Oh come on, claiming we know something from "some woman" is just pushing it too far!
Duck!!Climate Change I hope this is not to political but it is so important
- Thread starter nodd
- Start date
- Status
Oh come on, claiming we know something from "some woman" is just pushing it too far!
Duck!!
That is not what is being suggested, an example of how the establishment can be wrong, massively wrong, is being given to counter the claim that the majority think this or that so it must be true line. As for derision, it is used by the advocates of the established theory all the time to squash others with different perspectives and ideas. This is often due to the fear that a challenge to their long standing belief will effect their standing, career, income, book sales, gift to posterity, position, mental state, cherished even sacred World paradigm etc. etc. (Sorry for resorting to Latin again)
And yet there is so much pressure to prove something that is 'without question' such as mans contribution to climate change?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy
while I'm not suggesting it discredits CC in itself it does show manipulation in practice
From the linked article:
Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.
Ptolemy was operating on the observations and evidence he had available but came to an incorrect conclusion. This was then compounded by the majority agreeing with him and developing a more and more complicated model (Epicycles) to explain the observations that were obviously going to contradict the initial blooper. Nothing new under the Sun, the same is going on in our modern day with Einstein et al and compounded by the fact that theoretical Mathematics has taken over in many cases from actual Science. Tesla attests to this. This is why we now have the mainstream fantasy that Black Holes, Dark Matter and Dark Energy exist. They are incorrect Mathematical and theoretical constructs to support the idea that the universe is is governed and driven by Gravity, akin to Ptolemaic Epicycles.
Stephen Crothers has clearly demonstrated that Hilbert's derivation of the field equations is incorrect and that the suggested Physics supporting Black Holes violates Special Relativity anyway. Hilbert is in error and Schwarzschils's original paper itself refutes the idea of Black Holes. Here we have an example of a theory and whole massive imaginary body in space, in fact many of them now, that is believed and supported by the majority of 'consensus Science' (a ridiculous term), the media, the general population and their dogs. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jINHHXaPrWA Crothers uses a little derision for humorous effect but considering the madness he is pointing out I don't think that should really be held against him!
[video=youtube;jINHHXaPrWA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jINHHXaPrWA[/video]
I'm not anti-establishment as long as the establishment is Free, Fair, Correct, Uncorrupted, Peaceful, Balanced, Non-compulsive and so on to avoid quoting Latin, so I don't 'lose the argument'! For what I can see these things are not usually evident in much of consensus Science or Climate Change 'Science' in particular.
What we see today is a reflective battle and change over of the established Ptolemaic theory and Copernican theory. The EUM will replace Eisenstein SR and GR, it is inevitable, it is just that the majority have not yet seen it and turning the ship Leviathan is a very slow and resisted process. There is going to be a lot of egg on a lot of foolish or ignorant faces when this occurs.
As the EUM becomes more widely adopted then we should get a much better understanding of what is really driving out climate and any change that it undergoes. Now that will be a very interesting revelation. As we study the climate and features of other planets we will also get a much clearer understanding of the History and functions of Earth.
Last edited:
Science "triumphing?" Ummm, wasn't it science that created all the carbon producing devices? And wasn't one of the reasons the early automobile became popular because it reduced the KNOWN pollution in cities? (horse manure)
The simple fact is every discovery/invention that has seemingly cured one problem, has come with another problem, or set of problems, of it's own:
-Man discovers fire and the results are he can better survives cold, and can cook previously inedible food. The new problem? Burns and home fires.
-The previous example of the automobile in the last paragragh. Benefits? faster transportation with less feed costs and no manure; The downsides? Car crashes, traffic jams, and pollution.
-We harnessed electricity and the benefits are fairly obvious. The downsides? Accidental electrocutions, electrical fires, radiation from power lines.
And yes, this premise is taught in risk management classes at the univesity level (I was taught it in an aviation related risk course over two decades ago)
How's that for a syllogism Boatman?
which is why I said it doesn't discredit CC however it was emails from a group of scientist who where desperate that their results weren't demonstating a conclusion that they had already come to (the existance of CC) - why they are scientists, to a true scientist a negative hypotheses conclution to a test is as significant as a positive one - unless of course your job depends on it...
To a large degree I agree with you here. But there is also a danger that said "peer review" turns into "peer pressure" to conform to the accepted belief.
And where do you hope to find any kind of establishment free of these human flaws?
Reluctantly since you ask, this one.
http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/tesla-vs-einstein-the-ether-the-birth-of-the-new-physics
http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/tesla-vs-einstein-the-ether-the-birth-of-the-new-physics
Yep and the Warren Commision considered 'Back and to the left, back and to the left, back and to the left' to be quite acceptable too! Language is not suitable for kiddies or sensitive souls. The 6 mins are very amusing for some. Search: [FONT=arial, sans-serif]Bill Hicks on the JFK Assassination - from Revelations [/FONT]
Sorry I thought this was a commonly known quote that only needed referring to rather than referencing. I searched 'Tesla and Mathematics' on Google, first result, um, Google is your friend, NOT!
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/nikolatesl401270.html#brHIPCaC7YxirRCf.99
- Status
Similar threads
