Australian Politics Forum - Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:10pm I was a scientist at Exxon: https://theconversation.com/i-was-an-exxon-funded-climate-scientist-49855 Interesting conundrum.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21535
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #1 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:25pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:10pm:

I was a scientist at Exxon:

https://theconversation.com/i-was-an-exxon-funded-climate-scientist-49855

Interesting conundrum.

Nah. It is a paper that regurgitates Oreskes opinion piece about Exxon. This time with the imprimatur of a "paper".

"We adapt and combine the methodologies used to quantify the consensus on AGW by Oreskes [23] and Cook et al [22] with the content analysis methodologies"

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f

Of course the Cook study to which they refer is the 97% crock. Where in actual fact about 65 papers (according to Cook's methodology) said humans caused more than 50% of AGW.

The other thing is if Oreskes paper was so good, why did she have to change her methodology?

Of course you could read Lenny Bernstein's Ex-Exxon email-
http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/07/Climate-Deception-Dossi...

Too funny. Cheesy

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW Reply #2 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:27pm It is written by a student then scientist who worked for Exxon. Would he work for them again is the conundrum.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW Reply #3 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:32pm Be interesting to know how many of the public deniers like JoNova are getting paid and get material to obfuscate and falsify what is known about AGW?
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21535
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #4 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:36pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:27pm:

It is written by a student then scientist who worked for Exxon.

Yes. Katherine Hayhoe is a climate activist. Wink

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:27pm:

Would he work for them again is the conundrum.

I think the name Katherine means she is female. Wink

Lets see what she said -

"From 1995 to 1997, Exxon provided partial financial support for my master’s thesis, which focused on methane chemistry and emissions."

Oh, financial support. Doesn't say she worked there then.

"I spent several weeks in 1996 as an intern at their Annandale research lab in New Jersey and years working on the collaborative research that resulted in three of the published studies referenced in Supran and Oreskes’ new analysis."

So she spent several weeks as an intern at their lab in 1996.
She did years working on collaborative research. She does not say if she was working for Exxon at that time.

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW Reply #5 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:41pm If you read it you will see she did work for Exxon. Nevermind, will post extracts of that later, have only given it a quick skim for now.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21535
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #6 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:49pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:41pm:

If you read it you will see she did work for Exxon.

So tell me what is the difference between "I worked for Exxon" and "I was an Exxon-funded Climate Scientist"?

She seems to go out of her way to deny actually working for them. Afraid of litigation because it could be shown she didn't "work" for them?

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk

Gold Member

Offline

Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #7 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:55pm

Your desperation is showing again.

Fvvck me, why be so desperate to deny she worked for Exxon? That she did is clear:

Quote:

The stark contrast between internally discussing cutting-edge climate research while externally conducting a climate disinformation campaign is enough to blow many minds. What was going on at Exxon?

I have a unique perspective – because I was there.

From 1995 to 1997, Exxon provided partial financial support for my master’s thesis, which focused on methane chemistry and emissions. I spent several weeks in 1996 as an intern at their Annandale research lab in New Jersey and years working on the collaborative research that resulted in three of the published studies referenced in Supran and Oreskes’ new analysis.

Climate research at Exxon

A scientist is a scientist no matter where we work, and my Exxon colleagues were no exception. Thoughtful, cautious and in full agreement with the scientific consensus on climate – these are characteristics any scientist would be proud to own.

Did Exxon have an agenda for our research? Of course – it’s not a charity. Their research and development was targeted, and in my case, it was targeted at something that would raise no red flags in climate policy circles: quantifying the benefits of methane reduction.

Maybe I should look at the Oreskes papers? Anything there, Lees, of interest, hmm?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 26^th, 2017 at 12:00am by Jovial Monk »

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21535 Gender:	Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW Reply #8 - Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:59pm Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:55pm: Your desperation is showing again. Well you can always contact her and find out for yourself. http://katharinehayhoe.com/wp2016/contact/
Back to top	IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW Reply #9 - Aug 26^th, 2017 at 12:10am So she did work for Exxon, working on methane reduction. The conundrum is: knowing Exxon presented false data about AGW to the world, data at odds with what its own scientists were finding would she work for Exxon again? A moral conundrum. Interesting.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

Jovial Monk

Gold Member

Offline

Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #10 - Aug 26^th, 2017 at 12:21am

Hmmm some good info about Oreskes.

I spent quite a bit of time in the Barr Smith library basement reading papers/articles about continental drift, don’t remember that US scientists were skeptical of it at first (with discovery of plate tectonics of course continental drift became accepted.)

Cancer from tobacco, AGW from burning fossil fuels and paid scientists, intellectual whores, who published false information and generally obfuscated and denied the real science performed by others.

Definitely worth a score of follow up posts!

Back to top

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!

IP Logged

Jovial Monk

Gold Member

Offline

Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #11 - Aug 26^th, 2017 at 12:34am

Just parking:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/10/opinion/exxons-climate-concealment.html

https://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken

https://www.ted.com/talks/naomi_oreskes_why_we_should_believe_in_science

Ha! I said Holland is very concerned with sea levels.
https://phys.org/news/2016-10-unravelling-secrets-sea-north.html#nRlv

Technical University of Delft, South Holland (my birthplace) has been studying the North Sea sea levels since the 1950s. Only 8cm—the closer you are to meltwater coming off Greenland the lower the sea levels—counterintuitive or what?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sinking-atlantic-coastline-meets-rapi...

https://phys.org/news/2013-04-climate-sea-gulf-finland.html

https://phys.org/news/2017-08-sun-current-global-temperature.html#nRlv

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sea-level-rise-is-speeding-up-in-part...

Back to top

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW Reply #12 - Aug 26^th, 2017 at 9:14am Wasting your time with His Density there Lee, he just cannot see another pov or cede any point no matter how obvious it is in refuting his beloved Theory.
Back to top	IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21535
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #13 - Aug 26^th, 2017 at 11:50am

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 26^th, 2017 at 12:34am:

Ha! I said Holland is very concerned with sea levels.
https://phys.org/news/2016-10-unravelling-secrets-sea-north.html#nRlv

Technical University of Delft, South Holland (my birthplace) has been studying the North Sea sea levels since the 1950s. Only 8cm—the closer you are to meltwater coming off Greenland the lower the sea levels—counterintuitive or what?

And having built dikes before, much having been below sea level, they have lost the ability to even extend them? it is rising so fast? Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Falsification and obfuscation of science of AGW
Reply #14 - Aug 26^th, 2017 at 12:04pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 25^th, 2017 at 11:10pm:

I was a scientist at Exxon:

https://theconversation.com/i-was-an-exxon-funded-climate-scientist-49855

Interesting conundrum.

Maybe Exxon did feel threatened back then, thinking it could be the start of the end for them.

But these days Exxon has climbed aboard the Anthropogenic Global Warming gravy train spouting what any true warmist would consider a delight to hear.

These days Exxon is on your side JV.............. Kiss

There going to save us all from our selves by creating a $$$ unlimited market of carbon derivatives on the stock exchange.

I guess they did the math and found it most welcoming.

http://www.exxonmobil.com.au/en-au/environment/climate-policy/exxonmobils-perspe...

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged