• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Top Climate Expert guilty of fraud, 32 months jail

Jack Hays said:
Actually, it has nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with EPA management.
Click to expand...

So it was just an accident, when you clicked 'like' to Tim the Plumber's suggestion in the OP that this is somehow relevant to "those pesky skeptics"?

You obviously are bright enough to know when the story is from, and how irrelevant it is. But you also gladly offer your support those who try to make it into something more.
 
Mithrae said:
So it was just an accident, when you clicked 'like' to Tim the Plumber's suggestion in the OP that this is somehow relevant to "those pesky skeptics"?

You obviously are bright enough to know when the story is from, and how irrelevant it is. But you also gladly offer your support those who try to make it into something more.
Click to expand...

Frankly I don't think the "skeptics" line was important to the OP.
 
Does this mean Denier World is compromised every time a member gets busted for misbehavior in a men's room?
 
JackA said:
Does this mean Denier World is compromised every time a member gets busted for misbehavior in a men's room?
Click to expand...

This is about a single case of massive individual fraud and what that may say about EPA management.
 
Jack Hays said:
Actually, it has nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with EPA management.
Click to expand...

If it didn't have anything to do with climate change then why did you post a link to WUWT?

And while I'm sure you will point out that Watts doesn't claim this is evidence that AGW is phony... he sure does insinuate it.

As a matter of fact every single denialist who has joined in this discussion has, in one way or another, insinuated or said that this is evidence against the science of AGW.
 
Buzz said:
If it didn't have anything to do with climate change then why did you post a link to WUWT?

And while I'm sure you will point out that Watts doesn't claim this is evidence that AGW is phony... he sure does insinuate it.

As a matter of fact every single denialist who has joined in this discussion has, in one way or another, insinuated or said that this is evidence against the science of AGW.
Click to expand...

WUWT takes on many topics other than climate change. Learn first. Then post.
 
Jack Hays said:
WUWT takes on many topics other than climate change. Learn first. Then post.
Click to expand...

Ahhh... so yeah... he is currently saying Merry Chrismas to all right now. But if you go and look over his site it is hard to find anything that isn't directly related or at least indirectly related to climate change.

Why don't you address the fact that Watts does, in fact, insinuate that this is evidence against AGW? Think first. Then post.
 
Buzz said:
Ahhh... so yeah... he is currently saying Merry Chrismas to all right now. But if you go and look over his site it is hard to find anything that isn't directly related or at least indirectly related to climate change.

Why don't you address the fact that Watts does, in fact, insinuate that this is evidence against AGW? Think first. Then post.
Click to expand...

He does not so insinuate. And there are several posts on non-climate-change topics in just the past few days.
 
Jack Hays said:
He does not so insinuate.
Click to expand...

You're right, he doesn't insinuate; Watts pretty explicitly states his opinion that this is indicative of climate science more generally:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12...e-epa-from-agencys-top-paid-climate-official/

This is stunning, yet not surprising. We know people get caught up in “the cause”, and that there are massive egos involved in some of the more visible climate advocates that lead them to irrational excesses of word and deed, but this one takes the cake. . . .

And of course, here’s the “anything for the cause” blindness that allowed it all to happen: . . . .

While this is a massive fraud of salary and benefits, one has to wonder what sort of fraud this man may have perpetrated in his role as a climate official. . . .

In this EPA document, they don’t seem to be looking into any of those things, only his travel abuse. I think they have “team blinders” on since I haven’t found anything where they look into the quality of his climate work.​

Again, for your own part you obviously are smart enough to see how stupid it is to suggest that one person's financial fraud has anything to do with the quality of work in an academic field generally. As you said, "Actually, it has nothing to do with climate change..." But you are supporting and spamming for those who suggest exactly that, then backpedalling in an attempt to obfuscate the indefensible.
 
Last edited:
Jack Hays said:
He does not so insinuate.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? About half of his comments are insinuations. Do I really need to quote them and then teach you how the English language works?

Jack Hays said:
And there are several posts on non-climate-change topics in just the past few days.
Click to expand...

Show me.
 
Mithrae said:
You're right, he doesn't insinuate; Watts pretty explicitly states his opinion that this is indicative of climate science more generally:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12...e-epa-from-agencys-top-paid-climate-official/

This is stunning, yet not surprising. We know people get caught up in “the cause”, and that there are massive egos involved in some of the more visible climate advocates that lead them to irrational excesses of word and deed, but this one takes the cake. . . .

And of course, here’s the “anything for the cause” blindness that allowed it all to happen: . . . .

While this is a massive fraud of salary and benefits, one has to wonder what sort of fraud this man may have perpetrated in his role as a climate official. . . .

