• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Failure Deniers: Climate Change and Public-Sector Science

Wehrwolfen

Banned
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
402
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
By TOM BLUMER
June 28, 2013

If not taxpayer-funded, the massive failure of warmism advocates would have been addressed long ago.
At a private firm, if a new product or idea loses — or is on track to lose — serious amounts of money, or if a research project is going nowhere, it gets killed (see: the Ford Edsel, New Coke, Apple Newton). Those who fall in love with these flame-outs and blindly defend them even when the handwriting is on the wall get fired.But within government?
If a new idea or product is failing or initially seems destined to fail, bureaucrats, their corporate beneficiaries, and their cronies work to get them underwritten or subsidized. The fact that the government is even involved likely indicates that the private sector knows better than to touch it without putting taxpayers on the hook. This explains why the Obama administration has had losers like Solyndra, A123 Battery, Beacon Power, and so many others in its energy “loan” portfolio.
When companies continue to flounder, governments usually either institutionalize their failures or double down on them.
Hopeless passenger-rail romantics and then-powerful rail unions couldn’t bear to see the end of nationwide train travel, so they convinced Congress to have the federal government take over the entire enterprise in the early 1970s. What followed were four decades of annual Amtrak losses averaging over $800 million, and benefiting far less than 0.1 percent of daily travelers nationwide. Recent narrower losses should — but won’t — bring on discussions of selling off Amtrak’s profitable routes to private firms and abandoning the losers once and for all.

After a $5,000 price reduction to about $28,500, the Chevy Volt, produced by General Motors — an entity which is still under de facto government control — still sells only about 1,600 units per month. The vehicle’s fully loaded cost to produce is about $75,000. Yet don’t expect GM to pull the plug, figuratively or literally, on their financially disastrous electric car experiment any time soon. Too much false pride is on the line.


(Excerpt)

Read more:
PJ Media » Failure Deniers: Climate Change and Public-Sector Science

Why is Obama and his administration continuing to spends the hundreds and millions of taxpayer money to fund these scams?
 

StillBallin75

Salty Specialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
22,412
Reaction score
14,176
Location
Fort Drum, New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Why bother looking at the evidence and arriving at your own conclusions when you can let right-wing blogs do your thinking for you, eh?
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,511
Reaction score
52,723
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Why bother looking at the evidence and arriving at your own conclusions when you can let right-wing blogs do your thinking for you, eh?

Who would you trust, some hoity toity scientist actually educated on the topic, or Billy Bob Inbred' s blog? We know the answer for the OP...
 

Wehrwolfen

Banned
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
402
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Why bother looking at the evidence and arriving at your own conclusions when you can let right-wing blogs do your thinking for you, eh?

More like its on the other foot. Just how many times must this scam of Climate Warming be shown false? Sure the U.S., has returned there levels of CO2 and other industrial effluents back to pre-90's numbers. Have the Chinese, Russians, and Indians done the same? I think not.

Beijing's Pollution, Seen From Space In Before And After Photos
Beijing's Pollution, Seen From Space In Before And After Photos : The Two-Way : NPR
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


China air pollution: 'Slightly polluted' or 'hazardous'? - CNN.com

China air pollution: 'Slightly polluted' or 'hazardous'? - CNN.com

Nov 17, 2011 · China air pollution: 'Slightly polluted' or ... This photo shows two images of the view from ... taken on blue-sky days during the 2008 Olympics, ...
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


40 Years of Achievements, 1970-2010 | EPA@40 | US EPA

US Environmental Protection Agency › EPA@40

During the first 20 years of the Clean Air Act, ... Protecting America's Water . ... 40 Years in Images; EPA Milestones; Informing the Public;
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,511
Reaction score
52,723
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
More like its on the other foot. Just how many times must this scam of Climate Warming be shown false? Sure the U.S., has returned there levels of CO2 and other industrial effluents back to pre-90's numbers. Have the Chinese, Russians, and Indians done the same? I think not.

Beijing's Pollution, Seen From Space In Before And After Photos
Beijing's Pollution, Seen From Space In Before And After Photos : The Two-Way : NPR
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


China air pollution: 'Slightly polluted' or 'hazardous'? - CNN.com

China air pollution: 'Slightly polluted' or 'hazardous'? - CNN.com

Nov 17, 2011 · China air pollution: 'Slightly polluted' or ... This photo shows two images of the view from ... taken on blue-sky days during the 2008 Olympics, ...
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


40 Years of Achievements, 1970-2010 | EPA@40 | US EPA

US Environmental Protection Agency › EPA@40

During the first 20 years of the Clean Air Act, ... Protecting America's Water . ... 40 Years in Images; EPA Milestones; Informing the Public;

You realize none of that has anything to do with the accuracy of AGW?
 

Velvet Elvis

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
4,954
Reaction score
2,195
Location
Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I don't trust someone who robotically cranks out threads every 10 minutes, 20 times a day, seven days a week.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Wehrwolfen said:
...Just how many times must this scam of Climate Warming be shown false? ....

logo.gif


headline.png


Expert credibility in climate change
William R. L. Anderegg a , 1 , James W. Prall b , Jacob Harold c , and Stephen H. Schneider a , d , 1
Contributed by Stephen H. Schneider, April 9, 2010 (sent for review December 22, 2009)

Abstract

Although preliminary estimates from published literature and expert surveys suggest striking agreement among climate scientists on the tenets of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), the American public expresses substantial doubt about both the anthropogenic cause and the level of scientific agreement underpinning ACC. A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions.

Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that
(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and
(ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.​

Study 2:

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article
John Cook 1,2,3, Dana Nuccitelli 2,4, Sarah A Green 5, Mark Richardson 6, Bärbel Winkler 2, Rob Painting 2, Robert Way 7, Peter Jacobs 8 and Andrew Skuce 2,9
John Cook et al 2013 Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024
doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024
Received 18 January 2013, accepted for publication 22 April 2013
Published 15 May 2013

Abstract

We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature,
examining 11,944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.
We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.
In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers.
Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%).
Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus.

For both abstract ratings and authors' self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally Increased over time.
Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.​
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom