Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Trevor Wilson Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: Global Warming is a religion Date: Sun, 13 May 2018 05:49:44 +1000 Lines: 88 Message-ID: References: <982e103b-e029-4962-8bbc-4d26a3eaa5d8@googlegroups.com> <14bbfbe3-80a0-4657-b093-93db93da353b@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net f3q+vJGpphKimOdgtJmCaQPaBCOGaIkjv5ZeW4+adIK78r7m8g Cancel-Lock: sha1:jxfmaJovch9jogTmsWD3Ns43uD8= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180512-4, 13/05/2018), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:685104 On 13/05/2018 4:42 AM, benj wrote: > On 5/11/2018 10:00 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >> On 12/05/2018 11:13 AM, benj wrote: >>> On 5/11/2018 4:49 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>> On 12/05/2018 12:45 AM, James McGinn wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, May 10, 2018 at 8:52:17 PM UTC-7, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>> On 11/05/2018 2:56 AM, James McGinn wrote: >>>>>>> Global warming (climate change) is really nothing but a science >>>>>>> based religion. >>>>>> >>>>>> **Nope. Just plain ole' science you moron. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you can provide some PEER-REVIEWED science back your nonsensical >>>>>> bullshit, feel free to do so. >>>>>> >>>>>> I suspect we'll be waiting quite awhile. You're full of shit. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Trevor Wilson >>>>>> www.rageaudio.com.au >>>>> >>>>> peer review is worthless in this politically corrupt discipline >>>>> >>>> >>>> **Bullshit. We hear the same retort from all the other failed, >>>> alleged scientists. The peer-review process may not be perfect, but >>>> it is, far and away, the best process available to sort the >>>> crackpots from the real scientists. >>>> >>>> Come back when you have had your nonsense peer-reviewed. >>>> >>>> >>> Defense of censorship in Science in science noted and expected. >>> >>> "peer review" is review by those working in field not censorship of >>> politically incorrect (like anything that debunks global warming) >>> papers to make sure they never see the light of day. >>> >>> To call censorship "control of crackpots" shows that you are for >>> censorship and control science and are basically unethical and >>> dishonest and should have no place in science (like so many of those >>> in control of "peer review"). >> >> **I expected such stupidity from you. Tell you what: YOU propose a >> better system than the peer-review system, presently in place and >> there'll be a Nobel Prize in it for you. > > As usual you libs ignore all details and try to convince people by just > dropping jargon. Clearly "Peer review" cleverly designed to provide > censorship and control of science by a the few in power. It's easy to > propose a better system than peer review: You simply FIX the system that > is already there so that is it fair and doesn't exclude people who go > against the political wind (like say publish data debunking global > warming propaganda). And there is no Nobel prize for fixing human > systems of power, you idiot. **OK then, YOU propose a better system than the peer-review process. Waiting..... > >> As usual, you will waffle and splutter, but you will fail to provide a >> better system. > > As usual a lib "discussion" consists of only puerile grade school name > calling and nonsense ridicule verbiage. What you are trying to > accomplish is the subversion of the norms of science for political > control ends. That is very unethical and anti-science. **OK then, YOU propose a better system than the peer-review process. Waiting..... > > One Norm of science: Public Accessibility: > All scientific knowledge should be freely available to everyone. > > Your contention that only scientific knowledge pre-approved by those in > power should be available is antiscience. > > You can go back now to your froth and bluster against this little expose > of your agenda. **OK then, YOU propose a better system than the peer-review process. Waiting..... -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au