Dr. William Gray is losing funding because of his skepticism of "human caused" global warming. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5736103.html http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000007279.cfm Yet another example of radical "human caused" global warming fanatics attacking anyone that oppose them with other scientific views. Makes you wonder how much real science there is behind "human caused" global warming theories.
The point at issue was that funding for scientists is being determined by whether or not a scientist has the "correct" viewpoints rather than on the scientific merits. Exactly who is a radical is irrelevant.
Has no-one read the articles? - the Houston Cronicle article makes no mention of funding being withdrawn. The other article does, but references the Houston chronicle as the source of the story - any coincidence that it also happens to be conservative mouthpeice? The gist of it is the university are unhappy because they feel Dr Gray is doing too much self-promotion and should be including other academics in his research and publications - most specifically a newly graduated Post Doc - with ageing faculties and scientists natural liking for hogging the limelight wherever possible, this seems like a pretty fair position for the university to take to me. Just noticed that I'm on an "Nelson" (cricket fans will know what I'm on about)
Let me get this straight, you're supportive of him losing funding because he has alternative scientific theories proving man is not responsible for global warming ?!?!? Seems there's more than science behind the "human caused" global warming hype, because real science looks at all scientific theories openly, it doesn't shut off other views because it doesn't follow their religion, oops I meant theory. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Point 1. he's not losing funding - the second article is lying about the content of the first - READ them both Point 2. The reason why the consesus point towards an anthropogenic cause to climate change, is because that's what all the evidence points to - this is despite the massive inequality between the amount of money certain organisations have to put into ACC denial in comparison to traditional sources of research funding** Point 3. Obfuscating the causes of climate change are pointless - the fact is that the climate IS changing and we need to discuss what to do about it. ** this rubbishes the "conspiracy theory" its much easier to apply for a nice big research grant from exxon on the nod that you'll publish favourable findings than it is to fight for the tiny amounts of research money that all the other scientists are after
So the local media covering him is losing support, close enough. Seeing how empathetic some people are in this thread to seeing this scientist lose media coverage just further proves how "human caused" global warming fanatics are content with seeing other scientific views silenced. And this stereotype that anyone proving that global warming is not necessarily caused by humans "must have been funded by Exxon" is just that, a stereotype. You could just as easily say that most "human caused" global warming scientists are left-wing activists who are fudging some of their data and models, but that of course isn't true........
No - he is simply being asked to include other contributors from the university in external communication to the media - the guys is just pissed off that he can no-longer use this as 100% self-promotion and has to share the limelight with other people at the university - hardly a radical request for an organisation with limited resources - scientists can be an egotistical bunch so this sort of thing is guaranteed to piss on his chips. The media releases in question are about his weather reports - not related to climate change - he's not being slienced on the subject he's being asked to share the exposure - like I said - read the article - and you'll realise that you are the "fanatic" cos your seeing a conspiracy where there simply isn't one :crazy: Clearly you are the one guilty of stereotyping - in terms of relationship with ACC or ACC denial, its a non-story that's been blown up by a clearly dodgy right wing website plain and simple - trying to attach some scientific community / left wing enviroloony conspiracy theory to it is fucking laughable pal :frust:
I disagree. This is a reputable scientist that is tring to be silenced. I'm sure from your reaction, you're empathetic with what's happening here.
point to the part of the original article that says he is no longer going to be allowed to publish his weather reports point to any part of my post where I've said anything of the sort fact is I just don't suffer fools glady
Allegedly proves man is not responsible for global warming. If his evidence were compelling, more people would listen. Science is not dogmatic in regard to issues of evidence. Science is not simply accepting all theories as equal, some are better that others.