In this EPA document, they don’t seem to be looking into any of those things, only his travel abuse. I think they have “team blinders” on since I haven’t found anything where they look into the quality of his climate work.​

Again, for your own part you obviously are smart enough to see how stupid it is to suggest that one person's financial fraud has anything to do with the quality of work in an academic field generally. As you said, "Actually, it has nothing to do with climate change..." But you are supporting and spamming for those who suggest exactly that, then backpedalling in an attempt to obfuscate the indefensible.
Click to expand...

Well, I agree that Watts, and I, see this as evidence that there may well be a highly corrupt set of individuals in and around the climate change/AGW/IPCC etc activism and production of propaganda dressed as science in order to keep the easy jobs that give you free 1st class travel when you want it.

I say MAY.

That is the general tone of the agrument as presented seems not to be at all strong and anybody woh shows any disagreement is shouted down and discredited. This would not happen where those who presented their case confident. That seems to me to be more evidence of corruption.

I am surprised that this news did not seem to make it to the normal news of the TV. That is why I mistakenly presumed that it must be new. Not so. Again, that seems odd to me.
 
Jack Hays said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "it" since you're making a non sequitur argument of a kind I don't use.
Click to expand...

Before, when you claimed I was trying to distort things. If you get to assign motivation, so do I.
 
Mithrae said:
You're right, he doesn't insinuate; Watts pretty explicitly states his opinion that this is indicative of climate science more generally:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12...e-epa-from-agencys-top-paid-climate-official/

This is stunning, yet not surprising. We know people get caught up in “the cause”, and that there are massive egos involved in some of the more visible climate advocates that lead them to irrational excesses of word and deed, but this one takes the cake. . . .

And of course, here’s the “anything for the cause” blindness that allowed it all to happen: . . . .

While this is a massive fraud of salary and benefits, one has to wonder what sort of fraud this man may have perpetrated in his role as a climate official. . . .

In this EPA document, they don’t seem to be looking into any of those things, only his travel abuse. I think they have “team blinders” on since I haven’t found anything where they look into the quality of his climate work.​

Again, for your own part you obviously are smart enough to see how stupid it is to suggest that one person's financial fraud has anything to do with the quality of work in an academic field generally. As you said, "Actually, it has nothing to do with climate change..." But you are supporting and spamming for those who suggest exactly that, then backpedalling in an attempt to obfuscate the indefensible.
Click to expand...

Those are all fair questions about an individual who is obviously without integrity.
 
Buzz said:
Show me.
Click to expand...


[h=1]Solar Cycle 25 Amplitude Prediction[/h]Guest essay by David Archibald One of the most accurate ways of predicting the amplitude of the next solar cycle is to derive it from the strength of the solar polar fields at solar minimum. And you don’t have to wait for solar minimum. An accurate assessment can be made four years before minimum, which…
 
Buzz said:
Show me.
Click to expand...


[h=1]Unexplored Ocean Depths Bustling with Life, Despite Extreme Conditions[/h]Schmidt Ocean Institute’s new underwater vehicle SuBastian completes its first expedition discovering new hydrothermal vent sites and possible new species in the Mariana Back-Arc, an extreme deep-ocean environment. APRA HARBOR, GUAM – A team of leading geologists, chemists, and biologists aboard research vessel Falkor have just finished surveying the largely unexplored Mariana Back-Arc for life…


 
Mithrae said:
One person committed fraud.
Click to expand...
One person was caught committing fraud. Why do you twist things like a pundit?

Are you a pundit?

It is pretty well statistically established that for each person seen, caught, etc. doing any particular action, there are multiples more.

Mithrae said:
From this, a reasonable person would conclude that as with all groups, slightly fewer than 100% of members of that person's groups (male, white, government employee, climate scientist, over fifty by the looks etc...) are fine upstanding citizens.
Click to expand...
That's a rather uneducated or biased reaction if you ask me.

Mithrae said:
In short, we have one person committing fraud.
Click to expand...
Again, one person "caught."

Mithrae said:
The so-called 'sceptics' on the other hand - the self-described critical thinkers - are apparently concluding that Trump had an omniscient awareness of the fraud, that the Department of Energy and the Obama administration were in on the scam, that it somehow invalidates climate science, and god only knows what else their fertile imaginations can come up with. Just when I think I have my opinion low enough to match reality :(
Click to expand...
Why do you make things up?

Is this more of the confirmation bias surrounding the warmers?
 
Mithrae said:
Not really, no - not without more details on how he did it and got away with it for so long.
Click to expand...

There were more details, and links, if you bothered to read...
 
matchlight said:
One more reason to dissolve the EPA entirely.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not.

The EPA has done exceptionally fine work in the past. It and other agencies simply need to be reminded of their purpose, and a massive house cleaning is in order.

Need to completely remove any agenda driven purposes from several cabinet positions, and do real, honest work on behalf of the people.
 
Deuce said:
The headline is trying to implicate the scientific consensus on AGW. Blatant attempt at distortion.
Click to expand...

Is that your confirmation bias speaking again?

It goes to the integrity of the agency. The consensus argument is already a proven joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom