/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11899038

12KiB, 299x168, B9FB9605-1CA2-4C8B-BB6C-14EF9C911223.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 03:45:46 2020 No.11899038 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11899045 >>11899069 >>11899073 >>11899119 >>11899140 >>11899207 >>11899503 >>11899756 >>11899852 >>11899901 >>11899951 >>11900027 >>11900032 >>11900724

Candace Owens said that the reason there is a scientific consensus on human-induced climate change is because the studies that go against it are silenced and don't get funding. Could this be true, is this how science works?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 03:48:20 No.11899045 Report

Quoted By: >>11899049

>>11899038
She probably gets a lot of money to say that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 03:50:53 No.11899049 Report

Quoted By: >>11899062 >>11899068 >>11899763

>>11899045
Maybe, I just want to know if this is how science works in general. Seems like a big flaw if true.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 03:58:30 No.11899062 Report

Quoted By: >>11899099

>>11899049
it's not, if you were able to prove that it wasn't the case you'd become famous immediately, cited thousands of times, etc..
the studies that "get funding" could just as easily prove that these phenomena were a hoax with their results. but that's not what they're finding

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 03:59:41 No.11899065 Report

Quoted By:

lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:00:49 No.11899068 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899049
>big if true meme
can't tell if this is bait or just incredibly stupid
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316691239_Global_Warming_Causes_Effects_and_Solutions

Republicans have recently acknowledged climate change is real, but won't acknowledge the cause of climate change.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:00:50 No.11899069 Report

Quoted By: >>11899074

>>11899038
Really stupid. You don't say what the outcome of your study is going to be when requesting funding. Typical excuse for denial of reality.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 12_23_2013_funding.jpg, 224KiB, 730x667

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:02:19 No.11899073 Report

Quoted By: >>11899095

>>11899038
As has been proven time and time again, it's the opposite, AGW denier studies get disproportionate amount of funding from hedge funds and oil companies despite the fact that they are representing a position held by less than 1% of climatologists.

Nearly $2 billion in funding for climate change denialist "research" and associated lobbying by oil companies alone.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:02:22 No.11899074 Report

Quoted By: >>11899094 >>11899114

>>11899069
however, you do state your predictions and the hypotheses that you will be testing when applying for funding

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:07:57 No.11899094 Report

Quoted By: >>11899111 >>11899114

>>11899074
no you don't this isn't fucking middle school science projects
you say what you're going to be studying, and what its consequences would be regardless of the outcome, and why it's an interesting question to be funding.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:07:58 No.11899095 Report

Quoted By: >>11899101 >>11899108

>>11899073
Interesting. Funding is not an issue then, but is it still possible that anti-AGW studies are silenced due to politics or is that also bs?

Shuntaro Furukawa

Shuntaro Furukawa Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:10:22 No.11899099 Report

Quoted By: >>11899104 >>11899112 >>11900249

>>11899062
Completely untrue
There were multiple studies done to find a cure for the brain defects that cause homosexuality but they all get buried by some.mundane law or clause.
Eventually the scientists lose their credentials

If you go against the status quo you get punished.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:10:28 No.11899101 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899095
no they're not being silenced. big corporations would push that shit to the forefront as far as their dollars could take them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:12:02 No.11899104 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899099
That's right, pray the gay away, Pastor Joe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:13:33 No.11899108 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899095
LOL, politicians would love for AGW to be proven false. Then they'd be off the hook. They aren't even doing anything now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:13:41 No.11899111 Report

Quoted By: >>11899122

>>11899094
>what its consequences would be regardless of the outcome
so you make predictions got it

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:14:15 No.11899112 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899099
okay namefag I'll definitely take this into consideration!
however I'll continue to do science in my field where people are actively trying to find reasons we shouldn't believe in the status quo, just as those before them have made a lot of success by doing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:15:51 No.11899114 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899094
>>11899074
different funding sources have different application requirements

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:16:39 No.11899119 Report

Quoted By: >>11899142

>>11899038
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lslIyHo6zg

You can read the leaked emails.
https://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/greenhouse-science/climate-change/climategate-emails.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:17:09 No.11899122 Report

Quoted By: >>11899137 >>11899145

>>11899111
no you fucking mongoloid
>if this value we find is greater than 0 we learn that what popular theory we have is further validated but in the realm of this region we had not previously considered
>if we measure a value less than 0 we have an interesting contradiction to popular theory and either need to adjust our theory or perform further experiments on related fields to test whether or not popular theory is valid

it's like half the people on this site are bots

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:20:58 No.11899137 Report

Quoted By: >>11899143

>>11899122
how dumb are you, in that case the prediction would be the null hypothesis you fucking undergrad

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:22:08 No.11899140 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3hHi4sylxE

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Greenhouse_Spectrum.gif, 10KiB, 400x350

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:22:23 No.11899142 Report

Quoted By: >>11899821

>>11899119
>muh climategate
Nothingburger. A couple of scientists discussed their research over email, internet schizos misinterpreted the scientific terminology used on the emails to mean there was some big conspiracy, even though there wasn't, and that was just one study out of thousands proving AGW.

Meanwhile in the real world spectroscopy proves AGW beyond any shadow of a doubt.

>The final piece of evidence is ‘the smoking gun’, the proof that CO2 is causing the increases in temperature. CO2 traps energy at very specific wavelengths, while other greenhouse gases trap different wavelengths. In physics, these wavelengths can be measured using a technique called spectroscopy. Here’s an example:

>Spectrum of the greenhouse radiation measured at the surface. Greenhouse effect from water vapor is filtered out, showing the contributions of other greenhouse gases (Evans 2006).

>The graph shows different wavelengths of energy, measured at the Earth’s surface. Among the spikes you can see energy being radiated back to Earth by ozone (O3), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20). But the spike for CO2 on the left dwarfs all the other greenhouse gases, and tells us something very important: most of the energy being trapped in the atmosphere corresponds exactly to the wavelength of energy captured by CO2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:22:45 No.11899143 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899137
you claimed that you predict an outcome. I'm saying that you justify your experiment by saying what the consequences would be for either outcome. how is this so hard to understand?
I've applied for 5 grants btw you're literally not going to win this

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:22:55 No.11899145 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899122
You're right I misread the initial argument. I concede.
Originally I was thinking about stating your hypotheses and predictions in a scientific paper, not a grant proposal. I do think predictions and their implications would be required from most funding sources though, but not necessarily as you have so eloquently put it.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1583723132601.jpg, 83KiB, 583x777

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:50:24 No.11899207 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038

>Could this be true, is this how science works?

No, it's akin to stating the entire world is conspiring against you. There's way too many players in the academic field globally for a supposed false narrative like that to be pushed without multiple governments pushing back hard if the evidence was to the contrary.

Stop listening to retards and use your brain. How many countries do you really think would be inclined to waste billions on a secret cover up?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 05:47:46 No.11899318 Report

Quoted By: >>11899486

Candace Owens is a fucking moron

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 06:52:23 No.11899486 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899318
Correct. I still want to hate face fuck her tho.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 06:59:58 No.11899503 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038
She's a retarded black woman.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 09:06:40 No.11899756 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038
This is retarded. What do you mean funding. Trump and republicans are the deciders of who gets the funding right now atleast from the federal gov. They are climate change denialist. Unless there is an even bigger conspiracy this is retarded to say.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 09:14:36 No.11899763 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899049

Its exactly the opposite of what Candice says. The oil and gas industry is worth something like 100 Trillion. With a T. They have so much power that they can orchestrate attacks against their own people, rub it in those peoples faces and they still wouldn't flinch. They have so much power they can orchestrate nagionwode genocides, in the open, in 2020 and you wouldn't and don't even rebuke them. Now what do you think they would do to cover up that CO2 is Provably a heat sink, as in you can prove it at home with simple experiments? 100T how much do you think Candice cost? More or less than butchering an American resident reporter with Trumps blessing like they did in SA.

You fucking baaaa baaa. BAA BAA

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 10:19:13 No.11899821 Report

Quoted By: >>11899892 >>11899932

>>11899142
so whats to say human beings are having any significant effect on this big spike of CO2?
what research was done in the past suggesting this has increased any?
human beings probably have more of an effect increasing the other greenhouses gases considering we raise livestock more and more on a larger scale, and the earth has been producing mass amounts of CO2 on its own for ages.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 10:45:42 No.11899852 Report

Quoted By: >>11899948

>>11899038
It's true. It's painfully obvious that marxist institutions control modern science

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 10:49:52 No.11899856 Report

Quoted By: >>11899936

The 97% consensus line is an agenda pushed without data.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:24:06 No.11899892 Report

Quoted By: >>11899918

>>11899821
Are you retarded or something? Just take a look at the atmospheric co2 levels in the past and now.
If you can't comprehend that, I will try to explain it to you, with basic logic:
>Humans burn stuff
>That sets free co2
>Not enough co2 can get absorbed by plants
>co2 ppm rises
How do you people can do mental gymnastics so hard, that you believe, that burning fucktons of shit is going to have literally no effect?
It baffles me everytime

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:27:38 No.11899901 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038
I'm 27 and climate change is exactly what I experienced in my short life span.
I think it much more likely that climate change is real, than not.

How are scientists going to fake changing the climate to fake climate change? Just doesn't make much sense.

Also, why would Putin and Saudis and the US oil and gas giants allow such a conspiracy? They would just take out the conspirators because they are hurting their business.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:31:51 No.11899906 Report

Quoted By: >>11899941

weakening magnetosphere due to imminent pole shift

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:37:31 No.11899918 Report

Quoted By: >>11899949

>>11899892
so its not because there were more plants then its just because weve been burning things in the past 200 years

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:45:09 No.11899932 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899821
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/how-do-we-know-that-recent-cosub2sub-increases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:46:45 No.11899936 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899856
Nice denial of reality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:47:47 No.11899941 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899906
Source?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:50:06 No.11899948 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899852
>Marxist institutions
what

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:51:34 No.11899949 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899918
No, the isotope ratio of carbon in the atmosphere is skewing more towards the isotopic composition of carbon from fossil fuels and less towards the isotopic composition of carbon from plants. This immediately tells us the increase in CO2 is due to fossil fuels and not plants. Also, there are more plants because there are more CO2 emissions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 11:51:51 No.11899951 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038
Who?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 12:37:01 No.11900027 Report

Quoted By: >>11900093

>>11899038
Canadace Owens is a fucking idiot and should have never been launched into being a conservative figurehead. She only got there because she is "Le bAsEd black conservative woman!!!1!1". Con Inc are retards

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 12:40:33 No.11900032 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038
>Could this be true?
yes
>is this how science works?
yes

[at least the lesser ((sciences)) like climate etc]

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 13:20:53 No.11900093 Report

Quoted By:

>>11900027
She was a balance against AOC.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 13:22:36 No.11900095 Report

Quoted By:

It's true in the sense that studies against transgenders and race intelligence also dont get funding and arent published.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 14:46:44 No.11900249 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899099
so true
I keep applying for a grant to study jesus images in toast, but it always gets denied by the science jews

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 17:48:26 No.11900724 Report

Quoted By:

>>11899038
she's partially correct, that's why less stuff is being discovered by academia in the last 50 years. They only fund stuff they know to be 99% going to succeed in advance or politically correct. No actual exploration of the unknown.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches