Rainbody
Silver Member
IslandTractor said:You clearly have no idea how science works. Presenting data that contradicts accepted wisdom is exactly what gets you attention and promotion in an academic setting. The naive view that non commercial science is all about kissing butt is simply rediculous and flat out wrong. Where do you come up with this stuff?
In commercial science such as pharmaceutical research, results not pleasing to the employer are often suppressed though even that is much more difficult now than in the past due to new NIH and FDA regulations and policies. I'm sure there are other commercial examples and perhaps some government lab examples (Congress does like to meddle via the budget process) but it is REALLY hard to suppress academic research. Your example of climate scientists suppressing a doctoral candidates work because it contradicted earlier work is not believable as multiple individual scientists would review any such work and they love cutting each other down a peg or two. If Prof A tried to suppress work. Profs B,C and D would have a field day. We would all hear about it in near real time.
The Internet allows anyone whose work is suppressed to "publish" on line without further peer review or control. Where are the data that are being suppressed? This notion that contradictory data is being suppressed is just another variation on black helicopter boogie man conspiracy theory.
Where to begin? How many students you know get As by calling out the prof? Yeah whole bunches of those. Lots of students getting in climatology to debunk it.
Im not even going to get into how the elected president of the field, puts out the direction for the field. Take a look at AMS a few years back. Ever read that letter from Prof saying how his community was being hijacked. Its been post. Put down party line and that red drink and come to reality.
As for studies getting pigeon holed, there's plenty out there. They just get ignored (tree ring study in Europe) because they don't meet "shock value". ( see prior quotes from NASA).
I know it's a tough reality to face that beloved academia is as faulty as the rest of us.
Still not biting on the political flavor of science? The federal studies calling people inferior in past where labeled science. Nothing political there. Nope not an agenda at all. Just pure science.
How about that homework on Hansen? Good guy? Bad Guy? How about fraud?
Bottom line is that these studies are to serve a political purpose. The results are adjusted.If you can't see that, well I can't hold your hand and I honestly wish the best for you.
PS the black helicopters are the good guys. Unless your a commie. Best of luck!