The Climate Change scam

[Wolf]

 

[Mad as Fish]

What's the problem exactly though?

Science Isn’t Broken

If you follow the headlines, your confidence in science may have taken a hit lately. Peer review? More like self-review. An investigation in November uncovered a scam in which researchers were rubber-stamping their own work, circumventing peer review at five high-profile publishers.

fivethirtyeight.com

The replication crisis shows science is checking and validating itself.

No other movement puts itself under this kind of scrutiny and self criticism. There is always going to be a Schön at some point, but they get uncovered eventually.

Bollux, 90% are in it for the money.

 

[Wolf]

Bollux, 90% are in it for the money.

And the decent ones who questioned the CoVidian Cultists during the Scamdemic were fired, disowned, deplatformed and even jailed.

 

[tldr]

What's the problem exactly though?

Science Isn’t Broken

If you follow the headlines, your confidence in science may have taken a hit lately. Peer review? More like self-review. An investigation in November uncovered a scam in which researchers were rubber-stamping their own work, circumventing peer review at five high-profile publishers.

fivethirtyeight.com

The replication crisis shows science is checking and validating itself.

No other movement puts itself under this kind of scrutiny and self criticism. There is always going to be a Schön at some point, but they get uncovered eventually.

Well, Wikipedia says it's an ongoing crisis. Since Wikipedia isn't far right I suppose you accept it as a credible source.



'The replication crisis (also called the replicability crisis and the reproducibility crisis) is an ongoing methodological crisis in which the results of many scientific studies are difficult or impossible to reproduce. Because the reproducibility of empirical results is an essential part of the scientific method,[2] such failures undermine the credibility of theories building on them and potentially call into question substantial parts of scientific knowledge.

The replication crisis is frequently discussed in relation to psychology and medicine, where considerable efforts have been undertaken to reinvestigate classic results, to determine whether they are reliable, and if they turn out not to be, the reasons for the failure.[3][4] Data strongly indicates that other natural and social sciences are affected as well.[5]

The phrase replication crisis was coined in the early 2010s[6] as part of a growing awareness of the problem. Considerations of causes and remedies have given rise to a new scientific discipline, metascience,[7] which uses methods of empirical research to examine empirical research practice.

Considerations about reproducibility fall into two categories. Reproducibility in the narrow sense refers to re-examining and validating the analysis of a given set of data. Replication refers to repeating the experiment or study to obtain new, independent data with the goal of reaching the same or similar conclusions.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis


From your link:

'P-hacking is generally thought of as cheating, but what if we made it compulsory instead? If the purpose of studies is to push the frontiers of knowledge, then perhaps playing around with different methods shouldn’t be thought of as a dirty trick, but encouraged as a way of exploring boundaries.'

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/science-isnt-broken/

 

[Kangal]

Well, Wikipedia says it's an ongoing crisis. Since Wikipedia isn't far right I suppose you accept it as a credible source.



'The replication crisis (also called the replicability crisis and the reproducibility crisis) is an ongoing methodological crisis in which the results of many scientific studies are difficult or impossible to reproduce. Because the reproducibility of empirical results is an essential part of the scientific method,[2] such failures undermine the credibility of theories building on them and potentially call into question substantial parts of scientific knowledge.

The replication crisis is frequently discussed in relation to psychology and medicine, where considerable efforts have been undertaken to reinvestigate classic results, to determine whether they are reliable, and if they turn out not to be, the reasons for the failure.[3][4] Data strongly indicates that other natural and social sciences are affected as well.[5]

The phrase replication crisis was coined in the early 2010s[6] as part of a growing awareness of the problem. Considerations of causes and remedies have given rise to a new scientific discipline, metascience,[7] which uses methods of empirical research to examine empirical research practice.

Considerations about reproducibility fall into two categories. Reproducibility in the narrow sense refers to re-examining and validating the analysis of a given set of data. Replication refers to repeating the experiment or study to obtain new, independent data with the goal of reaching the same or similar conclusions.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis


From your link:

'P-hacking is generally thought of as cheating, but what if we made it compulsory instead? If the purpose of studies is to push the frontiers of knowledge, then perhaps playing around with different methods shouldn’t be thought of as a dirty trick, but encouraged as a way of exploring boundaries.'

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/science-isnt-broken/

Yeah of course it's a problem. While it seems to be mostly confined to the social sciences I'm not going to pretend it's not a problem elsewhere.

But that's the point in a way....the scientific process has helped to shed light on this.

There is additional self correcting aspects - anything that has potential commercial applications will have an attempt at replication. Hence the comments on the video about cancer research.

The problem is that there really is nowhere enough money going into research, so they really only get one shot to run their research or experiment once.(I have a cousin who is a PhD researcher now in Australia, and she struggles with cost of living. She should have gone into investment banking).

