Global Warming 2

I was going to add this as an addendum to my original article, Global Warming, but I’ve decided to give it it’s own space because it is that important (to me.)

Find the original article at Infowars, I will only post a few quotes from it.

Consensus Shattered As Major Scientific Study Says Global Warming Is Natural

Paul Joesph Watson

The so-called scientific consensus that global warming is man-made has been shattered with the release of a major new study backed by three universities which concludes that climate change over the past thirty years is explained by natural factors and that attempts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions are irrelevant.

Climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia report that temperature fluctuations over the past three decades are not consistent with greenhouse model predictions and more closely correlate with solar activity.

The report dismisses attempts to reverse global warming by reducing carbon emissions as ineffective and pointless.

“The observed pattern of warming, comparing surface and atmospheric temperature trends, does not show the characteristic fingerprint associated with greenhouse warming. The inescapable conclusion is that the human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming,” said lead author David H. Douglass.

Man-made global warming advocates have often made their case by claiming that the scientific consensus is fully behind CO2 emissions as the main driver of climate change, when in fact the UN’s own IPCC report was disputed by the very scientists that the UN claimed were behind it.

In other words, I was right. This also shows the power of a scientific dictatorship. The proliferation of ‘reports’ attempting to connect global warming with us ‘useless eaters’ begins from needing funding. Organisations (governments) put conditions on what the studies can include etc. This enables them to encourage the sort of conclusions they want.

Since Al’ the sky is falling’ Gore came out with his propaganda piece ‘An Incovenient Truth’ I have been reading interviews and reports from prominent scientists etc disputing the validity of his claims, so to me, to read this latest article doesn’t come so much as a surprise, but more of a relief, because with each extra piece of evidence, the doomsayers have less to stand on (not that they had much in the first place, which is why they would also use the psychological manipulation of trying to label man-made global warming sceptics as ‘deniers’ on a par with holocaust denial.)

It all revolves around emotional manipulation of the public. False flag terror attacks do exactly the same thing with the same goals in mind, which almost always end with governments taking more power and rights away from its employers, the citizens.

So anyway. The hysteria juggernaut rolled on, with a disproporationate amount of media coverage dedicated to blaming humans for Earth’s temperature variations.

The same technique is always used. They over-hyped global warming. Then they connected it with humans. Then they began using the ‘environmental crisis’ to attempt to dictate their goals to the public, under the guise of ‘protecting the planet.’

You create a carbon footprint. Therefore you are directly responsible for hurting Mother Earth. We think you should use as few resources as possible, and pay a ‘carbon tax’ to us. We will charge businesses, and governments, and the people will have to pay through higher taxes and costs as it is passed down the line and given nice-sounding names.

Then they start pushing their other agenda, which is population control. Too many babies hurts the planet. Controlled families like in Communist China (a country that has one numerous accolades from the UN and received glowing praise from various globalists, like the Rockefellers.)

Now it would seem the foundational myth to all of this is coming undone. Human existance isn’t to blame. I wonder what lie they will think of next. I mean, whatever it is, they are going to have to blame humans for it in order to (again) try to control our lives, movements, finances and thoughts through centralised power structures.

Keep your eyes peeled.

New Peer-Reviewed Study Finds ‘Warming is naturally caused and shows no human influence’

Press Release from Science & Environmental Policy Project

My original global warming article

Al Gore’s Real Colours

U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007

10 thoughts on “Global Warming 2

  1. Pingback: Global Warming? « End of Men

  2. This is a copy of the open letter to the UN regarding the Bali talks.

    UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the UN climate conference in Bali.

    Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
    Dec. 13, 2007

    His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon
    Secretary-General, United Nations
    New York, N.Y.

    Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

    Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction

    It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.

    The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC’s conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it.

    The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by government representatives. The great majority of IPCC contributors and reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts.

    Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports:

    z Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea- level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.

    z The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years.

    z Leading scientists, including some senior IPCC representatives, acknowledge that today’s computer models cannot predict climate. Consistent with this, and despite computer projections of temperature rises, there has been no net global warming since 1998. That the current temperature plateau follows a late 20th-century period of warming is consistent with the continuation today of natural multi-decadal or millennial climate cycling.

