Global warming...
Out of context: Reply #632
- Started
- Last post
- 1,047 Responses
- mpfree0
Well, as the debate rages, we find that there really are two kinds of “scientists.”
There are those who look at facts and make their judgements based on what they know.
Their findings can be matched by any other scientist, using the same data and set of circumstances to reach the same conclusions. It’s a age-old practice called peer reviewing. It’s the only true science.
And then there are those who yearn for a certain outcome and set about creating the needed data to make it so. Usually you will find this group of scientists greatly dependent on grants supplied by those with a specific political agenda who demand desired outcomes for their money.
Let’s just take NASA, for example - the most trusted name in American science.
A lot of NASA scientists have fallen into this trap. Environmental science has become the life-blood of the space program as the nation has lost interest in space travel. To keep the bucks coming, NASA has justified shuttle trips through the use of earth-directed environmental research. And the budgets keep coming.
At the same time, many of NASA’s scientists come with a political agenda in great harmony with those who advocate the green agenda. And they’re not above using their position to aid that agenda whenever the chance is available.
--
http://globalwarminghoax.wordpre…
valid points