|
|
|
|
 |
nyt_reader
 |
|
Logic prevails
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQFpl5VEA8qIoSTeZds1Fokp3tkQ?docId=70fac3d8a65441b4aea49925d47f10e8
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303640804577490572237074442.html
|
TonyEX
|
|
Look... I actually have a degree in physics.
You see... the court has not a God Damned clue what science is all about. They should at least go out and read Wittgenstein and Kuhn.. perhaps even take some classes in physics and the philosophy of science.
Science is about MODELS.... not TRUTHs.... there are no "truths" in science, only models which approximate our empirical evidence.
On top of that, the whole machine of "global warming" has been discredited in the last four years and only "political ambitious" people -both scientists and politicians- with a vested financial and professional interest in it people, cling to it. It is a propaganda machine perpetrated by people who stand to make money off it.
Besides, since when do we listen to the Courts and the Lawyers to tell us what is science? Since when do we let the Courts decide what are the "valid" scientific models?
This reminds me of the Soviets.
This is all bullshit and it will all go away in November.
|
MalcolmR
|
|
.
http://www.troutmansanders.com/dc-circuit-upholds-epa-greenhouse-gas-rules-06-26-2012/
| On the science, the Court found that the record contained “substantial evidence” that GHG emissions endanger public health and welfare. In response to petitioners’ arguments on uncertainty, the Court reiterated past precedent that an endangerment judgment is a very permissive standard and that EPA is justified in finding endangerment even if there is significant uncertainty. |
Truth?
Let's see what the EPA did on another matter where it contradicted the science. See what it's own Administrator later admitted. That caused millions of deaths. Page 1 near top, here:
http://www.conscious.com.au/__documents/The%20Eco%20Fraud_Part%203.pdf
The BS AGW scam is not the least scientific. It is anti-science. It is political. For a global agenda.
Malcolm
:)
|
MalcolmR
|
|
.
| Three federal judges admit to being biased in favor of a government agency when granting a landmark decision in favor of caps and taxes on “greenhouse gas” emissions. Court rules Earth’s atmosphere does act like a greenhouse after all. |
http://johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2012/06/27/u-s-court-judges-confess-to-bias-in-greenhouse-gas-emissions-case/
Malcolm
:)
|
MalcolmR
|
|
.
Facts got your tongue nyt_reader?
You post and then don't respond to responses.
Malcolm
:)
|
atomiclightbulb
|
|
TonyE wrote:
only "political ambitious" people -both scientists and politicians- with a vested financial and professional interest in it people, cling to it |
I know many scientists and researchers. Politics and money don't motivate them.
"Global warming research" doesn't pay very well, in any case:
http://arstechnica.com/science/2011/02/if-climate-scientists-push-the-consensus-its-not-for-the-money/
| . Penn State, home of noted climatologists Richard Alley and Michael Mann, has a strong geosciences department and, conveniently, makes the department's salary information available. It's easy to check, and find that the average tenured professor earned about $120,000 last year, and a new hire a bit less than $70,000. |
So to get 70k as a researcher at a top-tier public research university, you need to spend 4-5 years to get a Ph.D., then God-knows-how-many years slaving as a postdoc, and only then cross your fingers and hope to get hired for your first job. Then you basically spend the next few years chasing grant money and praying to get tenure. Fail to do so, and have fun teaching as a low paid adjunct at a branch campus somewhere.
Meanwhile, someone coming out of Penn State with a PNGE B.S. (Petro/Gas engineering) can expect $80,000 out of the gate working for Sunoco or Royal Dutch Shell.
Think about that. 4 years to 80k in Petroleum or Gas, with massive potential for six figures in only a few years, versus 10+ years for uncertain prospects for a chance at getting tenure (have fun!).
| , we can see that Earth Sciences faculty aren't paid especially well. Sure, they do much better than the Arts faculty, but they're somewhere in the middle of the pack, and get stomped on by professors in the Business and IT departments. |
Not even that much government money involved:
For the US government, spending on climate research across 13 different agencies (from the Department of State to NASA) is tracked by the US Climate Change Science Program. The group has tracked the research budget since 1989, but not everything was brought under its umbrella until 1991. That year, according to CCSP figures, about $1.45 billion was spent on climate research (all figures are in 2007 dollars). Funding peaked back in 1995 at $2.4 billion, then bottomed out in 2006 at only $1.7 billion.
Funding has gone up a bit over the last couple of years, and some stimulus money went into related programs. But, in general, the trend has been a downward one for 15 years; it's not an area you'd want to go into if you were looking for a rich source of grant money. If you were, you would target medical research, for which the NIH had a $31 billion budget plus another $10 billion in stimulus money. |
If financial interest is your goal, "Climate Science" is a poor choice.
All the money is in Petroleum and Natural Gas, because these are products that everyone uses. With abundant, clean-burning natural gas replacing coal as the fuel of choice for electric power in the U.S., I don't expect the monetary balance to change.
|
TonyEX
|
|
atomiclightbulb wrote:
TonyE wrote:
only "political ambitious" people -both scientists and politicians- with a vested financial and professional interest in it people, cling to it |
I know many scientists and researchers. Politics and money don't motivate them.
|
You don't know many scientists then.... advancement in science is an ego trip and to base a career on something that is proven wrong is a career and ego killer.
PhD's have the biggest EGOs I've ever seen.
Hey.. I spent some time at JPL... Caltech... worked with a bunch of MIT guys... lots of research guys with Doctorates up the Ying Yang. We're talking BIG TIME SCIENTISTS here.. not some eunuch in West Peoria State.
|
atomiclightbulb
|
|
Your coastal elitism is showing, TonyE.
There are many research powerhouses outside of CalTech, MIT and their peers.
Penn State, OSU, Purdue, Tennessee, Case, Illinois... the list is very very long. Just because you don't conduct research at Harvard or MIT doesn't mean you aren't a "big time scientist".
In any case, you fail to acknowledge my point: there's much more money and power behind the Petrol/Gas industry than academia.
The petrochemical people I know are absolutely blowing away everyone else in personal income. Their companies have the most influence, and the most sway in governments across the world. Most elected officials in the U.S., at least, are not going to vote away good paying jobs, or put upward pressure on fuel prices. Even states that are heavily democratic or lean Liberal have hugely vested interest in energy production.
Short of Nuclear power becoming cheap and safe, Petroleum and Gas are not leaving the stage anytime soon.
|
atomiclightbulb
|
|
atomiclightbulb wrote:
Most elected officials in the U.S., at least, are not going to vote away good paying jobs, or put upward pressure on fuel prices. Even states that are heavily democratic or lean Liberal have hugely vested interest in energy production. |
I wanted to add that it is Congress' responsibility to clarify the laws governing the EPA if they want to get around the Article III courts.
Congress has often ceded too much power to regulatory agencies, who are not often not accountable and often extremely difficult to control.
|
MalcolmR
|
|
.
Agreed, again.
That's one way in which the USA's Constitution has been nullified, bypassed.
Malcolm
:)
|
ckrll
|
|
This thread wanders around a bit.
But a few things for sure: (1) the human race is performing a real-time mother of all experiments on the effects of releasing CO2 in the atmosphere -- come back in 100 years and see the results, whatever they are or are not. (2) it ain't going to stop because the human race is going to burn every dam bit of fossil fuel it can pump, dig or otherwise extract, whatever the consequences. (3) auto emissions are a sideshow, nothing compared to the CO2 being released in Asia by coal burning power plants. (4) anyone who says the science of climate change is settled, either way, is just looking for data to support their bias; we just do not know enough at this point.
cockrill
|
TonyEX
|
|
atomiclightbulb wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
Most elected officials in the U.S., at least, are not going to vote away good paying jobs, or put upward pressure on fuel prices. Even states that are heavily democratic or lean Liberal have hugely vested interest in energy production. |
I wanted to add that it is Congress' responsibility to clarify the laws governing the EPA if they want to get around the Article III courts.
Congress has often ceded too much power to regulatory agencies, who are not often not accountable and often extremely difficult to control.
|
Unfortunately, reactionary progressives like Obama and Pelosi are fundamentally bedded to academia, not industry.
And Obama is an imperial president which means he's ignoring he Congress and the Supreme Court and ruling by fiat through regulatory agencies.
Oh... I was not being an elitist. In my field of work, the greatest research is done on the Coasts and Texas.
Petrochemical is more diverse... although we do have a lot of oil in California (Kern County, right off the coast in SoCal..).
And in my field, which is more into physics, ego's a much more enormous than in geophysics and geology where the important thing is how big is your truck when you go out on the field. ;-)
And yes, once upon a time I wanted to be a geophysicist until a Democratic Governor destroyed funding for Grad Schools in favor of housewives in Community Colleges.
|
TonyEX
|
|
ckrll wrote:
This thread wanders around a bit.
But a few things for sure: (1) the human race is performing a real-time mother of all experiments on the effects of releasing CO2 in the atmosphere -- come back in 100 years and see the results, whatever they are or are not. (2) it ain't going to stop because the human race is going to burn every dam bit of fossil fuel it can pump, dig or otherwise extract, whatever the consequences. (3) auto emissions are a sideshow, nothing compared to the CO2 being released in Asia by coal burning power plants. (4) anyone who says the science of climate change is settled, either way, is just looking for data to support their bias; we just do not know enough at this point.
cockrill
|
Dairy cows in California produce methane...
http://www.sfgate.com/green/article/AGRICULTURE-270-cows-generating-electricity-for-2779190.php
Of course in California this was an emergency and you can imagine how much money that is costing us taxpayers...
Oh you're right... it ain't costing me nothing.. we're broke... someone in Ohio and China is buying our bonds...
The point being that you don't make expensive policies based on shake theoretical ground... a notion that has never deterred people who never went past Biology in High School.
|
MalcolmR
|
|
.
TonyE:
Does nyt_reader remind you of anyone from TOV?
Pjlk?
Malcolm
:)
|
TonyEX
|
|
MalcolmR wrote:
.
TonyE:
Does nyt_reader remind you of anyone from TOV?
Pjlk?
Malcolm
:)
|
I just ignore him. You can't have a discussion with a block of wood.
|
P54
|
|
MalcolmR wrote:
.
TonyE:
Does nyt_reader remind you of anyone from TOV?
Pjlk?
Malcolm
:)
|
Funny. My son saw a post first time yesterday by nyt_reader and immediately said "this sounds like pjlk".
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
