Not to mention clamping down on free thought and discussion, which is a huge tenet in the community (or at least used to be)."Dr. Ivar Giaever, a former professor with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the 1973 winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, abruptly announced his resignation..."
"In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?" he wrote in an email to Kate Kirby, executive officer of the physics society.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Climate Change Hysteria
What have we been saying? Oh, yes, coming from a science background my big question has always been how in the world the "scientific" community can say that man-made global climate change is concrete. During my studies in the scientific field, if there is one big thing I learned it is that there are very few (and I mean almost no) absolutes in science. So to me, when a group of scientists choose to use the word "incontrovertible" for something that is obviously not proven 100% true (or really even possible to prove), it does nothing but destroy their credibility in all areas. What these people do not understand is that they are tearing down the core of science with their political and monetary hacking. Scientists rarely say something is scientific fact, which usually makes it so much more important when they do. Oh, and you know, this is one of those "marginal" scientists as they like to say that disagrees with them, not a major figure in the science world.