its heresy, but I rented that movie about 10 times in HS but never got to watch it. I believe I was trying to feel me some sweater meat every single time.
Have to find out if I can get that on Netflix when I get back in town...I'm sure the wife won't get it but it will my private little joke.
Posted by: MJ at July 14, 2010 03:40 PM (4ZsIQ)
Recall that one of the biggest knocks on climate "science" is that it never makes a prediction that can be verified (actually, it does, but they're always wrong), but that "proof" of its veracity comes from the fact that everyone's models agree with everyone else's.
So, in other words, we know the theory is true because people who believe in the theory agree with other people who believe in the theory that the theory is true.
In other words, circular "reasoning". No, not even reasoning, just a bunch of people in a circle jerk, shouting their crappy theories to the heavens and denouncing those who question it in any capacity with impunity.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 14, 2010 03:40 PM (WmoM+)
Posted by: Jesus at July 14, 2010 03:40 PM (9hu1I)
Posted by: Brad at July 14, 2010 03:40 PM (2GsJg)
Plus, you've missed the endless string of commercials and coming attractions that make you want to put your eyes out with your drink straw.
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 14, 2010 03:41 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: ace at July 14, 2010 03:41 PM (SsvUp)
oh yeah, and that's another weird phenomenon -- you just happen to stumble upon a movie at the exact same scene a bunch of times. Or you see the same damn re-run of a show over and over.
Posted by: i'm blowing my little vizoola at July 14, 2010 03:41 PM (Wzli+)
(And, yes, Ace, that is the start of Planet of the Apes with Heston giving a soliloquy before going under suspended animation himself.)
Posted by: andycanuck at July 14, 2010 03:42 PM (7b1Uc)
Posted by: sTevo at July 14, 2010 03:42 PM (zIUsq)
Posted by: AndrewsDad at July 14, 2010 03:42 PM (C2//T)
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 14, 2010 03:43 PM (WmoM+)
hey Jehu,
Evolution is not the antithesis of creation.
Evolution happened, get over it.
The world is more than 8,000 years old.
That, or you have to deny the accuracy of atomic clocks, the measurable speed pf light, the existence of matter, and all sorts of convenient things.
nothing in evolution excludes a Creator from setting up the rules to result in sentient species evolving.
I say this as a fairly devout Christian
Take your straw-man off of automatic. I believe the universe is 14 billion years old, the earth is 4 or 5 billion years old. I accept good science. I do not accept climate science, nor evolution as now taught. When any evolutionist can propose to me how symbiotic life can come about without proposing any outside directing (intelligence) then I might be more open.
I am not a young earther, I do not know how species came about in their distinction. I question genes are as elastic or as magical as evolutionists propose, otherwise you might finally get a tangelo seed, or a mule that can reproduce. Funny but botanists are usually pretty quite about all this evolution, as there is no clear cut species coming from other species in the plant world, just guys labeling a pine tree MORE primitive than a deciduous tree because they show up earlier in the fossil record, but that pine tree is just as sophisticated as your broad-leaf plant.
As an engineer I want real verifiable math-based science. I have yet to see a system of equations that deal with species differentiation, but I have lots of equations for the electromagnetic field. And I am not talking about the hodgepodge of statistical and population equations Darwinsts drag about like a ventriloquist dummy. Try thinking for yourself instead of parroting a (science knows what it is talking about party line) In my field I have Maxwell's equations that are elegant, and are systematic and reproducible for liberal or conservative, atheist, or believer, set of descriptive equations describing electro-magnetic fields.
Posted by: Jehu at July 14, 2010 03:43 PM (ECUd1)
I'm trying to raise funding in order to construct a big enough cannon to shoot Dr. Mann into the sun.
Can you spare $5.00?
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 14, 2010 03:43 PM (P33XN)
The Godfather on TNT. Right when they're telling Michael how to get the gun from the back of the toilet.
Posted by: Ombudsman at July 14, 2010 03:43 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: dfbaskwill at July 14, 2010 03:44 PM (ndlFj)
Those are end of Planet of the Apes and the mutant population who worshiped the atomic bomb in the 2nd movie - Beneath the Planet of the Apes respectively.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 14, 2010 03:44 PM (WmoM+)
I find that coming in late to some movies actually enhances them, because they seem more charged with mystery (in as much as you're trying to piece together the plot without the spoon-feeding beginning) and you often assume the beginning must be better than it actually is.
With most modern movies, coming in at the last 10 minutes works.
