Climate scientist accused of employer rort

But but but these guys are as pure as the driven snow. Yet another climate scientists has been caught stealing from the public trough. Late last year we found out that Dr. Jagadish Shukla, a Georgetown climatologist ironically famous for organizing a petition of scientists asking for the federal government to open a RICO investigation of skeptics like me, used his non-profit to funnel over $500,000 of government money to himself and his family. Government rules prohibit any professor from taking more than 2 months of their university salary from research grants. A congressional investigation of the good Dr. and the NSF that let him get away with it is ongoing. Now we have yet another climate scientist caught stealing. Australian climate scientist Dr Daniel Michael Alongi has been indicted for stealing research funds.

This doesn't really surprise me. If you are going to be dishonest in small things you will be dishonest in large things. Just remember these events when people tell you there is no financial motive in "climate science".

 

I refer to the old saying all the time, "Follow the money, it leads to the truth"

And these climate guys have to justify their research grants. Coming back with an answer of "Nope, everything looks peachy" ain't gonna generate grant money.

 

One 4 month old case in Australia?

If you want to show some world wide conspiracy or crime spree you have not even started.

 

Actually, you can read about what this guy had found and was studying.

The idea that climatologists need to depend on claiming some sort of impending disaster or to otherwise sign onto some global conspiracy is nonsense.

In fact, climate (and many other areas of science) are complex enough that it would be stupendously difficult to coordinate a story that is counter to the truth - far too difficult to be even remotely possible.

 

You are actiling like this isn't the only guy who has enriched himself. James Hansen the godfather of global warming walked away with about $1.6M in awards. Some of it was legal but a some of it was in violation of NASA rules thats one of the reasons he isn't working at NASA anymore.

 

Rule 1... never eliminate your job .

 

Anyone can steal but that this guy was calling for investigations of "Deniers" says a lot about him.

 

We started, baby. Way back in 2009 we had the correspondence of the East Anglia Mafia and the Hockey Team and many more.

The corruption was clear to all but the Kool Aid crowd.

SCIENCE + POLITICS = POLITICS

 

You're pointing to accusations that have been thoroughly debunked.

And, using big caps does NOT constitute evidence of a world wide conspiracy.

In fact, the Australia crime shows NO connection to such a conspiracy.

 

Look, I'm all in favor of jailing anyone that commits a crime.

The catch is you haven't shown any justification for the accusation that there is a world wide conspiracy.

Hansen has been a major contributor whose results have proven to be highly accurate. That isn't an excuse for any wrong doing on his part (wrong doing you don't cite, by the way). But, if you want to attack his contribution to science, you're going to have to address the science.

 

...by those committing the crimes.

Hillary will get similar treatment.

 

What? You mean by the entire population of scientists?

I think what you are saying is that you have no idea of how to find information on climate from any scientific source.

 

Nonsense? I think not.

Claim: ‘Global warming’ could cause humans to develop webbed feet, cat’s eyes and gills

Humans may evolve bizarre features such as webbed feet and eyes like cats in response to changing environments, a scientist claims today.

Read more: http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/01...ebbed-feet-cats-eyes-and-gills/#ixzz3xDzdHhGD

 

Hilarious!

But, I really wonder what climatedepot visitors think that article means.

 

So if your hypothisis is that scientists can be bought - then this would have to include ALL scientists. So any scientists who discounts
global warming would have to be viewed through the same lens of distrust.

Or do scientists who agree with you have roses growing from their butts?

 

the AGW fanatics do seem to remind me of how politicians operate, not scientists

Remember the head of the IPCC took a big fall recently also.

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/1505...nternal-panel-finds-rk-pachauri-guilty-sexual



.The complainant had moved the High Court seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to Pachauri by the trial court in the case. The complainant’s counsel alleged before the court that Pachauri was “dictating what needs to be said to witnesses” in the case.

He claimed there was “overwhelming evidence” against Pachauri that he misused the bail conditions. A criminal case on charges of sexual harassment, stalking and criminal intimidation was registered against Pachauri on February 18 by the police.

 

True that

 

I believe the correct approach would the skepticism and to recognize that they are simply human. That is only the first step though. There is a reason I dont trust homeopaths either.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah Pachuari is a snake. In the CRU e-mails he constantly requests that any payments to him go instead to the his TERI institute. Such research charities are a great way to avoid taxes.

 

So you think it's easy for the government to investigate itself? They WANT global warming to be real and so does the guy glomming the cash.

 

Let's remember that skepticism is based on evidence.

 

The thing to remember with "climate science" is that this isn't some old established field of science. Prior to Hansen's speech before congress that was a small field with a handful of researchers. With AGW what kind of people do you think have gravitated towards the filed? I got one hint it aint free market libertarians.

- - - Updated - - -

Or lack there of. As an engineer I need more than failed models and the claim that you can measure global temperature to within a thousandth of a degree.

 

Nobody wants global warming to be true. EVERYBODY wants it to be false.

Understanding our climate is incredibly important regardless of whether it is warming or cooling and regardless of whether humans contribute. That understanding is needed for resource management the world over, agriculture, disaster management, coastline plans (such as the one for Chesapeake Bay, Miami Beach, NOLA, NYC in the US), national defense, corporate technology investment, etc.

Your first sentence seems to imply that we should not invest in science on the grounds that the government couldn't investigate. Denial of science investment is simply unacceptable as an objective.

Let's remember that the USA has staked its future in information - in science. We are at a point in history where US manufacturing is no longer our future. For us to pick this as a time to cease investment in the very direction we see as that of our future global competitiveness is ridiculous.

 

No, skepticism does have to be based on evidence.

Yes, we need more information. But, that means MORE investment in science, because science is how we learn about this topic.

You as an engineer (especially if you are a civil engineer) should be well aware that we will NEVER have perfect knowledge in a field involving natural science.

The models we have today have proven to be highly accurate. And, yes, we need to do the work necessary to bring in the error bars and to expand our understanding of oceans, etc.

 

Neither will a study of gamma rays increasing water vapor in the atmosphere being a possible cause of "global warming". The only sure money maker for climate scientists is claims of man burning fossil fuels causing the problems. If you think otherwise the hoaxers will try to put you in jail.

 

The "models have proven accurate"? Wow!

Say, I am reminded that later this month we will pass the tenth anniversary of Al Gore's prediction that we only had ten years to enact sweeping changes to force us all to live like 16th century peasants or it would be too late and we would pass the " tipping point" for stopping "global warming". Since its too late, I say we start derisive laughter directed at the hoaxers and refuse to give them all our money and control over our lives like they demand.