Scientific Research vs. Lies Part IV

Part 4 of the series. Here is part 1, part 2, and part 3

I care about the environment. But I also care about the human race. We must find a happy balance with the environment to survive. A main issue I have, is with the constant doom and gloom I hear from certain people and their hypocrisy. The actions of many involved in the whole second ice age/global warming/climate change debate do not inspire confidence. Much of what I see is not the actions of mature individuals, but remind more of children demanding attention. I ask for honest skeptical scientific research, not religious zealotry. In a free country the major decisions need public support. The actions of a few "scientist" can thrown the question of the acts of all scientific honesty into question. The attacks on those who ask questions cause even more distrust and doubt.

Please Support us by visiting our sponsors

Just like the man standing on the corner wearing a sandwich board that says: "THE WORLD WILL END TOMORROW," sooner or later more and more people will begin to question the claim. With Al Gore's recent purchase of ocean front property, it would appear that one of the high priests of the movement is not setting a very good example. Maybe he knows something or has lost his faith. It seems to me that this is another example of the sheer arrogance of the leadership of the whole cabal.

Scientific research is a time honored process of gathering facts, analyzing them, and developing a conclusion. Then allowing others to examine your methods, repeat any experiments, and develop conclusions. All information must be shared. Science is the relentless pursuit of the TRUTH. But after watching this whole affair of over 30 years, it is obvious to me that the initial step was to prove a theory. An honest scientific program would start with a simple statement, such as: What affect does human activity have on the ecosystem. But from my first exposure to climate research the question has been: What affect does carbon have on the ecosystem? These are two totally different questions. The former asks an open question, the latter starts with a conclusion. That being, that carbon is the target of the research which makes it easy to overlook and/or exclude any possible other final conclusion. Once you head down that path it is hard to be objective and all science goes out the window.

The litter bins of history are filled with false predictions and lies. There are a rash of new videos on the Internet that have been sanitized in an effort to restore faith in the Climate Change theories. We must have honest debate and research if we expect to identify and fix problems. Jumping to conclusions and solutions usually waste time, effort, and does real damage. I want our energies spent on finding solutions and by following blind paths we may overlook the real problems. But manipulating and destroying "bad" data because it does not fit your predetermined conclusion is criminal and endangers the faith that people have in those who are suppose to be smart enough to solve the world's problems.

Scientific Research vs. Lies Part III

Part 3 of the series. Follow links to part 1and part 2.

Now the debate on Cap and Trade begins again. After months of efforts to rehabilitate the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) the media and politicians are determined to revitalize this now discredited religion of man made global climate change. Let's face it, that horse has left the gate and too many people now view this not as science, but as a hoax. The cause of alternate fuels has also been damaged. This is the greatest sin of the whole affair. Although there are those who still hang on to the idea that man is totally responsible for the climate, we must realize that many of the major sponsors of this movement seem to have ulterior motives. Those motives were profit.

Share

How would the cap and trade system as proposed by people like the President and Al Gore put more money into the hands of those who can produce alternate energy sources? The idea of trading carbon credits will mainly pump money into the hands of energy traders without encouraging research or development of real solutions. Making Al Gore a Billionaire and giving more power to Washington is not the answer to the nation's or, for that matter, the world's long term energy issues. Blaming human carbon emissions for all of the ills of the world is not producing positive results. Blaming all energy producers for the sins of a few, does not help the situation. It only sets back the cause for all of us.

Please Support us by visiting our sponsors

Blind trust in people who have shown no fear of lying is a dangerous way to live. If you think that you can trust those that get their way by lying is good; then how can you tell where the lies end and the truth begins? As far as I'm concerned the idea that anything can come from the reports released by the CRU and IPCC is usable or trustworthy is in great question. With the tactics used and the sloppy work that has been shown it is easy to not only disregard the results, but to disbelieve anything that comes from anyone who claims that carbon released by mankind has anything to do with the climate. The natural system is too complex and the lies have been shown to be just that, lies.

We must separate the lies from the speculation and true scientific analysis. We must look for answers, not place blame. It is time to listen and not try to talk down to anyone who disagrees with your beliefs. Arrogance only breeds distrust. For too long there are those who point fingers and tilt at windmills, but have no real answers. If you want support, then you can not just make charges that can be easily disproved. No matter how hard a person works to hide facts, the facts will come to light.

But the biggest danger still lies in the damage done by this whole episode. How can we repair the damage done to the scientific community by a group of zealots? We must not deny that we have made progress to clean the environment. We can not allow those who want to only make short term profits and political gains control the process. We must find alternative energy sources for the future. We must find ways use to the sources we have today that is cleaner and more economical. For the sake of those who come after us, we must be willing to face cold hard facts and look for real solutions. The future begins now. How will we leave this Earth to our descendant?

©2010 Pedro Sykes - Some Rights Reserved

Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

Blind Faith?

Please Support us by visiting our sponsors

Unlike Punxsutawney Phil who looked out this year and saw that Winter would continue, Mr. Gore looked out and saw more global warming.  I can only assume that the sunlight that has beamed into the hall of the IPCC and the CRU at The University of East Anglia was so bright that it blinded him.  I don't know why, but I felt that with so much invested, financially and intellectually, that it would be hard for an honest reevaluation from Mr. Gore.


He seems to think that those who question him are tools of some grand conspiracy. To the exact opposite of his paranoia he need to learn that it is good to question science. It is also required for honest scientific inquiry. When ever any group refuses to allow examination of the relevant data they must be distrusted. When these "warmers" start bulling anyone who made honest inquiries into the conclusions I began to distrust the message. They attacked and ridiculed anyone who simply questioned their claims. This is not the way that you conduct research it is the way to push an agenda.


I have no agenda other then the ultimate success of the human race. I want the lives of people to progress. I want our resources to be utilized in the best way for humankind and not wasted. An important resource is time and money. Both seem to have been wasted. Like sand slipping through your hand many of the predictions made are now being shown to be false or exaggerated. Data has been destroyed and altered. Pure speculation has been presented as fact. This is not the way to work for the betterment of society and the future of our children. 


There is an old Polish proverb: "A spoonful of wine in a barrel of sewage is sewage. A spoonful of sewage in a barrel of wine is sewage." If Mr. Gore and the climate scientists want to prove that there is man-made global warming then they will have to convince the world that the work that they have produced is not contaminated by all of the lies (sewage) that have been used up to this point. Don't just fall back on the same old song and dance again. We do not have your blind faith or belief in your so called "settled science."

Op-Ed Contributor - We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change - NYTimes.com

©2010 Pedro Sykes - Some Rights Reserved

Scientific Research vs. Lies Part II

Please Support us by visiting our sponsors

The debate around man-made global warming is very divisive. Whenever you discuss some issues, there are people who automatically jump to a conclusion. Sometimes it is due to their ignorance or they assume that they already know what you are going to say. (Ignorance simply means that a person is unaware of information.) Emotions can also cloud reading comprehension.  Unlike the spoken word, the written word carries the emotion that is brought by the reader.

We as a people must work together to solve problems. This requires some trust. But not total devotion to the first thing that comes along that sound reasonable. We must learn to listen, not just hear, and be willing to challenge our beliefs. We must always question our own beliefs to keep ourselves sane. That does not mean that we should abandon our beliefs, but we should be willing to consider both sides of an argument. It is good to defend a position as long as you consider the other person and their opinion. If we sink into blind obedience, we shall all surely drain.  Think for yourself.

I wish that I could say that we could trust the information given to us by all of our leaders, but I now have major doubts. With the revelations of Climate Gate and the history of bulling that has occurred within the scientific community I feel that we are back at square one. The conscious manipulation of data calls all conclusions about potential climate change into question. It is good to see that many in the scientific community that have questioned the conclusions of the IPCC and other climate change advocates getting more attention.

Pedro's Video Finds: Global Warming: The Other Side

A interesting and fact filled examination of Global Warming.
Pedro's Video Vault: Global Warming: The Other Side

Please Support us by visiting our sponsors

Scientific Research vs. Lies

Please Support us by visiting our sponsors

In an earlier time, man was ruled through superstition. When little was understood about the natural world the belief in the supernatural or the mystic realm allowed people to be easily manipulated. Over the years science has evolved to help explain the mysteries that have enslaved mankind for centuries. There are no absolutes in science, only theories. True scientific inquiry is governed by skepticism. The ultimate goals of science are the pursuit of true and to doubt all conclusions.

Scientific research must be based upon the basic tenet of disbelief. An individual has a theory. This idea is tested to prove and disprove the underlying concepts. It can not be rushed. On March 23, 1989 Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons announced a major breakthrough on cold fusion. They provided all of their data and detailed descriptions of the process. This news was met with much enthusiasm and fanfare. This process could provide almost unlimited energy.