Posted by: steveegg at July 14, 2010 03:44 PM (obXYX)
Yes it's been going that way for a while but the earth sciences have been completely corrupted"
Biology, too. Watch or read pretty much ANY program/article on any particular animal/region, and all you get is that "climate change leaves them with a grim future.
One way or another, it will all end in genocide. Either the statists/Gaia-worshippers wipe out pretty much everyone through their idiocy, or the rational people get rid of the statists/Gaia-worshippers. If I could be on the outcome, I'd wager very, very heavily on the statists/Gaia-worshippers to win.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 14, 2010 03:45 PM (ySNz/)
Posted by: Lone Marauder at July 14, 2010 03:45 PM (p1iaB)
You highlighted some good stuff, but missed perhaps the biggest:
"This level of success in proposing research, and obtaining funding to conduct it, clearly places Dr. Mann among the most respected scientists in his field."
Mann set a model not for understanding climate but for getting money. His peers first admired, then emulated him. Then they gave him awards for showing them how.
These are not scientists; they're scam artists and should go to jail. My cynicism of their fraud is boundless, so I'm pretty sure you've met your match.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 14, 2010 03:46 PM (swuwV)
Posted by: ace at July 14, 2010 07:40 PM (SsvUp)
So you're the one always walking in late...
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at July 14, 2010 03:46 PM (YVZlY)
hahaha, BLADE RUNNER
Never saw it! Always always come into at the scene with the chick wearing the clear plastic jacket kicking someone in the face in the rain. That's all I know of that movie and I've seen that scene a hundred times.
Posted by: i'm blowing my little vizoola at July 14, 2010 03:46 PM (gt3o0)
You should read the self-involved "geniuses" at Slashdot opine on this subject. FOIA requests are done by denier "trolls" who are wasting the good scientist's time with legal harassment. Climate-gate is drummed up by right-wingers and creationists. Mann was cleared. The code that was clearly cooked wasn't cooked; you don't even know what that code was doing. If you're not an expert in the field, you don't understand what's going on, and shouldn't be part of the conversation. Just look at this article from Climate Watch that proves my point. &etc.
Posted by: bonhomme at July 14, 2010 03:46 PM (jvG2F)
@27: "There will be blood in State College. I'm not the only alum disgusted with this shit."
Yeah, alumni contributions could drop a whole tenth of a percent or something. No one will do anything. Ever. They never do.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 14, 2010 03:47 PM (ySNz/)
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at July 14, 2010 03:47 PM (554T5)
This is way too opaque to be a white-wash. Its more like a Black_Wash®.
Back when I was doing research in the biomedical field, things like Michele Mann has done would have got me banned from the field for life. But, no, if you're the darling of the leftist asshats you get a pass, yea, even a promotion and Half-a-Million dollar new grant from the NSF.
This is what happens when we elect asshat moonbat dim-o-KKKrats!!! [and them's their good points]
Posted by: TennDon at July 14, 2010 03:49 PM (o6Yv2)
Clearly, Dr. Mann's reporting of his research has been successful and judged to be outstanding by his peers. This would have been impossible had his activities in reporting his work been outside of accepted practices in his field.
Remember that Phil Jones and Michael Mann were actively trying to get those who disagreed with their theory off of the editorial boards of the scientific journals that addressed "climate change".
So this "peer award" vindication is akin to having a jury of foxes judge the fox who took the eggs from the chicken coop.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 14, 2010 03:49 PM (WmoM+)
Posted by: T at July 14, 2010 03:49 PM (z9Awt)
Posted by: dfbaskwill at July 14, 2010 03:49 PM (ndlFj)
"They have too often mistaken real doubts for scurrilous attacks, and relied on mutual reinforcement rather than open debate, on authority rather than argument. The IPCC, chaired by Rajendra Pachauri, should by its procedures and example do much to help with this. Unfortunately, it has allowed itself to become part of the problem."
-the economist.
& gosh, who does that remind you of?
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 14, 2010 03:49 PM (0fzsA)
Ace should start a creationism thread. He could invite Captain Ponytail Queeg as a guest lecturer.
Posted by: Cicero at July 14, 2010 03:50 PM (9hu1I)
I'm trying to raise funding in order to construct a big enough cannon to shoot Dr. Mann into the sun.
Can you spare $5.00?
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 14, 2010 07:43 PM (P33XN)
"This level of success in proposing research, and obtaining funding to conduct it, clearly places Dr. Mann Dack Thrombosis among the most respected scientists in his field."
