Take the AARP Smart Driver course and you could save on auto insurance! Sign up today.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
227
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

227 Views
Message 31 of 70

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@jimc91 wrote:

 

Your above statement is YOUR OPINION, this is mine.

 

Why are democrats so opposed to others that have differing opinions?

 

 


Democrat's opinion is the Gospel (in their mind)!  There are scientists with better qualifations that disagree BUT Democrats (think that) know their answer is always the right answer.


I will be happy to have a scientific discussion with you on any climate change point that you want to discuss.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
227
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
227
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

227 Views
Message 32 of 70

@jimc91 wrote:

I don't view it as my tax dollars being wasted.

 

Then that must mean you believe the 3% of scientists who say it isn't happening, instead of the 97% who say it is.  Personally, I consider this to be a waster of money.  If they want to have a hearing about what to do about it and they decide nothing, then so be it, but they need to quit questioning the science.


Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
227
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
226
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

226 Views
Message 33 of 70

@jimc91 wrote:

 

Your above statement is YOUR OPINION, this is mine.

 

Why are democrats so opposed to others that have differing opinions?

 

 


Democrat's opinion is the Gospel (in their mind)!  There are scientists with better qualifations that disagree BUT Democrats (think that) know their answer is always the right answer.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
226
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
218
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

218 Views
Message 34 of 70

I don't view it as my tax dollars being wasted.

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
218
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
213
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

213 Views
Message 35 of 70

@jimc91 wrote:

The Science committee has the task of oversight.  It is how the system works.  If you do not like it you could work to change it but for now its how it works...


So what, that doesn't change the science regardless of their "findings".  You are OK with them wasting your tax dollars conducting an "investigation" that they will not even understand?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
213
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
208
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

208 Views
Message 36 of 70

The Science committee has the task of oversight.  It is how the system works.  If you do not like it you could work to change it but for now its how it works...

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
208
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
209
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

209 Views
Message 37 of 70

@jimc91 wrote:

The bright side is that we are likely to get to the bottom of this sooner than later since the "Stone Wall" is no longer in place...


If your opinion is 2+2=5, that does not make it a fact.  As I said earlier, the Science Committee investigating something they don't understand and are out to disprove makes no difference in the science data. 

 

By that logic, you should be calling Smith the next time you need surgery (he's a Congressman, he must know how to operate).

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
209
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
216
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

216 Views
Message 38 of 70

The bright side is that we are likely to get to the bottom of this sooner than later since the "Stone Wall" is no longer in place...

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
216
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
180
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

180 Views
Message 39 of 70

@jimc91 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@jimc91 wrote:

I agree with the comments made by Eric Worrall about this topic.  

 

He stated:

 

This is getting serious. NOAA defied efforts at Congressional oversight when President Obama was in charge. I doubt NOAA will enjoy the same immunity from oversight under President Trump.

 

You can’t prosecute a scientist for making a mistake. You can potentially prosecute a civil servant if they are grossly negligent, cut corners, and provide misleading information to the public.

 

It will be interesting to finally get to the bottom of this "scandal" that began back in 2015.  What do you think?  Surely you would not want policy makers to recommend policy based on inaccurate information would you?


As others have said.  There is NO scandal because the report it is based on is fictitous.  David Rose wrote a biased article and left out information that the data was independently confirmed by others using the same data and confirmed by data from other areas.  I have looked up Eric Worrall, but have been unable to see what qualifications he has.  Do you have any background on him that would show he actually knows what he is talking about?


You are NOT on the inside so you could not have all the facts.  

 

The Science Committee requested information from NOAA back in 2015 but were stonewalled.  The purpose of this probe is to get the requested information that will prove whether or not Dr. Bates is telling the truth.  

 

I can not imagine why anyone would oppose that.  What has NOAA been hiding?  Why did they choose to not comply with Oversight?  We will soon find out if a civil servant has in some way decided to corrupt data for a political reason.  IMO.

 

Your above statement is YOUR OPINION, this is mine.

 

Why are democrats so opposed to others that have differing opinions?

 

 


Here is the statment from the NOAA "“Because the confidentiality of these communications among scientists is essential to frank discourse among scientists, those documents were not provided to the Committee,” the agency told Nature. “It is a long-standing practice in the scientific community to protect the confidentiality of deliberative scientific discussions.”  I don't know how much "climate-gate", a totally made-up conspiracy helped with this thinking.

 

You are confusing opinion with facts.  If the "facts" that your "opinion" is based on are false, you cannot logically support your opinion.  It is really that simple.

 

Facts are not differing points of view.  How to interpret facts can be different, not the facts themselves.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
180
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
219
Views

Re: Fresh Congressional Probe into Flawed Karl “Pausebuster” Scandal

219 Views
Message 40 of 70

@sp362 wrote:

@jimc91 wrote:

I agree with the comments made by Eric Worrall about this topic.  

 

He stated:

 

This is getting serious. NOAA defied efforts at Congressional oversight when President Obama was in charge. I doubt NOAA will enjoy the same immunity from oversight under President Trump.

 

You can’t prosecute a scientist for making a mistake. You can potentially prosecute a civil servant if they are grossly negligent, cut corners, and provide misleading information to the public.

 

It will be interesting to finally get to the bottom of this "scandal" that began back in 2015.  What do you think?  Surely you would not want policy makers to recommend policy based on inaccurate information would you?


As others have said.  There is NO scandal because the report it is based on is fictitous.  David Rose wrote a biased article and left out information that the data was independently confirmed by others using the same data and confirmed by data from other areas.  I have looked up Eric Worrall, but have been unable to see what qualifications he has.  Do you have any background on him that would show he actually knows what he is talking about?


You are NOT on the inside so you could not have all the facts.  

 

The Science Committee requested information from NOAA back in 2015 but were stonewalled.  The purpose of this probe is to get the requested information that will prove whether or not Dr. Bates is telling the truth.  

 

I can not imagine why anyone would oppose that.  What has NOAA been hiding?  Why did they choose to not comply with Oversight?  We will soon find out if a civil servant has in some way decided to corrupt data for a political reason.  IMO.

 

Your above statement is YOUR OPINION, this is mine.

 

Why are democrats so opposed to others that have differing opinions?

 

 

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
219
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Have you taken a memorable trip to a destination others should know about? Post a Trip Report


city skyline captured on tablet

Top Authors