ECSNorway Wrote:True. It demonstrates pretty thoroughly that some paid shills keep abusing the normal process by permanently opening, re-opening, and re-re-opening investigations on widely agreed conclusions based on solid data. Because that way their patrons can claim that "there is no scientific consensus" on the subject, and delay the day it affects their bottom line and/or worldview.Morganni Wrote:This is exactly my point. Regardless of whether or not Climate Change is in fact a) real, b) a serious danger, and/or c) human-caused, the science needs to be open to investigation by all interested parties. This kind of attempt to repress conflicting thought reminds me too much of the controversies surrounding, for example, Darwin and Galileo. If they were genuinely confident of their claims, they would have no issues with others investigating the question. That they have to resort to extreme measures to prevent the research from being questioned demonstrates pretty thoroughly that there is Something Rotten In Denmark.Logan Darklighter Wrote:I think what he's saying here is that he tried to investigate the matter via the normal accepted process and was blocked at every turn by his peers.
Yes. I was disappointed to see this turn into a discussion of global warming in general, because that's kind of a side issue in this context. The concerning thing here is that this organization is violating it's own rules to squash dissent. This, in itself, suggests they are not entirely confident of their own claims, but isn't really what I'd call conclusive. Nonetheless, even if everything they claim is 100% accurate, these are foul deeds.
-Morgan.
Same as they did with pesticides, with tobacco, with creationism, etc, etc, etc.