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at July 14, 2010 03:51 PM (YVZlY)
Or you could just watch the 2 minute trailer on-line and save yourself 90 minutes and $12.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at July 14, 2010 03:51 PM (P9+0W)
What a grand sham. What these imbeciles accomplished is exoneration of the "deniers" by declaring Mann cleared of wrongdoing by decree without so much as a Q&A session. What better reason to be a denier could you ask for?
They are convinced that the rest of us are as stupid as they are.
Posted by: maddogg at July 14, 2010 03:52 PM (DqSon)
That sounds like a challenge.
Posted by: Ace's liver at July 14, 2010 03:52 PM (XIXhw)
If that. Most of the alumni won't give a damn about this betrayal of the scientific method and that such betrayal might ultimately lead to privation for much of the world.
/Speaking as a PSU student.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 14, 2010 03:52 PM (WmoM+)
Just remember, Global Warming is not a lie if you believe it. And I am really willing to believe. But first you must release my second chakra. Or blow me. It's up to you.
Posted by: George Costanza at July 14, 2010 03:52 PM (UPNlB)
Posted by: Rodney at July 14, 2010 03:53 PM (XRIh6)
@59: "Well to be technically accurate Pinot nailed the little girl on the Fifty Yard line"
The movie never really says if he nailed her or not. The football field stops before showing them doing anything, and she introduces Pinto to her dad as "the guy who molested me." He'd already accomplished that at the toga party.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 14, 2010 03:54 PM (ySNz/)
Peer-review can also be rubber stamping by fellow circle-jerkers.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 14, 2010 03:54 PM (WmoM+)
If I could be on the outcome, I'd wager very, very heavily on the statists/Gaia-worshippers to win.
I can't go there with you but the corruption spreads into every facet of life. I picked up a locally published book on the history of Ocracoke when I was on the Outer Banks a few years back and what was the phenomenon most likely to hurt the habitation of the island in the future? Not tourism, not over development but Global Warming. The Outer Banks will be under water by 2100. That was the whole frickin' point of what was otherwise an interesting book.
These assholes are everywhere.
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 03:55 PM (9BzMV)
Peer-review can also be rubber stamping by fellow circle-jerkers.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 14, 2010 07:54 PM (WmoM+)
Especially if you get to choose who is in the circle. In a just world there would be harsh and ruinous penalties for academic and scientific fraud.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 14, 2010 03:56 PM (oIp16)
Posted by: Tommy Gunnar at July 14, 2010 07:34 PM (rQTdM)
It may have been cut in some TV versions, but I clearly remember Heston talking in the spaceship as he gives himself an injection before going into suspended animation.
Posted by: Mætenloch at July 14, 2010 03:56 PM (f5vi+)
The old theory is ridiculed and only found in dusty tomes. However in its day that old theory was universally beleived. And woe to the unbelievers. I call bullshit on any human being as being utterly scientific and objective, most all human beings, if not all, filter all knowledge and truth though an existing worldview. The genius of an Einstein is he is able to think outside the existing worldview or scientific consensus. But later Einstein was felled by the same myopia, and rejected Quantum Mechanics, the basis of much or most of our modern electronic world.
Posted by: Jehu at July 14, 2010 04:01 PM (ECUd1)
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel, Getting Popcorn and Skipping Credits at July 14, 2010 04:02 PM (swuwV)
Posted by: thisremindsmeof... at July 14, 2010 04:04 PM (zl3ii)
Posted by: JackStraw at July 14, 2010 04:04 PM (VW9/y)
It is important to guard against rigidity and self-assurance that your viewpoint is correct, without becoming a Clinton where you only believe something on the basis if it helps number one.
Posted by: Jehu at July 14, 2010 04:05 PM (ECUd1)
Posted by: Jehu at July 14, 2010 08:01 PM (ECUd1)
Yeah, I agree with that for the most part but this is the first time that politics has co-opted science and perverted it to push a social agenda on a global scale.
Fortunately there are more of us than them.
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 04:10 PM (9BzMV)
Posted by: Russell at July 14, 2010 04:14 PM (zG7G3)
@150: "Fortunately there are more of us than them."
Numbers don't mean that much, necessarily. The formula for power has always been Numbers + Resources X Will. Their resources and will are both significant.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 14, 2010 04:15 PM (ySNz/)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at July 14, 2010 04:16 PM (4XtKa)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at July 14, 2010 04:16 PM (P33XN)
@152: "Bottom line, libs will say or do anything to have control. Yet given control, they cannot control themselves and they implode."
If they didn't have the annoying tendency to take lots of unwilling folks with them while they are imploding, that would be fine.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 14, 2010 04:16 PM (ySNz/)
Take your straw-man off of automatic.