    In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is “settled,” significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming. But because IPCC working groups were generally instructed (see to consider work published only through May, 2005, these important findings are not included in their reports; i.e., the IPCC assessment reports are already materially outdated.

    The UN climate conference in Bali has been planned to take the world along a path of severe CO2 restrictions, ignoring the lessons apparent from the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, the chaotic nature of the European CO2 trading market, and the ineffectiveness of other costly initiatives to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Balanced cost/benefit analyses provide no support for the introduction of global measures to cap and reduce energy consumption for the purpose of restricting CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is irrational to apply the “precautionary principle” because many scientists recognize that both climatic coolings and warmings are realistic possibilities over the medium-term future.

    The current UN focus on “fighting climate change,” as illustrated in the Nov. 27 UN Development Programme’s Human Development Report, is distracting governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity’s real and pressing problems.

    Yours faithfully,

    Signatories of an open letter on the UN climate-conference

    Published: Wednesday, December 12, 2007

    The following are signatories to the Dec. 13th letter to the Ban Ki- moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations on the UN Climate conference in Bali:

    Don Aitkin, PhD, Professor, social scientist, retired vice- chancellor and president, University of Canberra, Australia

    William J.R. Alexander, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa; Member, UN Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000

    Bjarne Andresen, PhD, physicist, Professor, The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

    Geoff L. Austin, PhD, FNZIP, FRSNZ, Professor, Dept. of Physics, University of Auckland, New Zealand

    Timothy F. Ball, PhD, environmental consultant, former climatology professor, University of Winnipeg

    Ernst-Georg Beck, Dipl. Biol., Biologist, Merian-Schule Freiburg, Germany

    Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen, PhD, Reader, Dept. of Geography, Hull University, U.K.; Editor, Energy & Environment journal

    Chris C. Borel, PhD, remote sensing scientist, U.S.

    Reid A. Bryson, PhD, DSc, DEngr, UNE P. Global 500 Laureate; Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research; Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography, and of Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin

    Dan Carruthers, M.Sc., wildlife biology consultant specializing in animal ecology in Arctic and Subarctic regions, Alberta

    R.M. Carter, PhD, Professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia

    Ian D. Clark, PhD, Professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

    Richard S. Courtney, PhD, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.

    Willem de Lange, PhD, Dept. of Earth and Ocean Sciences, School of Science and Engineering, Waikato University, New Zealand

    David Deming, PhD (Geophysics), Associate Professor, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Oklahoma

    Freeman J. Dyson, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.

    Don J. Easterbrook, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Geology, Western Washington University

    Lance Endersbee, Emeritus Professor, former dean of Engineering and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Monasy University, Australia

    Hans Erren, Doctorandus, geophysicist and climate specialist, Sittard, The Netherlands

    Robert H. Essenhigh, PhD, E.G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University

    Christopher Essex, PhD, Professor of Applied Mathematics and Associate Director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario

    David Evans, PhD, mathematician, carbon accountant, computer and electrical engineer and head of ‘Science Speak,’ Australia

    William Evans, PhD, editor, American Midland Naturalist; Dept. of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame

    Stewart Franks, PhD, Professor, Hydroclimatologist, University of Newcastle, Australia

    R. W. Gauldie, PhD, Research Professor, Hawai’i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, School of Ocean Earth Sciences and Technology, University of Hawai’i at Manoa

    Lee C. Gerhard, PhD, Senior Scientist Emeritus, University of Kansas; former director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey

    Gerhard Gerlich, Professor for Mathematical and Theoretical Physics, Institut für Mathematische Physik der TU Braunschweig, Germany

    Albrecht Glatzle, PhD, sc.agr., Agro-Biologist and Gerente ejecutivo, INTTAS, Paraguay

    Fred Goldberg, PhD, Adjunct Professor, Royal Institute of Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden

    Vincent Gray, PhD, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of ‘Climate Change 2001, Wellington, New Zealand

    William M. Gray, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University and Head of the Tropical Meteorology Project

    Howard Hayden, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Connecticut

    Louis Hissink MSc, M.A.I.G., editor, AIG News, and consulting geologist, Perth, Western Australia

    Craig D. Idso, PhD, Chairman, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Arizona

    Sherwood B. Idso, PhD, President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, AZ, USA

    Andrei Illarionov, PhD, Senior Fellow, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity; founder and director of the Institute of Economic Analysis

    Zbigniew Jaworowski, PhD, physicist, Chairman – Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland

    Jon Jenkins, PhD, MD, computer modelling – virology, NSW, Australia

    Wibjorn Karlen, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden

    Olavi Kärner, Ph.D., Research Associate, Dept. of Atmospheric Physics, Institute of Astrophysics and Atmospheric Physics, Toravere, Estonia

    Joel M. Kauffman, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemistry, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia

    David Kear, PhD, FRSNZ, CMG, geologist, former Director-General of NZ Dept. of Scientific & Industrial Research, New Zealand

    Madhav Khandekar, PhD, former research scientist, Environment Canada; editor, Climate Research (2003-05); editorial board member, Natural Hazards; IPCC expert reviewer 2007

    William Kininmonth M.Sc., M.Admin., former head of Australia’s National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological organization’s Commission for Climatology Jan J.H. Kop, MSc Ceng FICE (Civil Engineer Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers), Emeritus Prof. of Public Health Engineering, Technical University Delft, The Netherlands

    Prof. R.W.J. Kouffeld, Emeritus Professor, Energy Conversion, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

    Salomon Kroonenberg, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Geotechnology, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

    Hans H.J. Labohm, PhD, economist, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations), The Netherlands

    The Rt. Hon. Lord Lawson of Blaby, economist; Chairman of the Central Europe Trust; former Chancellor of the Exchequer, U.K.

    Douglas Leahey, PhD, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary

    David R. Legates, PhD, Director, Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware

    Marcel Leroux, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS

    Bryan Leyland, International Climate Science Coalition, consultant and power engineer, Auckland, New Zealand

    William Lindqvist, PhD, independent consulting geologist, Calif.

    Richard S. Lindzen, PhD, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

    A.J. Tom van Loon, PhD, Professor of Geology (Quaternary Geology), Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland; former President of the European Association of Science Editors

    Anthony R. Lupo, PhD, Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science, Dept. of Soil, Environmental, and Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri-Columbia

    Richard Mackey, PhD, Statistician, Australia

    Horst Malberg, PhD, Professor for Meteorology and Climatology, Institut für Meteorologie, Berlin, Germany

    John Maunder, PhD, Climatologist, former President of the Commission for Climatology of the World Meteorological Organization (89-97), New Zealand

    Alister McFarquhar, PhD, international economy, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.

    Ross McKitrick, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph

    John McLean, PhD, climate data analyst, computer scientist, Australia

    Owen McShane, PhD, economist, head of the International Climate Science Coalition; Director, Centre for Resource Management Studies, New Zealand

    Fred Michel, PhD, Director, Institute of Environmental Sciences and Associate Professor of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

    Frank Milne, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Economics, Queen’s University

    Asmunn Moene, PhD, former head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway

    Alan Moran, PhD, Energy Economist, Director of the IPA’s Deregulation Unit, Australia

    Nils-Axel Morner, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm University, Sweden

    Lubos Motl, PhD, Physicist, former Harvard string theorist, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

    John Nicol, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Physics, James Cook University, Australia

    David Nowell, M.Sc., Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, former chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa

    James J. O’Brien, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Meteorology and Oceanography, Florida State University

    Cliff Ollier, PhD, Professor Emeritus (Geology), Research Fellow, University of Western Australia

    Garth W. Paltridge, PhD, atmospheric physicist, Emeritus Professor and former Director of the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies, University of Tasmania, Australia

    R. Timothy Patterson, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University

    Al Pekarek, PhD, Associate Professor of Geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, Minnesota

    Ian Plimer, PhD, Professor of Geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide and Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia

    Brian Pratt, PhD, Professor of Geology, Sedimentology, University of Saskatchewan

    Harry N.A. Priem, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Planetary Geology and Isotope Geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences

    Alex Robson, PhD, Economics, Australian National University Colonel F.P.M. Rombouts, Branch Chief – Safety, Quality and Environment, Royal Netherland Air Force

    R.G. Roper, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology

    Arthur Rorsch, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Molecular Genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands

    Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, B.C.

