0
13

[–] ShowMeThePunny 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It's interesting how many people know about the "Military - Industrial Complex" but ignore the other warnings from Ike ' s Farewell Address:

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
7

[–] 3532836? 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Don't forget the near criminalization of contradicting science.

2
5

[–] novictim 2 points 5 points (+7|-2) ago  (edited ago)

So policy makers have the tools to end this dangerous and unnecessary experiment with the global climate. Meanwhile, Dr. Judith Curry says "Wait! Our science is imperfect! We can't be sure that this unplanned and unintended experiment with our earth will even have bad outcomes!"

I listened to what Dr. Judith Curry had to say. As a scientist, I understand her concern over stating "more than we actually are certain of".

But does she not grasp that we are conducting a massive and unplanned experiment with our planet? The burden of proof that massive increases in carbon are "A-Ok!" is on the carbon producers/oil companies, right? That the science is not on their side is the real point here.

It is clear to me that Dr. Judith Curry is not looking at this from a policy choice perspective. We pay for these climate scientists to gather data and to tell us how we are doing and what their best and worst case predictions suggest. We demand of scientists that they make predictions for the purpose of directing our actions.

We don't just ask for data and graphed data with no postulations and discussion for policy makers. Dr. Judith Curry seems to not grasp that.

There is a hell of a lot at stake here, right? Pumping up the CO2 level is a massive experiment that we had never meant to conduct. All we wanted as people was the energy, not the waste!

Dr. Judith Curry does not deny that man is pumping up the CO2 levels.

Scientists (and everybody else who pays attention) are watching CO2 levels rise from pre-industrial fluctuations of 260ppm to 280ppm now upto >400ppm in 2014. The rate of rise can be seen at the NOAA website in graphic form. We know that CO2 in the atmosphere and oceans has a half life of >150 years...it eventually gets sequestered in plants and other chemical reactions but not at a rate that should give us comfort. This means that each ton of CO2 we continue to pump into the air by burning fossil fuels will be extant throughout our lives and the lives of our children's children.

Science is about studying the known world around us. It is about finding objective truths and about deriving predictions, best and worst case scenarios. Dr. Judith Curry objects that there is a "group think" that is making predictions which MIGHT not be true and that policy MIGHT not need to take into account the WORST CASE scenarios.

Maybe you are right, Dr. Judith Curry. Maybe all this radical increase in CO2 will not be a detriment and maybe natural cycles of earth's cooling and warming are a bigger factor than the greenhouse effect generated by man-made CO2?

But if you have the entire planet, all of man's civilizations awaiting the results of an unnecessary and unplanned experiment with imperfectly predictable outcomes involving CO2 emissions, with billions potentially starving depending on how the effects play out, MAYBE caution that puts more weight on worst case scenarios is the RESPONSIBLE thing to do? Of course it is.

And it is not as if we don't have the technology to avoid the use of fossil fuels already in our hands. All we lack is a will to take them up and displace the majority of fossil fuel use. The responsible thing here is very obvious. Stop the unplanned carbon experiment unless you can prove it's a good idea.

2
-2

[–] wolfsktaag 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

anything we do is an experiment. making large changes to anything could have ramifications we dont understand or necessarily foresee. and not just climatic ramifications, but social, economic, and geopolitical

refusing to experiment with our world and planet is not an option

0
1

[–] novictim 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

That made zero sense.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

1
4

[–] 33degree 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

You mean like the Stanford researchers who were caught by undercover operatives accepting bribes to produce pro-coal research?

Yup, just like that. All both sides of scientific discourse are bought and paid for in this country. Science is now just as corrupt as all the other government services provided.

6
-2

[–] InYourFace 6 points -2 points (+4|-6) ago 

Oh, look who it is. Judith Curry breaking the silence! Shocking. Wake me up when Huckabee breaks the silence on gay marriage groupthink.

2
-2

[–] Rummel 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

Gay marriage = Fake science