“Is this the same Bradley who was involved in an exchange of emails with the chief rogue scientist, Phil Jones, of the Climategate scandal? The topic pertained to “hiding the decline” in global temperatures. This Bradley was also associated with the infamous Michael Mann “hockey stick”, which was used by the UN’s IPCC to promote the anthropogenic, global-warming hoax.”
What is this ethical science you speak of?
How this gravy train is still moving when all the wheels have fallen off is a tribute to 2 decades of brain washing and how difficult it is for the MSM to admit they were wrong. Being wrong once in a while is to be expected but wrong for 20 years is a hurdle they just don’t know how to deal with. If they had remained neutral and just reported both sides of the story they wouldn’t have painted themselves into a corner. This lack of judgement has cost them credibility and any hope of reversing the fact that they bet on the wrong cause, and they lost. Simply putting out a headline stating “PERHAPS WE MADE A MISTAKE” is difficult but would be a step in the right direction. Politicians on the other hand will hang on to this scam until the very end because taxing CO2 (nothing) is a opportunity they will never see again.
http://www.lowerwolfjaw.com/agw/quotes.htm
Wow…I’m impressed with several Queen’s people and their analysis and comments de-bunking AGW, and the ‘climate science’ fraud. There are several articles below the one that is linked. There is hope for some ‘academics’ after all.
“[In New York City by 2008] The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change. There will be more police cars. Why? Well, you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up… Under the greenhouse effect, extreme weather increases. Depending on where you are in terms of the hydrological cycle, you get more of whatever you’re prone to get. New York can get droughts, the droughts can get more severe and you’ll have signs in restaurants saying “Water by request only.” – James Hansen testimony before Congress in June 1988”
Yup…that James Hansen.
You would think the MSM would have looked at that statement and questioned his credibility after 25 years of fear mongering. But that would involve real journalism. Alarmism sold more papers.
The stench coming out of Queen’s is just awful.
Mouldy progressive eco crap seems to have filled the void between the ears of Queen’s senior management people.
Very embarrassing for a Queen’s 76 grad.
Yup….that James Hansen.
Just a few weeks ago. Where are the investigative reporters ?
http://www.euractiv.com/science-policymaking/james-hansen-verge-creating-clim-interview-519752
You know, I was gonna say ‘Hey Queen’s, if you’re gonna honour an AGW fabricator, at least pick a home-grown bullshitter.”
But I see you already gave him his parchment way back in ’87.
Geez, you guys have been stupid for a long time, eh?
“If it differs from observations, then it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/06/another-nail-in-the-climate-change-coffin.php
They cant fathom that they are wrong.. Its business as usual in the pal reviewed world of academia..
With no warming for almost 20 years they will reward the alarmists with political rewards.. You will always be right in my heart!!!
Stubborn political grandstanding, proves without a doubt that they care far more for their politics than what used to be called science..
perterj you own this thread!
Kate and SDA posters and commentators were right up with ‘Whats Up With That’, Lord Moncton and our own PM (who said right it was a socialist hoax to deprive people of their money – aghendah to zero 1) seeing this fairy tale for the lie that it is.
As to these ‘egg on the face’, johnny come lately’s with their ‘questioning’ of the ‘science’ behind the cult; I say eat crow!!
SDA gets results.
I don’t think it would be that difficult for the media to escape from the corner they’ve painted themselves into. Simply write about new developments in science and how it is normal in science to modify old theories because of new data/discoveries. Report on the failure of political policies (ample material there) and how this has harmed rural people and those with lower income while enriching politicians and their cronies. Questioning wasted tax dollars, fraud and political corruption is an easy and truthful escape route.
What is more difficult is for them to face the awful things the media said about “deniers” and what that behavior says about them and their profession. Academic institutions like Queens have the same problem: they didn’t just disagree with skeptics – they attacked with a kind of zeal more akin to religious fervor or mindless mobs.
Queen’s is a much over rated university.
Are there any sciences that are not tainted by political agendas left?
Like we didn’t see this coming!
What question was asked again and again in the early days of this fraud? “What will the frauds say when they realize they are caught?”
What was the answer?
“They will try to pretend they didn’t do it. It NEVER happened.”
Good GOD …..
Don’t think so Ken I was at the afternoon convocation ceremony at Queen’s last Friday,and even the honorary guest speaker for the graduating nurses ruined an otherwise very decent speech,by naming climate change as a challenge our society faces.
I was just reading about the Queens Coat of Arms in the convocation program and the Latin under the shield translates as “Wisdom and Learning shall be the stability of our times” Little ironic isn’t it?
I’m reminded of the Colonel Bogey March tune with fun lyrics we used to sing when we were kids. “Bullshit! was all the band could play. Bullshit! was all they played all day. Bullshit! We call it ‘bullshit’ and bullshit was it really was” Or something like that.
Sciences untainted by politics? Oh yes, much of molecular physics, most of astrophysics and general relativity. Most anything which doesn’t have consequences which are obvious to the ordinary woman,
as politics are dominated by the female voter.
In fact most of physics has been immune. The political effort at present is mainly directed to smoothing the way for women into physics.
As for stellar astrophysics, I have noted that information on solar variability are not so easy to find as they once were. Not too much more. Even radiative transfer seems to be regarded as innocuous, so long as it is not applied to the Earth’s atmosphere.