    Tom V. Segalstad, PhD, (Geology/Geochemistry), Head of the Geological Museum and Associate Professor of Resource and Environmental Geology, University of Oslo, Norway

    Gary D. Sharp, PhD, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, CA

    S. Fred Singer, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia and former director Weather Satellite Service

    L. Graham Smith, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario

    Roy W. Spencer, PhD, climatologist, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville

    Peter Stilbs, TeknD, Professor of Physical Chemistry, Research Leader, School of Chemical Science and Engineering, KTH (Royal Institute of Technology), Stockholm, Sweden

    Hendrik Tennekes, PhD, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

    Dick Thoenes, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

    Brian G Valentine, PhD, PE (Chem.), Technology Manager – Industrial Energy Efficiency, Adjunct Associate Professor of Engineering Science, University of Maryland at College Park; Dept of Energy, Washington, DC

    Gerrit J. van der Lingen, PhD, geologist and paleoclimatologist, climate change consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand

    Len Walker, PhD, Power Engineering, Australia

    Edward J. Wegman, PhD, Department of Computational and Data Sciences, George Mason University, Virginia

    Stephan Wilksch, PhD, Professor for Innovation and Technology Management, Production Management and Logistics, University of Technolgy and Economics Berlin, Germany

    Boris Winterhalter, PhD, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland

    David E. Wojick, PhD, P.Eng., energy consultant, Virginia

    Raphael Wust, PhD, Lecturer, Marine Geology/Sedimentology, James Cook University, Australia

    A. Zichichi, PhD, President of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva, Switzerland; Emeritus Professor of Advanced Physics, University of Bologna, Italy

  3. Well, the verdict is in, Moose must die in order to stop Global Warming!!!

    “A grown moose will burp and pass so much methane gas in the course of a year that it amounts to 2,100 kilos of carbon dioxide emissions. Newspaper VG reported that a motorist would have to drive 13,000 kilometers in a car to emit the same.”

    It is apparent that my country of Canada has by far the largest Moose population in the world:

    830,000 Canadian moose !!!
    435,000 Russian moose !!!
    255,000 American moose !!
    200,000 Swedish moose !!
    125,000 Norwegian moose !
    90,000 Finnish moose !

    Yes, indeed, not only does Canada not want to sign the Marxist Kyoto Accord, but we also harbour the vast majority of these enviro-terrorist creatures.

    I am sure all the Global Warming tree-huggers won’t mind then if we in Canada go on a massive bloody Moose hunt, and kill as many of these awful, disrespectful creatures that have no business being allowed to exist in our environment, eh? Annie, get my gun! I’m gonna shoot me a Moose and save our planet!

  4. Ecowarrior. That’s a great response, full of facts and information.

    Chicagoman. Thanks for the info. The system sounds like a quagmire and completely manipulated and controlled.

  5. E-mail me at, I’d rather not say many details on a public forum since Femmie nutjobs will report me.

    This is how research grants work:

    I will use NIH grants as an example.

    After you finish your grant you submit it at one of several grant deadlines during the year. October, April etc.

    Places like the NIH select reviewers in the field and these form small groups at NIH and go through grants. The study sections constitute members of that field that will review the grants and give them priority scores. The grants that receive the best scores get funded.

    Since scientists are suppposed to be very objective, the system should work really well even though a competitor likely will read your grant. Also things you see on the grant you should not use for your own research unless they were knowingly communicated to you by the person writing the grant. For example If I am working on thing A and it is completely novel, you are not allowed to go and start doing research on thing A unless it is published or communicated to you by me.

    If you do not get funded, you receive your score, reviewers comments and you can resubmit your grant with corrections.

    When I was starting my first postdoctoral fellowship my boss reviewed this particular grant. There was some information on it that we were actually trying to research ourselves. The information in the grant was probably at least 1 year removed from when we would get it on our own. My boss asked me to basically do the next step of the research and to also perform that experiment. Seeing that this was from a competitor I felt uncomfortable doing it.

    Another time I reviewed this paper for The Journal of Immunology for that same boss. The research was not that good in it. Controls were missing all over the place and I gave it a bad review. My boss then basically changed many things in my review of the paper and told me that we owed this lab a favor and gave the journal his approval to publish anyways.

    I see good papers that don’t get into good journals because the labs are new, small or don’t have many people scratching their backs for them. I see shitty papers from famous labs in good journals because they get published from favors or fear of pissing off a big shot.

    To me The Journal system is antiquated and is meaningless now. I no longer have any faith, I even cancelled my Science subscription after the Korean stem cell fiasco from a couple of years ago.

    I am currently setting up a website for the free exchange of information and reagents. I will reveal that soon.

    There are experiments published by certain labs in the NK field that give one conclusion (this protein X downregulates NK cells). After publication you have the right to ask the lab for the reagents to repeat the experiments, part of the scientific process after all. They are obliged to give you the reagents since upon publication you sign an agreement to share the reagents and they were also discovered using public funds.

    9 times out of 10 I either get flat out refused reagents, or the labs give me the run around, don’t answer e-mails, make me go in circles getting permission and finally they stop communicating.

    I have now cloned out every gene that I need to use in my research since most scientists are a bunch of little bastards and won’t fulfill their scientific obligation to the field. This is also why I am starting my website.

    If you publish something, it is already published and it should be testable by others, especially if it is controversial.

    To make a long story short, I cloned out the gene in question. I used it in my experiments and found the OPPOSITE effect. I repeated it over and over and still found the opposite effect. Turns out another lab published a paper and showed that this gene X can recruit an activating kinase (transfers phosphate groups to proteins to activate them). Their paper supports my findings.

    Back to global warming, you bet your ass papers refuting it and grants refuting it get denied left and right.

    I think its funny that scientists teach research ethics, yet most of them don’t have any themselves.

    I don’t want to reveal too much about myself on this site but ask me by e-mail if you have any questions.

  6. How to make every body in this world love the nature. Jangah hanya negara tropis suruh pelihara hutan.. tapi negara maju juga harus sadar diri untuk mendukungnya… ( Do not only tropical country must be care their forest.. but the other country look like USA.. must be support… )
    viva Bali

  7. Chicagoman, what did you discover?
    I’ve been through this first hand as well, same with many of my associates.
    Please share your research.
    I’m curious about your discovery, as I’m studying the immune system as well.

  8. Thanks for the input Chicagoman. The research you’ve done sounds interesting. I’d like to know what happened with that and what the consequences of your research is when you can let me know.

    I’d also like to know about the funding system and why it allows such conflicts of interest. Another way of saying could be ‘that it isn’t COF because because it doesn’t conflict with the sponsors interests.’

    It’s sickening how ingrained corruption is in our society now.

  9. I’m not surprised, it happens all the time in science.

    During the course of my work on immune cells my research reached a conclusion opposite of what everyone else thought. I got denied grant funding numerous times because the people reviewing my grants were competitors that my work proved wrong (should be conflict of interest, but that’s how the system is set up). Instead of being adults about it and analyzing my experiments versus theirs, they made up all kinds of fancy reasons for not accepting my work, none of which were significantly relevant.

    Turns out that I proved them wrong again in ANOTHER model system as well as in organisms themselves. I even repeated their experiments and show in my work that they did theirs all wrong.

    The paper will be submitted AGAIN to a high impact journal. I proved my stuff inside and out with great controls so many times it is hard to justify not accepting my article for publication, but we’ll see.

    Most scientists are a bunch of little children suckling on the governments nipples for grant money. To many getting funding and their name ahead of yours is paramount.

    I see so many things that are unethical that it turns my stomach. This is why I am leaving academia in a few months to go into industry. These people here a bunch of whiney little bitches and spoiled brats.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s