Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Climate Change Forum oops. not only not primarily anthropogenic...

...it might not even be warming

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83323

the gravy train is coming...or going

all aboard

the gravy train is coming...or going

and how much are the supposed scientist being paid to ride the train?




I wonder just what percentage of climate scientist are riding that train , and what percentage do they hold to scientist in general.

650 scientist , what scientific field are these scientist in?

could it be meteorology?

or most likely geology.

and working or intending to work with oil companies in the near future.

I would say that "the gravy train is coming" for those in the fields of alternate energy.

but everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion.

"and how much are the supposed scientist being paid to ride the train?"

supposed scientists?

did you check any of their creds?

how much paid?

in terms of grant (slush fund) dollars, far less than the gw scaremongers are getting

I tried but was not allowed in the laboratory.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy




you know some supposed scientist dont even adhere to science and tend to sway their purchased opinion in the wind and in the face of actual scientific data collected by actual scientist.



we'll I wouldn't know , perhaps you do.

someone or some company is obviously going to foot the fare to poland for the 650 "scientist" to get there.

Wow! A new poster comes in out of the blue and gives us loads of uh ... "information" ... from that highly reliable scientific source, the worldnutdaily. Wow! The article even cites that there are MORE "scientists" in the dissenting view than on the IPCC, as if that were relevant. Never mind that the vast majority of these guys are speaking far afield of their expertise.

This is such a novelty. We never get cranks in here.

And yea ... industry shills can make a lot more than university professors and government employees.

FF wrote:
And yea ... industry shills can make a lot more than university professors and government employees.

True, but it doesn't make them right, just very much noisier per kilo.

So WND is incapable of reporting fact?

I am amazed at just how parochial scientific types can be.

Most 'sources' *can* and *do* report facts. Many of them are very good at selectively reporting facts and reporting some things as facts that aren't facts.

I'm amazed at how one can be accused of being "parochial" for pointing out that a slanted unscientific "news" source is, in fact, slanted. Well ... no, I'm not amazed.

We should understand things in context - Poland is relatively poor country, which is living from burning of fossil fuel supplies and selling the energy and energy hungry products to the rest of Europe in the simmilar way, like Czech Republic, whose president Vaclav Klaus is lobbyist of energetic companies (CEZ in particular, for which his family is working). On the contrary, countries like Japan (where Kyoto protocol was signed originally) depends on import of energy - so they can perceive global warming as more real threat.

Of course there is so little funding if you agree with the 'consensus'.

Oops...

"Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates together committed $750 million to research climate change...to fight Global Warming."

"The EU has earmarked a total of € 1.9 billion for funding this theme over the duration of FP7."

"a group of oil executives from Exxon, Shell, and BP... have agreed to donate $125 billion to an environmental fund focused on halting all CO2 emissions worldwide."


Yeah, seems as if there's no money in it if you are with the consensus.

AGW research is an industry.

I agree that is the final result.

also eventually , after everyone has died and all life has ceased to exist , the CO2 that they caused will still be here.

we will no longer be emitting CO2 , nor will there be any plants to convert the CO2 into Oxygen.

its funny how with ALL THAT FUNDING AVAILABLE there is none AVAILABLE for ANYTHING that would really make a difference.

lets see with 125 billion , I could start up a auto industry based on the use of GAS TURBINES connected to a GENERATOR that charges a BATTERY.

.....
You drive your car to work , it sets there charging the batteries until there charged.

You drive it home
it sets there charging until the battery is charged.

......

the turbine is a 1 H.P. equivalent.
its efficency is 90% vs a piston engine efficiency of 15%

it gets apx 100 mpg or more

DO YOU THINK THAT ANY OF THAT MONEY WILL GO INTO THE PRODUCTION OF SUCH A GAS SAVER , SUCH A POLLUTION PREVENTER ?

I DONT.

Do you have any idea what those dollars on "research" will actually be spent on? I don't. There are international laws against whaling, but there are exceptions for "research." Japanese whalers can do wholesale whaling by just putting the word "RESEARCH" on the sides of their ships. It's a pretty fair analogy to say that japanese whaleships have the same relation to "research" that Fox or WND have to "news."

Shell, et. al. are claiming they will put money into "research." We have no basis for understanding what they mean by that term - it could very well be they're going to put a nice coat of green paint on their oil rigs.

TFF

I found the oil rig you mentioned , it looks as if they have went as far as planting trees on top.

and the olympic sized swimmimg pool is a definite plus here in the new green world created by the research dollars that the oil men have donated.

--------- FANTASY ----- will never be seen


I guess that until there is more research dollars available we will have to put up with the current
green efforts in oil rig design.

------- REALITY ------- seen throughout the world




after all it is better to burn off the methane than to release it.

I suppose that the research has found a way to capture the methane , thus no burning pillar of fire puffing from the new green oil rigs.

Black Dots Represent Oil Rigs
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=h...N%26start%3D357

Paul,
Looks like it. I seriously don't know how the oil companies plan to invest their billions into that kind of "research."

Recently, Susan Hockfield, the president of MIT gave a talk at my work. I don't recall all the stats exactly, but it's something like this:

Most science-oriented companies (like pharmaceutical companies) will invest about 15% of their profits into research.

Car companies invest about 3%.

Oil companies less than 1%.

I gather most of their "research" is looking for new oil, not looking for new ways of generating energy.