Happy to Jehu.
We agree on pretty much everything, but you have to admit your first comment was a bit weighted toward the creationist-angle.
Evolved,
Viewing the Bible stories as more allegorical than factual is a good place to start, and fully in line with Catholic theology. It presents problems not with Christ's lineage, which only really required coming from David to fulfill the OT prophesies, but instead with the "Adam and Eve" conception of original sin. At some point, man became sentient and aware of the ability to act with malice, but how to pin that on two people in the Garden, I don't know.
I'm not hedging, I'm believing what I believe until there's a compelling reason not to. Having felt God acting through me (in a physical sense), I'm strongly biased to believe in a universal creator. Believing in the death and resurrection of Christ, I am Christian.
Viewing fossils in mountain ranges and the ability to measure atomic half-lives, as well as the speed of light and the distant galaxies at the dawn of the universe, I accept that the Bible is not literally true. Literal truth of the Bible isn't necessary for my faith, so I fail to see how I'm hedging a damn thing.
Posted by: s'moron at July 14, 2010 04:23 PM (UaxA0)
Seriously, science is on life support. I recently received my last issue of Smithsonian, the 40th Anniversary Edition and it is nothing but leftist green bullshit with dire warnings about the end of the planet unless we act now!
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 07:11 PM (9BzMV)
Why do I have a feeling the 30th edition also predicted imminent doom unless we stopped the peons from using fossil fuels too.
Posted by: 18-1 at July 14, 2010 04:25 PM (bgcml)
Numbers don't mean that much, necessarily. The formula for power has always been Numbers + Resources X Will. Their resources and will are both significant.
Not that I'm doubting you but is there a book or article on the formula for power that I can read so I can judge for myself?
That sounds too much like strategy for a board game.
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 04:29 PM (9BzMV)
I recall that one of the arguments that warmists use is that in order for AGW to be false, there had to be an active conspiracy and/or massive incompetence.
Well, we know there is a conspiracy now thanks to the leaked emails, and the most favorable analysis of Mann's "research" is rank incompetence.
Posted by: 18-1 at July 14, 2010 04:31 PM (bgcml)
If they didn't have the annoying tendency to take lots of unwilling folks with them while they are imploding, that would be fine.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at July 14, 2010 08:16 PM (ySNz/)
Wouldn't that ruin the point? The whole idea behind liberalism is to take from others for your own personal endeavors because creating the wealth you want to spend yourself is to damned hard.
Posted by: 18-1 at July 14, 2010 04:33 PM (bgcml)
As a matter of pure logic, the prime mover is not a bad reason to believe in a creator, gus. People disagree on its validity as a matter of absolute proof, but it possesses intuitive sense.
It's not really a basis for belief in a specific god, or for discerning the attributes of that god. You can end up with anything from far removed deists to everything-has-a-spirit animists from that initial position.
My faith is only based on my experience. There are things I cannot explain. I'm OK with a certain amount of irreconcilability in this lifetime.
My only prayer is that God allow me to see the beauty of his universe and its workings, on the cosmic scale, when I move on to hopefully hang with Him in the the next plane of existence.
Posted by: s'moron at July 14, 2010 04:34 PM (UaxA0)
And the 70th Ed. will predict - even after we've outlawed oil - that humans must hold in their farts because of their contributions to global warming... unless one buys UN IPCC carbon credits.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 14, 2010 04:35 PM (swuwV)
s'moron says it well and the only thing I might add is that one of the greatest tragedies of our time is that society has been taught that there is either science or religion, neither the twain shall meet.
I personally believe that science and religion compliment each other and if folks on both sides would get their heads out of their asses, some real progress might be made.
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 04:42 PM (9BzMV)
Why do I have a feeling the 30th edition also predicted imminent doom unless we stopped the peons from using fossil fuels too.
One of the magazine's first issues was published for the first Earth Day.
Imagine how annoying that might have been.
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 04:45 PM (9BzMV)
To one heart that loves thy name."
(From the Penn State Alma Mater by Fred Lewis Pattee)
New lines to follow the above from the 2010 revision by Michael Mann:
"Unless climate science is your game.
Hide the decline.
Hide the decline."
Posted by: Reiver at July 14, 2010 04:54 PM (IefVV)
"By way of preamble, let me remind you where I stand on climate change. I think climate science points to a risk that the world needs to take seriously. I think energy policy should be intelligently directed towards mitigating this risk. I am for a carbon tax."
Yeah. Fuck you, I'm not reading your article.
Posted by: tangonine at July 14, 2010 04:54 PM (C8Pcc)
I'm a graduate (non-practicing) Marine Zoologist who started looking at globular waarming over 40 years ago.
I read the Mann/Bradley/Hughes paper when it first came out in the 90s. In the original paper, they state that there 'could be' problems with the statistics and methodology. Looking at the full data could show you normal temperatures for the last hundred years...or it could show a hockey stick pattern no matter what data was input (including random noise).
Soon after publishing, Mann became the darling of the greens and got more stroking than Paris Hilton's kitteh.
The paper was amended (at the behest of greenies) by removing 80% of the data to leave only the hockey stick and all of his own seconds thoughts went away.
He sold out.
Posted by: trainer at July 14, 2010 05:16 PM (yCWYQ)
That there is the precise definition of so-called 'climate scientists' - from the moment one so much as skims a synopses of their work it cannot be denied that their work is pure fiction - nothing else.
Posted by: Druid at July 14, 2010 05:17 PM (Oe01r)
Plus, there's the fact that evolution, even if true, doesn't disprove the existence of Adam and Eve. In fact, I'm pretty sure the EVOLUTION of mitochondrial DNA in humans proves that there was an Eve of some kind (everyone shares a common ancestor).
#103 And when an electrical engineer can perform heart surgery, I'll believe my light switch works. Hey, if you can demand one discipline do the work of another, why can't I? The wackiness of your logic makes me hope my life never depends on something you engineered.
I also like how you demand equations for evolution. I take it you also demand equations to prove that ice ages happen. Sorry, you're looking at something far more complex than determining the melting point of steel or the airflow in a jet turbine. How can an equation for evolution possibly take into account migration, climate change, disease, predation, or natural disasters (you know, the things that actually drive it)? You're talking about layering so many equations on top of one another that collecting the data to actually fill in the variables would be a near impossible task. Really, if we had the mathematical prowess to do that, we could accurately predict the weather all across Earth for every day of the next thousand years without a problem.
And yes, statistical data is strong evidence. If you don't accept it, that's your problem, but I definitely want you on my jury if they ever catch me with a bloody knife standing over my latest hobo kill.
As for your plant complaint, even in the animal kingdom it's hard to see which specific species emerged from which immediate ancestor, as the data is noisy at lower levels due to gene flow (and plants, due to pollination, have an even greater gene flow than animals).
Posted by: JSchuler at July 14, 2010 05:36 PM (yKEQc)
He sold out.
Just like all the rest of them.
With trillions at stake, what's a few million or billion in grants here or there?
They're whores with degrees.
Posted by: ErikW at July 14, 2010 05:36 PM (9BzMV)
The American Thinker: http://tinyurl.com/2er6w7a
Can you say Nobel Prize for Physics, you racist deniers?
Posted by: Nobel Prize committee at July 14, 2010 05:36 PM (jchJh)
@ Ace
Stop watching Planet of the Apes on TNT!
Rent the dvd and watch that. It'll amaze you.
Posted by: memomachine at July 14, 2010 08:41 PM (MwCol)
This is called "being right by definition," something that anybody who has ever tried to argue with management in corporate America should be familiar with. If there's money being made, "their guy" is just as much "above the rules" as they are, and any arguments to the contrary are magically found to be deficient. This is true even if the argument clearly proves that a heavy cost will be imposed in the long run (in this case the reputation of Penn State is being obliterated, not to mention that of the climate science community, and the scientific community as a whole). This is the same kind of thinking that undoubtedly also caused the oil disaster in the Gulf - if not also the non-response of the Obama administration (although that would be about something besides money).
This is exactly the sort of thing that Psych parodies, BTW.
Posted by: Optimizer at July 14, 2010 10:17 PM (acVo8)
Posted by: Pork Alfredo at July 14, 2010 11:08 PM (NZ6Uo)
Posted by: bookkeeping service at September 25, 2010 05:11 AM (WBOg6)
Posted by: eyelash serum at September 27, 2010 05:00 AM (DVDAe)
Posted by: battery charging directory at September 28, 2010 07:19 AM (+0AUw)
Posted by: florists in US at September 29, 2010 06:29 AM (y1wOX)
Posted by: iþ baþvurusu at March 06, 2011 01:24 PM (0ENkl)
Posted by: ed hard clothing at March 14, 2011 01:07 AM (C1yVh)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2126 seconds, 306 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: MAJ O at July 14, 2010 02:59 PM (ThQkB)