The World Collapsed Into Armageddon – And Nobody Noticed

You were just too ignorant to notice.

————————————————————————————-

http://www.nytimes.com/

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to The World Collapsed Into Armageddon – And Nobody Noticed

  1. Mike Davis says:

    This group of sociologists is a step below Climatologists because they are thriving on the garbage left behind and think of it as real food just like any other scavenger or carrion eater.

  2. truthsword says:

    They don’t understand that sentiment and articles like these are what sickens many to any part of the AGW message. When you start saying, the masses are too stupid to get it, you are using the elitist liberal playbook. They are only proving the point through such articles they are trying to dismiss.

    The reason the masses aren’t buying in because more extreme weather events aren’t happening any more or less than usual, temps aren’t shooting through the roof, winters have been colder and snowier of late, beach front houses aren’t under water, the antarctic ice is record high, the arctic is not in a death spiral… and so on. Real people see the real things. The models mean nothing to them. They ignore the AGW alarmism because that is what it is.

    IMHO this has been devistating to science. Not just the trust factor, but the idea that all this money going into AGW over a failed pre-theory, could be going towards real problems. It is indeed a shame that real science issues are neglected over stupidity and tax scheme.

  3. Malaga View says:

    The Sociologists for Climatologists support group offers the following Twelve Step Program for Climatologists:

    1) Admit we were powerless to control climate.

    2) Believe that a power greater than ourselves controls climate.

    3) Decide to turn off all our climate models and spreadsheets.

    4) Make a searching and fearless inventory of raw climate data.

    5) Admit to ourselves, and to other human beings, the exact nature of our wrongs.

    6) Remove all the defects and adjustemnts from historic climate data.

    7) Humbly ask nature to continually change climate.

    8) Make a list of all persons we had harmed and make amends to them all.

    9) Make direct amends to these harmed people wherever possible.

    10) Make a personal inventory of when we were wrong and promptly admitted it.

    11) Use strict scientific methodologies to improve our knowledge of the natural world.

    12) Carry this message to Climatologists and practice these principles in all our affairs.

    • Mike Davis says:

      Malagaview:
      Just following 3 of those would make them heretics and be no longer able to claim to be part of the climatology commune.

      I take that back because item one would be grounds for disbarment.

  4. Sundance says:

    When social scientists (or ethicists, psychologists, Pope, etc) enter the climate fray you know the physical science is in big trouble and the bottom of the science barrel has been reached. We can all soon look forward to seeing infomercials touting “hypnosis therapy” as a cure for climate change skepticism as it won’t be long before the Neuroscience community makes an official diagnosis. lol

    • Mike Davis says:

      Sundance:
      i read a while back what I thought was a revelation from the Neuroscience group proclaiming just such a thing.

    • suyts says:

      hahahaa, yep! Sociologists are going to save the day for alarmists! ahahahahahaha. Man, it is sooo over! I wonder what issue they will pull out of the arse next? Or will they just start recycling old issues? Either way, CAGW is, well, cooked! hahahaha

  5. Leon Brozyna says:

    The social sciences are glaringly missing…

    Translation: We want in on the action. We want money for research to solve this global warming societal problem. Money for research into why AGW isn’t believed. Money for research into how to convince society of the validity of AGW. Money … lots and lots of money for lots and lots of papers. We also need lots and lots of money so we can produce studies to show we need lots and lots of money.

  6. TinyCO2 says:

    Let’s see. Take politicians, journalists, celebrities, Royalty who believe in homeopathy and talking to plants, Green Peace and other assorted NGOs, pure academics and finally social scientists. Hmm, could it be possible to find a bigger group of useless, airy-fairy, credulous and highly-strung individuals who are prone to exaggeration? This is not a body of people to inspire trust.

    I suppose it was too obvious for Hoffman and his research partner to have actually asked sceptics why they believe what they do? If they had, they would have found out that we don’t have a problem with science, just crap science. Every layer of climate science, policy, econometrics and mitigation is riddled with lies, damned lies and statistics. You don’t have to think that AGW is a plot to part us of our money to KNOW that it will have exactly that effect. The debate is whether it’s necessary. A debate everyone but sceptics is terrified to have.

    To try and link us with abortionists (and their illogical violence) is obscene and typical of warmists and their tendency to fling out insults because they’re patently losing the argument. I think you’ll find that’s once source of the palpable anger. As far as I can see, the shoe is on the other foot, or did I imagine the discovery channel bomber and Splattergate?

    The lengths warmists will go to rather than get their science in order is amazing. However I doubt any scientist who thinks that sceptics are in a minority is capable of seeing anything clearly. I like to think that climate scientists are at least more observant than social scientists… probably.

  7. maguro says:

    Pretty much any question that starts with “Can social scientists help…” is bound to be answered negatively.

  8. peter says:

    through the looking glass

  9. Patagon says:

    Successful astrologers have to be clever psychologists, as their income depends on convincing the others about the validity of their forecasts, which most of the time are unverifiable.

  10. Erik says:

    “This is a tough one to find a smoking gun on,” said Hoffman. (CAGW)

    Bwahahaha!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s