tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post6875529364275863207..comments2023-04-16T23:43:11.235+08:00Comments on Mirror Signal Move: "Paid Hacks & Whores"Mike Faganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-64715515679984361472012-03-23T00:13:46.613+08:002012-03-23T00:13:46.613+08:00For christ's sake...
Less than what you would...For christ's sake...<br /><br />Less than what you would have to gain by paying attention to what is <i>actually</i> said. <br /><br />Get this: I'm going on chalk & blackboard duty for you now even though I pulled a muscle in my back earlier tonight and should really be soaking in the bath tub...<br /><br />The argument is that <i>because</i> the question of AGW was politicized almost from the beginning, <i>so</i> the uncertainty in both the science <i>and</i> the modelling has been ignored or played down both by the press and by many of the scientists themselves (not all - there have been exceptions and people who have changed their minds). So it is not that all of the scientists and government groups "lied" per se (although Peter Gleick admitted to having done so), it is that many of them <i>exaggerated</i> the scientific support both for the AGW hypothesis <i>and</i>, more especially, the strength of the models upon which the predictions of catastrophe were based. In the case of some proponents of CAGW (e.g. Michael Turton) that exaggeration is so bad as to be <i>obviously</i> fraudulent and absurd - which is the real reason he banned me (because I'd dress him down on all of these points). And then in addition to all of that, anyone daring to disagree with the "consensus" of "settled science" has been outcast and villified in disgraceful terms. <br /><br />As to the point of the question itself - what the vested interests are - it must be borne in mind that the accusation I am making is not one of totally insincere cynicism (although that may be true in some quarters), but of a fidelity corrupted by the promise of action through political power. In addition to the vast sums of money, and psychologically perhaps far more important in individual cases, is the <i>prestige</i> of the project fed through its' ramified connections to political power and amplified by the desire to be perceived by others as working for the common good.<br /><br />It's like Popper always said - it's not that there aren't enough of us willing to do good, it's that too many of us are often too liable to err in the pursuit of the good.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-78065154122427029912012-03-22T22:23:57.928+08:002012-03-22T22:23:57.928+08:00But, what do these major governmental groups have ...But, what do these major governmental groups have to gain by lying about global warming?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com