If you dispute the inflated and inconsistent claims of global warming alarmists, you are denounced as anti-science. You may even find yourself under investigation. But is catastrophic anthropogenic global warming actually a scientific theory at all? A fundamental principle of science is that a theory, to have any significance, must be falsifiable. -John Hinderaker
If your doctor diagnoses you with chronic fatigue syndrome, you’ll probably get two pieces of advice: Go to a psychotherapist and get some exercise. Your doctor might tell you that either of those treatments will give you a 60 percent chance of getting better and a 20 percent chance of recovering outright.
After all, that’s what researchers concluded in a 2011 study published in the prestigious medical journal the Lancet, along with later analyses.
Problem is, the study was bad science. And we’re now finding out exactly how bad.
The journal Tumor Biology is retracting 107 research papers after discovering that the authors faked the peer review process.
This isn’t the journal’s first rodeo. Late last year, 58 papers were retracted from seven different journals— 25 came from Tumor Biology for the same reason.
“I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL [Geophysical Research Letters] paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year reconstruction.”
There is, writes Daniele Fanelli in a recent issue of Nature, something rotten in the state of scientific research—“an epidemic of false, biased, and falsified findings” where “only the most egregious cases of misconduct are discovered and punished.”
A research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation at the University of Edinburgh, Fanelli is a leading thinker in an increasingly alarming field of scientific research: one that seeks to find out why it is that so much scientific research turns out to be wrong.
The New York Times, of all places, now offers evidence about a fraudulent professor, Diederik Stapels, in the Netherlands who made up data to support studies he reported in scholarly journals. The conclusions he reached were always in the service of conventional wisdom, so they escaped scrutiny...
Staples had the choice of abandoning the work or redoing the experiment. But he had already spent a lot of time on the research and was convinced his hypothesis was valid. "I said -- you know what, I am going to create the data set," he told me.
Sitting at his kitchen table in Groningen, he began typing numbers into his laptop that would give him the outcome he wanted.
As the old saying goes, you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing.
Since I am no philosopher, I'm not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
-Harold Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara
Environmentalist, Oops, Energy
Over the last fortnight I've made a deeply troubling discovery. The anti-nuclear movement to which I once belonged has misled the world about the impacts of radiation on human health. The claims we have made are ungrounded in science, unsupportable when challenged, and wildly wrong. We have done other people, and ourselves, a terrible disservice.
Environmentalist, Liberal, Government, Fraud, Science, Oops
The Environmental Protection Agency’s revised draft assessment of an Alaska mine project cites research from environmental consultants who admitted falsifying a report in an environmental lawsuit. The EPA’s new review of the potential Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska, relied on research from Stratus Consulting and Ann Maest, the company’s managing scientist. Stratus recently admitted to providing false statements in a decades-long $19 billion lawsuit against the oil company Chevron.
Crime, Government, Character, Racism, Science, Healthcare, Murder
July 25, 2002 --Thirty years ago today, the Washington Evening Star newspaper ran this headline on its front page: "Syphilis Patients Died Untreated." With those words, one of America's most notorious medical studies, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, became public. "For 40 years, the U.S. Public Health Service has conducted a study in which human guinea pigs, not given proper treatment, have died of syphilis and its side effects," Associated Press reporter Jean Heller wrote on July 25, 1972. "The study was conducted to determine from autopsies what the disease does to the human body."
Environmentalist, Warming, Liberal, Government, Incompetence, Science, Narrative, Oops
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s reliance on poorly-sited weather stations to calculate surface temperatures is inflating the warming trend of the U.S. and maybe even the rest of the world, according to a landmark study looking at three decades of data. “The majority of weather stations used by NOAA to detect climate change temperature signal have been compromised by encroachment of artificial surfaces like concrete, asphalt, and heat sources like air conditioner exhausts,” Anthony Watts, a seasoned meteorologist and lead author of the study, said in a statement Thursday.
Environmentalist, Liberal, Government, Science, Oops
After three years, researchers have finally published a study claiming to have debunked science the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has used to justify imposing costly regulations on U.S. industries.
The study led by veteran statistician Stan Young found “little evidence for association between air quality and acute deaths” in California between 2000 and 2012.
“The daily death variability was mostly explained by time of year or weather variables; Neither PM2.5 nor ozone added appreciably to the prediction of daily deaths,” reads the study.
The State of Climate Science...
And then there are the not qualified who become climate scientists.
When the science bureaucrats (if you can't do real science be a science bureaucrat) decided global warming was the next big thing, there was a huge influx of money, which meant a huge influx of unqualified into climate science since there just weren't enough qualified and the money HAD to be used.
Enter opportunists, carpetbaggers, the corrupt, the ignoble.
"NASA GISS is a monument to bad science that truly should be torn down."
Democrat, Liberal, Obama, Fraud, Science
Giaever was one of President Obama's key scientific supporters in 2008. Giaever joined over 70 Nobel Science Laureates in endorse Obama in an October 29, 2008 open letter. In addition to Giaever, other prominent scientists have resigned from APS over its stance on man-made global warming. See: Prominent Physicist Hal Lewis Resigns from APS: 'Climategate was a fraud on a scale I have never seen...Effect on APS position: None. None at all. This is not science'