[Bored chemist]

The really stupid part of the idea that scientists can be "bought" is how badly paid most of us are.

Exactly and because you are badly paid you are easier to use and abuse and manipulate into saying what the paymasters want you to say.

But... if we were being paid to corrupt the results, like you suggest, we would no longer be being badly paid, would we.
And, since we are badly paid, it follows that we are not being bribed.

This isn't meant to be difficult.

[championoftruth (OP)]

Look:

1) CO2 has gone above 400 ppm in the first time in the whole of human history and this has been traced to being caused by fossil fuels being burnt

2) we've had 8 of the 10 hottest years in recorded history in the last ten years. That cannot happen by chance.

3) California and Australia were both on fire.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that when climate change is significant enough that even meteorologists can easily see it in their data, that it's very, very, very real.

But the op is whether these readings can be trusted, not what are the readings. In the case of temperature this one can, as it accepts that the margin of error is wide.
2000_years_with_error_v2.png (94.78 kB . 800x600 - viewed 4277 times)

I my opinion yes they can be trusted, the planet is warming, in the 12th century rivers where freezing over during the winter, during the 1600 they where still freezing over, dickens wrote about the tail end of this cool period.

Conversely people will argue that the little ice age was localised, but in that case I disagree, you cannot have part of a system that is cooling whilst still claiming the same temperature for the whole.

It would be very easy to argue that this warming period is anommolous. But the trend is that we are getting warmer over the last 10000years, if we were not I would be very very very concerned as temperatures rise slowly but drop very fast.

Why did you limit your graph to 600? why not before Because?

Also by selecting the 'right' time period start and end points you can spread your political agenda as much as you like.
look the graph line is going down we are into a ice age and its going up we are into global warming.

temperatures go up and down all the time and the temperatures measurements are untrustworthy and unreliable and climategate 5000 leaked emails proved it when they admitted to lying and shutting down any attempt to question the data by smearing them.

Anyone remember Climategate?

[Kryptid]

Have you ever met one with a different agenda? Hen's teeth come to mind.

I'd be awfully surprised if all climate scientists from all countries worldwide had the exact same political opinions.

i can get an expert and as long as i pay his salary he will bark exactly as i order him to.

Climate scientists aren't all paid by a single individual. So if what you are saying was true, you'd expect there to be a lot of disagreement among them as they are all paid by different people who (presumably) would have different agendas.

That is, of course, unless one were to invoke a conspiracy theory where all of these scientists are actually being paid by some world-wide secret organization with tentacles invading the developed world...

Exactly and because you are badly paid you are easier to use and abuse and manipulate into saying what the paymasters want you to say.

If that was really true, then we might as well say that science can't be trusted and we should throw away all of our textbooks because they were written by people who could be bought. No more periodic table, no more rocket ships, no more medicine, etc.

[championoftruth (OP)]

The really stupid part of the idea that scientists can be "bought" is how badly paid most of us are.

Exactly and because you are badly paid you are easier to use and abuse and manipulate into saying what the paymasters want you to say.

But... if we were being paid to corrupt the results, like you suggest, we would no longer be being badly paid, would we.
And, since we are badly paid, it follows that we are not being bribed.

This isn't meant to be difficult.

Well you are not going to be paid in traceable and taxable money are you? It in the form of delayed incentives.

when you leave your job come 'work' for us as a 'consultant' for a few hours a week and we pay you a cushy pension and 500k etc. Or move to the Bahamas...is how corruption works

[championoftruth (OP)]

Have you ever met one with a different agenda? Hen's teeth come to mind.

I'd be awfully surprised if all climate scientists from all countries worldwide had the exact same political opinions.

i can get an expert and as long as i pay his salary he will bark exactly as i order him to.

Climate scientists aren't all paid by a single individual. So if what you are saying was true, you'd expect there to be a lot of disagreement among them as they are all paid by different people who (presumably) would have different agendas.

That is, of course, unless one were to invoke a conspiracy theory where all of these scientists are actually being paid by some world-wide secret organization with tentacles invading the developed world...

Exactly and because you are badly paid you are easier to use and abuse and manipulate into saying what the paymasters want you to say.

If that was really true, then we might as well say that science can't be trusted and we should throw away all of our textbooks because they were written by people who could be bought. No more periodic table, no more rocket ships, no more medicine, etc.

You seem to have forgotten WEF GAVI GATES and the Melinda and Gates foundation. They have their tentacles everywhere thru front and 'non profit' organizations and thru 'donations' of multibillions.

It been all traced.

[Kryptid]

You seem to have forgotten WEF GAVI GATES and the Melinda and Gates foundation.

I can't forget evidence that I was never shown. So how about showing it to me?

[paul cotter]

I can't be deplatformed from any social media as I have never used them. As regards being fired if not compliant I will try to give an honest answer: in my younger days before I had any track record and I was financially insecure, yes possibly I may have been open to being compliant at the risk of being fired, but that situation never happened, thankfully. Once I had a track record, definitely no. I seems to sense some covid denial in your last post-not good.

[championoftruth (OP)]

You seem to have forgotten WEF GAVI GATES and the Melinda and Gates foundation.

I can't forget evidence that I was never shown. So how about showing it to me?

No problem. This is publicly recorded and verifiable information.

you need to study it first.

cant attach it as 19mb.

 limit is 2.5mb

[Kryptid]

No problem. This is publicly recorded and verifiable information.

you need to study it first.

cant attach it as 19mb.

 limit is 2.5mb

Can you find it in link form?

More importantly, does it contain the requested evidence that those organizations are in charge of paying all the world's climate scientists?

[Petrochemicals]

Why did you limit your graph to 600? why not before Because?

Also by selecting the 'right' time period start and end points you can spread your political agenda as much as you like.
look the graph line is going down we are into a ice age and its going up we are into global warming.

you are not reading this at all are you?

1st, it's not my graph
2nd the dark shows the margin of error
3rd it shows the temperature could be as high as present in the recent past
4th political agenda? The earth has warmed in 10000 years, undeniable.
5th I was answering YOUR opening post on data quality,not on the nuances of climate  variability.

I notice the attempt at an insult, but you insulted me more by not paying attention to the post and reeling of a hairspring reply. I will not bother in future.

[paul cotter]

This appears to be headed to a general conspiracy theory. This is a science forum where science is debated, conspiracy theories are not entertained.

[championoftruth (OP)]

You seem to have forgotten WEF GAVI GATES and the Melinda and Gates foundation.

I can't forget evidence that I was never shown. So how about showing it to me?

Here it is. i had to split the 169 page to just a few as 19meg pdf

[Kryptid]

Here it is. i had to split the 169 page to just a few as 19meg pdf

You're aware that someone giving grants to organizations is not the same thing as forcing those organizations to secretly falsify information in accordance with some sinister plan, right? I want evidence for the latter, not the former.

Okay, so I'm looking at the timeline here and things are not adding up for this conspiracy theory. It seems that evidence for climate change was starting to be observed as far back as the 1950's. In 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was set up. So the evidence must have been pretty good for climate change even so long ago.

Now I take a look at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and it was started in 2000. Same thing for the Global Alliance of Vaccines and Immunization. The first conference of the World Education Forum was also held in that same year. So donations from those organizations could not have plausibly been responsible for faking the evidence for climate change that led to the formation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

[championoftruth (OP)]

Here it is. i had to split the 169 page to just a few as 19meg pdf

You're aware that someone giving grants to organizations is not the same thing as forcing those organizations to secretly falsify information in accordance with some sinister plan, right? I want evidence for the latter, not the former.

Okay, so I'm looking at the timeline here and things are not adding up for this conspiracy theory. It seems that evidence for climate change was starting to be observed as far back as the 1950's. In 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was set up. So the evidence must have been pretty good for climate change even so long ago.

Now I take a look at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and it was started in 2000. Same thing for the Global Alliance of Vaccines and Immunization. The first conference of the World Education Forum was also held in that same year. So donations from those organizations could not have plausibly been responsible for faking the evidence for climate change that led to the formation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

You dont get those 'donations' without terms and conditions.

Those being that the money be used to promote their policies aims and financial interests and not contravene the donar.

no such thing as a free lunch.

[Bored chemist]

i can get an expert and as long as i pay his salary he will bark exactly as i order him to.

 rent a experts are dime a dozen as the last 3 years have shown.

This post makes it clear that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm a scientist, if I want a new job- a better paid one- the thing I need to be able to show is that my work was good.
If there's any evidence that it was corrupt, I'm unemployable.

but your conspiracy theory says that Greenpeace- funded essentially by gruaniad readers and hippies- is better able to "buy off" scientists than the oil and gas companies.
Not just a bit better- say getting 60% of them, but able to outbid the fossil fuel lobby to the extent that the polls look like this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change#/media/File:20211103_Academic_studies_of_scientific_consensus_-_global_warming,_climate_change_-_vertical_bar_chart_-_en.svg

So the only real question is are you joking or are you mad?

[Bored chemist]

The really stupid part of the idea that scientists can be "bought" is how badly paid most of us are.

Exactly and because you are badly paid you are easier to use and abuse and manipulate into saying what the paymasters want you to say.

But... if we were being paid to corrupt the results, like you suggest, we would no longer be being badly paid, would we.
And, since we are badly paid, it follows that we are not being bribed.

This isn't meant to be difficult.

Well you are not going to be paid in traceable and taxable money are you? It in the form of delayed incentives.

when you leave your job come 'work' for us as a 'consultant' for a few hours a week and we pay you a cushy pension and 500k etc. Or move to the Bahamas...is how corruption works

You seem not to realise something.
You could possibly buy me off with half a million.
But there's about 300 scientists in the lab I work in.
How deep are your pockets?

[Bored chemist]

Is that another conspiracy theory?

At best that should get the thread moved to "new theories". I think the trash can would be better but.... whatever.

[alancalverd]

Only an idiot would deny climate change. It always has and always will change, because the system is inherently unstable. 

The problem arises when people take a very short term view of an obvious correlation and insist that it proves causation, despite all the historical evidence and actual physics. This leads to a comforting delusion that we can somehow avert a disaster that is actually inevitable, by making sacrifices. 

[Kryptid]

You dont get those 'donations' without terms and conditions.

So what is your evidence that their terms and conditions are to falsify climate change data? If the data was already supporting climate change before the donations were given (which I already pointed out), then nothing would have to be falsified anyway.

I'd also like to see your evidence that satellite temperature readings are fake.

[Origin]

You seem to have forgotten WEF GAVI GATES and the Melinda and Gates foundation. They have their tentacles everywhere thru front and 'non profit' organizations and thru 'donations' of multibillions.

Oh, great another psycho conspiracy theory.