Oppose Scientific Conspiracies. Support Open Acceess.
by tdaxp ~ December 12th, 2009
One of the lessons of climategate is that anti-scientific conspiracies and sloppy work can exist even in science.
The cure for these diseases is sunlight.
Therefore, I support Obama’s Office is Science & Technology Policy trial balloon of forcing scientists who do work with federal funds to make the results of that work freely available. Not only would this make life harder for global warming cultists to hide behind paywalls costing of thousands of dollar per user — it helps science as an institution.
Therefore, I hope that President Obama pushes forward with plans for open access science.
I think this is your...
December 14th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
“Therefore, I support Obama’s Office is Science & Technology Policy trial balloon of forcing scientists who do work with federal funds to make the results of that work freely available.”
You know what? I support this effort as well, but I am not expecting to find what you are hoping to.
From Realclimate bloggers commenting on Computerworld.com
‘”More interesting is what is not contained in the emails,” the site noted. “There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the MWP’ [Medieval Warm Period], no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords.”‘
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9141258/Global_warming_research_exposed_after_hack
Furthermore, what are your thoughts on disclosing the funding and research of “private” research projects that receive funding from energy companies that are federally subsidized?
December 27th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Hey Jeffrey,
Thanks for the comments.
Regarding the Georoge Soros stuff, the only people I see peddling it are far-left bloggers trying to attack a strawman. It’s part of a pattern of deception by the ACGW cult..
I think all sources of funding, as well as tools used, should be cited in papers as a matter of academic ethics. I may be in a minority about this.
December 29th, 2009 at 7:34 am
“Regarding the Georoge Soros stuff, the only people I see peddling it are far-left bloggers trying to attack a strawman.”
How’s so?
December 29th, 2009 at 8:00 am
Thus so.
The only people I see tying George Soros to the cover-up are leftists.
For instance, your earlier comment.
December 29th, 2009 at 8:14 am
You do understand sarcasm, right? I would think the mere mention of “vegetarian overlords” would have established that right away.
December 29th, 2009 at 8:24 am
It’s really hard to tell the difference between ACGW talking points and sarcasm.
December 29th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Thanks! I needed to be grinning this afternoon. The above did it for me.
January 7th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
My grin came from Ben Nelson, ObamaCare’s 60th vote, making his first public self-criticism… [1]
[1] http://www.fremonttribune.com/articles/2010/01/07/news/local/doc4b44af1b90306516425283.txt