Buy Sev's Latest Book

Be sure to buy my latest e-book at Amazon! Dark Matters

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Truly Disturbing

No real important games in the World Cup today. I'm currently watching the Germany vs Australia match and screaming my head off for Australia. Many Aussies were kind enough to come cheer on Team USA yesterday against England. Let's face it, they have much more in common with the old Monarchy than we do. They even have the Queen on their money... they're British.

However, that is not what disturbs The Force today. What does disturb The Force is an interview with Stephen McIntyre of Climate Audit and the man who disproved the Hockey Stick graph in the IPCC report. Over at PJTV in a Members Only interview. I saw McIntyre's speech at ICCC 2010 and was intrigued enough to take a look at this video. Mainly because McIntyre has no scientific axe to grind, just a knowledge of mineral reports, math and statistics which makes him imminently qualified to judge the data that made that graph.

At some point in the 53 minute interview, he discusses how he and Ross McKitrick were denied publication in Science magazine AFTER they added Phil Jones to the peer review panel. Phil "Hide The Decline" Jones of the University of East Anglia, Lord Voldemort of the Climate Alarmists coven. The man who single handedly suborned the peer review process and has forever tainted the scientific community with the stench of snake oil salesmen.

Let me explain why this is possibly the most criminal process to ever happen in the world of science and why the North Korean geneticist is small change compared to the Chicken Little Gimme Grant Money Alarmists.

Ever since we began to question our being, our planet and our universe, we accepted that only the truth would suffice as an answer. If we could not find an answer we had to accept one of two truths, we were wrong or we did not yet have the technology sufficient to proving our hypothesis. These suppositions were all based on everything being true and factual and the data being reviewed in a rational, logical manner.

Now, if we thought we had produced answers, we would immediately try to get others, interested in the same area, to replicate what we had done in the lab. We would have exhaustive papers with a clear abstract as to what we hoped to prove and how we went about proving it. We guarded our lab notebooks like a miser hoarding his first nickle, but we gave all the pertinent information so that others could replicate our experiments, and thus prove our theory with us. If it was not replicated by anyone else, then we had to go back to the drawing board. We did not go back and fudge the data and studies, we had to go back and rethink our hypotheses, our methodology and discover whether we were wrong, or whether we just needed more data. But, we always had to accept that we might be wrong. If the facts did not support our hypothesis, then we were wrong. Nothing would change that fact.

Now, I will add here that many old hypotheses and studies have been dug up and proven since we developed the technology with which to test them.

Phil Jones, that charlatan in a lab coat, figured it would be best to stack the peer review boards with Alarmists who would systematically deny every paper that proved climate change was a sham. And until those boards were packed they would only submit their papers to boards on publications that were sympathetic to the Global Warming BS.

This is about as wrong as the scientist who believes that a better understanding of incest will make it as socially acceptable as homosexuality. It has almost nothing to do with religion and everything to do with genetics. It ain't ever gonna happen.


I urge you to watch the video. If you're not a member, you should seriously think about becoming one. It's the best $5 a month you will ever spend. You will learn that as a scientist, we can man up, grow a pair and accept that we are wrong and stop pouting and doing self-destructive things like covering our ears until the voice of reason shuts up or you can circle the bowl and go down the drain with the rest of the refuse that surrounds any progressive liberal driven agenda. But you must think for yourself. Do not depend on anyone else for your opinion. Find out as much as you need to know, know that your opinion was right or wrong, and then move on. Dwelling on it, pouting because it's not the result you expected or wanted is infantile.

You will feel much better about yourself once you accept the things that cannot be changed. Then find something else to be passionate about.

No comments: