Mo Opinion, if you don't believe the scientific community are not as corrupted by government financing of their entire lives, just stop for a minute & look over the Peter Ridd case.

The judge effectively said in his judgement, that the James Cook management are about as trust worthy as the very worst used car salesman. Hell they still believe they have the right to lie to their paymasters, us the tax payer, & continue to receive their obscene salaries.

The global warming gravy train has exposed this sector of the bureaucracy, which is what they have become, as one of the very worst in their rip off practices. There is no longer any sector of the scientific community I would trust without a very through examination of their ethics & science.

There is no doubt that the very worst is the global warming bunch, but the biologists, particularly marine, are gaining on them quickly.

Dear Hasbeen,

The scientific community is not trying to deceive you. Your belief that the scientific community is lying to you about their temperature readings is not correct.

You are having what shrinks would call paranoid delusions. You need help and should see a psychiatrist who can prescribe medication to correct your mental aberrations.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/bad-science-australian-studies-found-to-be-unreliable-compromised-20190719-p528ql.html
Devils advocate? no not at all honesty however must be taken into account
Another field but seems to prove some science can not be trusted
I agree, in fact as a climate change believer I think it is the anti climate changers who use fake science
But others will mock me,fine no problem stand by for yet again the hottest summer we have ever seen

It would be nice Mr Opinion, if I could feel reassured by your assurance. However you come across as one of the grant chasing scientists, or an apologist for them.

I am not the least interested in your opinion, unless it is backed up by some facts & proof. When any so called scientists does not release enough information for others to duplicate their results, or does release enough information, but no one can duplicate their results, they have no right to further research grants.

We are bring robed blind by the university sector, as shown by the Peter Ridd case, & need to pull these people into line.

If you have anything to support your opinion. let us have it, your platitudes mean nothing.

Dear Hasbeen,

Yes, yes, of course you are being robbed by the lying scientific community. We know, we know. It's terrible what they are doing to you ............. and to Loudmouth and to mhaze and to individual too. It's terrible.

And don't forget those awful Bachelor of Arts types either. That's where you find those awful archaeologists, anthropologists, historians, sociologists, philosophers. They're all liars too ...... aren't they Hasbeen? But don't worry Hasbeen; just take your medicine and they'll all go away.

Mr O,

This discussion started with Bazz mentioning a climate theory which has come to be called the Svensmark hypothesis. It basically says that that CO2 has little to do with temperature and the main driver of change is cloud cover. In turn cloud cover is determined by the amount of cosmic rays hitting the earth which is in turn determined by the strength or weakness of the solar winds. So ultimately the temperature is primarily altered by the cycles in solar activity.

Now there are quite a number of scientists who buy this theory and are working on gathering more evidence. The most recent papers say that the increase in temperatures over the past century were mainly caused by the sun's activity. They say that of the 1 degree rise, 0.1 degree is caused by CO2 and of that 0.01 degree is caused by man. But the vast majority of the rise is related to the solar winds.

Now Mr O, you clearly don't agree with that since you're fully on board with the CO2 story. So do you think that the scientists who write about and support the Svensmark hypothesis are lying to you?
If yes, then we can mark you down as a denier. If no, then why don't you admit that the science isn't settled.

Or you could just ignore the problem.