OhIsee.Then
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 1,581
- Reaction score
- 277
- Location
- MI and AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Wow. You jump to conclusions without thinking about what was written. You apparently need to classify people so things are simpler for you. What you missed is that I was identifying myself as a junk scientist that had his data ‘evaluated’. (Note that I wrote that the Koch Brothers honestly verified the data and reported it, good for them.)"Oh then I see", your a global alarmist, beleiving in all the junk science that has become the Anthropogenic Global warming scam led by Al Gore, Now I see why your having such issues with comparing apples to peanuts.....That explains alot. .
I have several examples. I will briefly describe one. I was working with a product we just started shipping looking at a completely different matter. I observed an intermittent failure mode in the product. Since the product wasn't designed in my group and it was shipping I used a hand written note to management to explain the problem. I suggested that they make and implement a quick simple correction now and wait to see if we get reports from the field of failures. No field failures had been identified yet. I was called essentially an alarmist, a junk engineer. No correction was done. Several months later the field failures were happening enough to result in a big problem. Since I had identified the problem months before and I was never involved in the responsible group I didn't hear about the resolution for several weeks. The claimed source of the problem was that that group copied a design from my group and that I was the source of the problem. It wasn't copied, but they needed a scapegoat. But, by your logic, I was a junk engineer until we had field failures, not just in the lab.