“As long as the incentives are there, then rewards will be there for those who can cheat the system, whether they do so intentionally or not.”
Now, imagine you’re a researcher who wants to game this system. Here’s what you do. Run many small and statistically weak studies. Tweak your methods on the fly to ensure positive results. If you get negative results, sweep them under the rug. Never try to check old results; only pursue new and exciting ones. These are not just flights of fancy. We know that such practices abound. They’re great for getting publications, but they also pollute the scientific record with results that aren’t actually true. As Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet once wrote, “No one is incentivized to be right. Instead, scientists are incentivized to be productive.”
Finally … and so blindingly obvious to those not blinded by the AGW propaganda.
The main driver of wildlife extinction is not climate change, but humanity’s harvesting of species and our ever-expanding agricultural footprint.
This is according to a new study of nearly 9,000 ‘threatened’ or ‘near-threatened’ species.
While scientists acknowledge climate change is a threat, they found that three-quarters are being over-exploited for commerce, recreation or subsistence.
Demand for meat and body parts, for example, have driven the Western gorilla and Chinese pangolin to near extinction, and pushed the Sumatran rhinoceros – prized in China for bogus medicines made from its horn – over the edge.
And more than half of the 8,688 species of animals and plants evaluated are suffering due to the conversion of their natural habitats into industrial farms and plantations, mainly to raise livestock and grow commodity crops for fuel or food.
By comparison, only 19 per cent of these species are currently affected by climate change, they reported in a study published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature.
Conservation budgets, the researchers argued, must reflect this reality.
And then some of the usual BS
‘There is no need to see tradeoffs among different conservation priorities – we need them all,’ Peter MacIntyre, an expert on the ecology of fresh-water systems at the University of Wisconsin, told AFP.
Translation: The AGW cult wants all the money.
Imagine a giant wood stove at the top of Burnaby Mountain (where my alma mater SFU is situated).
Imagine all the CO2. Imagine all the smoke.
It appears the idiots running SFU hate air quality in Vancouver and the lower mainland.
“The district energy system will produce energy using locally sourced biomass that would otherwise be destined for local landfills. It could include urban wood waste (from tree cuttings and trimmings), uncontaminated wood waste (such as wood chips from sawmills and shavings), and clean construction wood waste.”
If we know anything about wood waste we know:
- They will run out of wood waste and start burning whole trees
- There will be more CO2 produced than if they were burning coal (let alone natural gas)
- There will be more particulate matter than if they are burning clean natural gas.
Climate Change! It causes floods in 1910 to look like floods in 2016.
More pictures here.
The original study was flawed (understatement) and said the opposite.
…the American Journal of Political Science … published a finding much beloved of liberals a few years back that purported to find scientific evidence that conservatives are more likely to exhibit traits associated with psychoticism, such as authoritarianism and tough-mindedness, and that the supposed “authoritarian” personality of conservatives might even have a genetic basis
The authors regret that there is an error in the published version of “Correlation not Causation: The Relationship between Personality Traits and Political Ideologies” American Journal of Political Science 56 (1), 34–51. The interpretation of the coding of the political attitude items in the descriptive and preliminary analyses portion of the manuscript was exactly reversed.
Read the whole article.