If its interesting they publish. And why not? If its really interesting someone will attempt to replicate. If the result can't be replicated, that's the end of the road.

There's a definite distinction then between the soft and hard sciences. Hard science is really something that can be monetised and comes with risk, it's going to get checked at some point. Cos someone WILL pay if its badly wrong. And yes, sometimes it does.

The scientific method is nothing more than to try to put some fail safes around the fact we are human, with bias, limited resources, massive egos and prone to group think. It's value is always evident in the medium to long term.

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

On the science.

I remember that arsehole telling everyone to get jabbed to the eyeballs.

Are you taking the piss Sir?

 

[Wolf]

Who's running the gimp's account for the weekend?
Because it's definitely not the same gimp who runs it during the week.

 

[Professor]

What's the problem exactly though?

Going Off-Topic on a Climate thread.

The replication crisis shows science is checking and validating itself.

Whatever that means?
In regard to the supposed Climate Crisis we see that Science is manipulating, cherry picking, obfuscating and ignoring the facts.
Not checking itself sufficiently and hence altogether invalidating itself in many important areas, Climate being one of those.

No other movement puts itself under this kind of scrutiny and self criticism. There is always going to be a Schön at some point, but they get uncovered eventually.

A pity that MSM is such a load of censored, edited nonsense though. - Now the general public haven't a clue what to believe - ClownWorld Science

 

[Kangal]

Going Off-Topic on a Climate thread.

Take it up with @tldr

His post is not off topic in the larger scale of things. We probably need a new thread for it.

 

[tldr]

Yeah of course it's a problem. While it seems to be mostly confined to the social sciences I'm not going to pretend it's not a problem elsewhere.

But that's the point in a way....the scientific process has helped to shed light on this.

There is additional self correcting aspects - anything that has potential commercial applications will have an attempt at replication. Hence the comments on the video about cancer research.

The problem is that there really is nowhere enough money going into research, so they really only get one shot to run their research or experiment once.(I have a cousin who is a PhD researcher now in Australia, and she struggles with cost of living. She should have gone into investment banking).

If its interesting they publish. And why not? If its really interesting someone will attempt to replicate. If the result can't be replicated, that's the end of the road.

There's a definite distinction then between the soft and hard sciences. Hard science is really something that can be monetised and comes with risk, it's going to get checked at some point. Cos someone WILL pay if its badly wrong. And yes, sometimes it does.

The scientific method is nothing more than to try to put some fail safes around the fact we are human, with bias, limited resources, massive egos and prone to group think. It's value is always evident in the medium to long term.

It's not cheating, it's "exploration".

Climate science can be monetised through government grants, subsidies, retooling mandates and confiscations. Bet there's a lot of regret for the whole COVID thing now - lifted the lid really.

'Data strongly indicates that other natural and social sciences are affected as well.[5]'
ibid

 

[Mad as Fish]

It's not cheating, it's "exploration".

Climate science can be monetised through government grants, subsidies, retooling mandates and confiscations. Bet there's a lot of regret for the whole COVID thing now - lifted the lid really.

'Data strongly indicates that other natural and social sciences are affected as well.[5]'
ibid

The World Enslavement Forum suggests that we need to spend an extra 3.5 trillion dollars a year on climate change measures. When the pot is that big then every crook and chancer in the world is going to slither out of the woodwork for a slice of the action.

Transitioning to a green economy will cost the world another $3.5 trillion a year | World Economic Forum

www.weforum.org

 

[Kangal]

Climate science can be monetised through government grants, subsidies, retooling mandates and confiscations. Bet there's a lot of regret for the whole COVID thing now - lifted the lid really.

There's fuck all money in it compared to other sectors and industries and certainly no "killer app" analogue to hope for in this space. People forget this. It's not the bogeyman you are looking for.

Covid could have been a hell of a lot worse. When lockdowns started, no one knew about long covid.

You obviously think differently. But it can't change the facts as I see them. We really could have fucked this up massively, now we know how covid damages the body. And we are going to have to live with it anyway, forever.

 

[Mad as Fish]

There's fuck all money in it compared to other sectors and industries and certainly no "killer app" analogue to hope for in this space. People forget this. It's not the bogeyman you are looking for.

Covid could have been a hell of a lot worse. When lockdowns started, no one knew about long covid.

You obviously think differently. But it can't change the facts as I see them. We really could have fucked this up massively, now we know how covid damages the body. And we are going to have to live with it anyway, forever.

More makey uppey copium

 

[Mad as Fish]

Yeah of course it's a problem. While it seems to be mostly confined to the social sciences I'm not going to pretend it's not a problem elsewhere.

But that's the point in a way....the scientific process has helped to shed light on this.

There is additional self correcting aspects - anything that has potential commercial applications will have an attempt at replication. Hence the comments on the video about cancer research.

The problem is that there really is nowhere enough money going into research, so they really only get one shot to run their research or experiment once.(I have a cousin who is a PhD researcher now in Australia, and she struggles with cost of living. She should have gone into investment banking).

If its interesting they publish. And why not? If its really interesting someone will attempt to replicate. If the result can't be replicated, that's the end of the road.

There's a definite distinction then between the soft and hard sciences. Hard science is really something that can be monetised and comes with risk, it's going to get checked at some point. Cos someone WILL pay if its badly wrong. And yes, sometimes it does.

The scientific method is nothing more than to try to put some fail safes around the fact we are human, with bias, limited resources, massive egos and prone to group think. It's value is always evident in the medium to long term.

Is that the cousin who fecked about in the kitchen sink to prove that the covid tests were somehow valid? No wonder nobody wants to pay her for her crap science.

 

[Wolf]

More makey uppey copium

Any sign of a case of Long Flu in Ireland?
I posted during the week where some fruitcake 'scientist' reckons he's discovered it....

These Cultist clowns are so funny.

 

[Mad as Fish]

Maine has postponed its ban on ICE powered cars because a storm caused severe power outages. As U.S. Rep. Jared Golden says in opposing the great transition -

Forcing Mainers to purchase cars and trucks powered by electricity when our grid is insufficient, charging stations are few and far between, and a storm like yesterday’s would render 80% of cars useless is, to say the least, ill-advised.

Ironic Plot Twist Slams The Brakes On Maine Vote To Ban Gas Cars | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

 

[tldr]

There's fuck all money in it compared to other sectors and industries and certainly no "killer app" analogue to hope for in this space. People forget this. It's not the bogeyman you are looking for.

Covid could have been a hell of a lot worse. When lockdowns started, no one knew about long covid.

You obviously think differently. But it can't change the facts as I see them. We really could have fucked this up massively, now we know how covid damages the body. And we are going to have to live with it anyway, forever.

'The NIH also approved funding for researchers to study the sleep habits of monkeys who were given meth in the morning, according to the report.

Another monkey example involved a study focusing on trans-identifying men and HIV. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) spent more than $477,000 on the study, which gave male monkeys female hormones to examine how cross-sex hormones might affect the immune systems of trans-identifying men when it comes to HIV.

In another outlandish example, the NIH approved a grant to study Russian cats walking on a treadmill, the report said.'

Barbie Fraud, Meth Monkeys: Rand Paul’s Annual ‘Festivus Report’ Shows $900 Billion In Government Waste - The Daily Wire

 

[Tiger]

'The NIH also approved funding for researchers to study the sleep habits of monkeys who were given meth in the morning, according to the report.

Another monkey example involved a study focusing on trans-identifying men and HIV. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) spent more than $477,000 on the study, which gave male monkeys female hormones to examine how cross-sex hormones might affect the immune systems of trans-identifying men when it comes to HIV.

In another outlandish example, the NIH approved a grant to study Russian cats walking on a treadmill, the report said.'

Barbie Fraud, Meth Monkeys: Rand Paul’s Annual ‘Festivus Report’ Shows $900 Billion In Government Waste - The Daily Wire

Tank loves all this kind of stuff.

He’s a subversive Jew. This is his fuel. This is what he lives off.

 

[jpc]

The 'Climate Change' scam is the new current thing for retarded and brainwashed idiots to get excited about.
It follows on from lockdowns, BLM, experimental vaccines, war in Ukraine, war in Gaza etc etc etc.
Whatever is trending on Twatter will be what retarded and brainwashed idiots will be pontificating about.
Funny as fuck when ya take a step back and see the macro view of things but idiots like that are incapable of doing such a thing.

The idiots should read these articles !

Climate Change: The Unsettled Science – Part 2

Iain Davis In Part 1 we questioned the fundamental principles said to underpin “the Climate Science™.” Specifically we considered the scientific validity of the claimed “consensus” and explored som…

off-guardian.org

 

[Mad as Fish]

The idiots should read these articles !

Climate Change: The Unsettled Science – Part 2

Iain Davis In Part 1 we questioned the fundamental principles said to underpin “the Climate Science™.” Specifically we considered the scientific validity of the claimed “consensus” and explored som…

off-guardian.org

The suggestion that the whole climate change theory is based on a flawed interpretation of 19th century science pulls the rug from right underneath this whole global warming religion and I am a little surprised that it is not pointed to more regularly in the non MSM.

I'm going to have to read through it again just to get my head around it all.