Oops.

“There is this mismatch between what the climate models are producing and what the observations are showing,” says lead author John Fyfe, a climate modeller at the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis in Victoria, British Columbia. “We can’t ignore it.”
So, apparently PM Harper was muzzling scientists who are able to show that not only is the pause in global warming real, but that as of yet no one can explain it and that it needs to be understood.
Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis
Via Judith Curry

…the psychologist Gary Marcus has recently put it, “it is facile to dismiss science itself. The most careful scientists, and the best science journalists, realize that all science is provisional. There will always be things that we haven’t figured out yet, and even some that we get wrong.” But science is not just about conclusions, he argues, which are occasionally (or even frequently) incorrect. Instead, “It’s about a methodology for investigation, which includes, at its core, a relentless drive towards questioning that which came before.” You can both “love science,” he concludes, “and question it.”
I agree with Marcus. In fact, I agree with him so much that I would like to go a step further: if you love science, you had better question it, and question it well, so it can live up to its potential.
And it is with that in mind that I bring up the subject of bullshit.

Seriously? Parched Earth soaks up water.
Sponges, ocean heat sinks, stronger than ‘normal’ El Niño, adjusted temperatures. Excuses.
There has to be a point, some time, some where, when even the least ardent believer in the scientific method has to hang their head and admit, this ain’t how the process works.
Not a religion, no, no, no.
h/t, Adrian

Last September, the Governments’s Chief Medical Officer, Dame Sally Davies, said: “There is no evidence that Alzheimer’s disease can be transmitted in humans, nor is there any evidence that Alzheimer’s disease can be transmitted through any medical procedure”.

New evidence suggests a ninth planet lurking at the edge of the solar system

While PETA wept: “In conclusion, our results suggest that United Kingdom-based vegetarians and comparable nonvegetarians (including people who eat fish but not meat and those who eat meat <5 times per week on average) have similar all-cause mortality.”

Revised estimates for the number of human and bacteria cells in the body: …the numbers are similar enough that each defecation event may flip the ratio to favor human cells over bacteria.

After more than 50 years of warnings to cut dietary cholesterol, the panel agreed with the American Heart Association’s 2013 report that “available evidence shows no appreciable relationship” between eating cholesterol and blood levels of cholesterol.

… there are so many reports of relationships between oxytocin and social behaviors. It is impossible that not a single one of these effects is real. Isn’t it?

“A complex web of vested interests promote calcium and vitamin D for osteoporosis, despite lack of evidence“

Edge.org;

Imagine that you had a very vivid dream last night that you saw a unicorn, probably in your backyard. The dream was so vivid that the next day you go into your backyard and look around, expecting to find your unicorn. But it’s not there. That is the position string theorists and other SUSY proponents now find themselves in.

The Devil you say! “Until now, we’ve always thought that transmissible cancers arise extremely rarely in nature, but this new discovery makes us question this belief…”

Nature;

This blind faith in cancer screening is an example of how ideas about human biology and behaviour can persist among people — including scientists — even though the scientific evidence shows the concepts to be false. “Scientists think they’re too objective to believe in something as folklore-ish as a myth,” says Nicholas Spitzer, director of the Kavli Institute for Brain and Mind at the University of California, San Diego. Yet they do.

Grab a coffee.

“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” *