Which scientist will be the next to pull the wool over his peers?

Question

With all the global warming talk nowadays you constantly here reference to "peer reviewed” work, as if this is a guarantee that what a scientist says is scientific truth--assuming scientific truths are the actual laws according to nature and not some man made assumptions.

The thing we all need to remember is that scientists are human and humans make mistakes. Some "real" scientists go beyond making mistakes and actually fabricate science --case in point, Dr. Hwang in South Korea. His work even passed "peer" review for a number of years.

I have a scientist friend that has done research on group psychology. He said that his research suggests that the magnitude of mistakes increases in groups: not more mistakes but the errors are greater. I can't help but wonder what implications this has for the scientific community. If people like Dr. Hwang were able to fool the scientific community for so long. Who else is fooling the scientific community?

My point is that science doesn't have all the answers. Our societies live as if scientists know everything there is to know about the working world. They seem to forget that science is actually a work in progress. We should keep in mind that just because we believe something to be a scientific fact, does not mean that it is true. Someday someone could find the key that is hiding and turn our present scientific facts into hogwash.

Just consider the sound barrier. At one time, not so long ago, it was scientific fact that you could not fly faster than the "sound barrier", hence the name.

Actually from what you, marine52, wrote and what my friend told me about his study, I would say you are only partially correct.

The experiment that I have in mind is one in which he brought in a group of individuals to watch a video. I don't remember the details for example size of study, but he made certain suggestions, about the video prior to the viewing. After viewing the group was asked to discuss the video and come to certain conclusions.

He found that when groups made errors, duie to group dynamics, the errors were larger in scope than errors made by individuals.

Actually for all the 1000's of scientist saying that global warming is happening. I have found many scientists who think it is bunk and bad science. As a matter of fact there are probably as many if not more who think so.

http://junkscience.com/
http://www.globalwarming.org/
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1824

Answer 1

In this day and age, where blindly accepting man-made global warming is hip and profitable, those of us interested in the truth must remain resolute against the propaganda and hysteria.

Siliencing detractors of man-made global warming is the top tactic of the Greenies; after all, thousands of competent scientists have already debunked their theories of man-made global warming, citing sloppy data collection methods, questionable modeling techniques, low-confidence level statistics, and flat-out intellectual dishonesty.

The first link below is a story regarding a Weather Channel meteorologist who wants all meteorologists who question man-made global warming to lose their certifications. She claims her statement was to "encourage debate", but it is quite clear that she wants to stifle to the voice of those opposed to global warming junk science.

The second link is a bit older, but again shows how the Greenies will slander and smear detractors of their "theories". This particular article references the "hockey stick" warming trend, which is the Holy Grail of man-made global warming advocates. How dare scientists question science, when propaganda has already declared this theory true.

So, in regards to your question, it is extremely important that we know exactly who is reviewing these man-made global warming theories. As you can see from these articles, scientists who oppose man-made global warming will be silenced, which therefore leads to biased reviews of these theories by proponents of man-made global warming - which, of course, is flat-out intellectually dishonest.

Answer 2

This is hardly one scientist "pulling wool". This is a massive consensus, reached by thousands of scientists working independently and getting the same result. It is the very epitome of the "scientific method".

And that method has worked quite well for some time in exposing faulty work, pretty fast. Polywater and cold fusion are two great examples.

This time the work isn't faulty. The enormous data base has been building (once again, through a lot of independent work) and it consistently and ever more powerfully says the same thing. The idea that thousands of climatologists are being fooled into a mistake here is simply absurd.

Global warming is real, it's caused by us, and it presents a great danger to our economy.

That isn't pleasant. It means we're going to have to work very hard to reduce its' effects. But it is solid science. It is reality. Deny reality at your peril.

These people don't deny reality. They don't get their science from Al Gore, they get it from the best scientists in the world. They know, if they had the "wooled pulled over them" on this it would ruin their career and their lifelong reputation. And they're confident global warming is real. You may not respect all of them, but surely you respect some.

"The science of global warming is clear. We know enough to act now. We must act now."

James Rogers, CEO of Charlotte-based Duke Energy.

"The overwhelming majority of atmospheric scientists around the world and our own National Academy of Sciences are in essential agreement on the facts of global warming and the significant contribution of human activity to that trend."

Russell E. Train, Republican, former environmental official under Presidents Nixon and Ford

"We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over."

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republican, Governor, California

"Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."

John McCain, Republican, Senator, Arizona

"These technologies will help us become better stewards of the environment - and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change."

President George Bush

Answer 3

You are really reaching. Yes there are dishonest people and one person can deceive people for a time, but not for long. On research generally there are a multitude of different people working on the same thing and each are gathering data separately. That would be very difficult to say that it is fabricated. Instead of looking for reasons not to believe something, how about doing your own research an trying to do something that you obviously aren't doing, being objective.

What your scientist friend is talking about is a phenomena called Group Think. This occurs when people are working for the same agency, where they feel compelled to go along with with the majority. NASA is a good example of this with the shuttle explosion.

Enclosed is a web site about the causes of Group Think, and ways to avoid it.

Answer 4

It's still my contention that the whole global warming debate boils down to those who rely on research grants, and thus, are at the mercy of their benefactors to say what they're told to say, against those who do not rely on research grants and have nothing to lose by telling the truth.
The best example I can thing of is Dr James Hanson of the Goddard Space Lab. Al Gore likes to quote Hanson. Hanson gets money from the Heinz foundation. Teresa Heinz-Kerry oversees the Heinz family endowments and met John Kerry at an Earth Day rally. Are we seeing the connection? If Hanson came out and said that global warming was not caused by man and fossil fuels, he would be throwing his career and his bank account right in the toilet.

Answer 5

Beamstein