Climate change - socialist conspiracy

Asterism -

A couple of the posters who made the intitial suggestion have already posted on this thread.

Do you see them explaining their thinking?
 
Asterism -

I appreciate the full and on-topic reply, but this doesn't make a lot of sense to me -

To acquire power, appease opposition and buy influence.

The election is over, conservatives won.

And you are suggesting that thier first act is to hire socialist advisers to acquire power?

In these fields, yes. More grants, more credibility, more manipulation if they can control the money pipeline.

That makes no more sense than a left-wing party hiring conservative advisors!

Do you think Hillary only employs liberals? Do you think Bush only employed conservatives? James Carville is a very famous Democratic operative who was hired by multiple Republicans.

I do agree about the 'athiest priests' in climatology to some extent, but not within physics or biology.

Neither do I, which is why I said what I said. Most of the actual scientists I know are not convinced that that humans are contributing to climate change.

The fields are too large and too old. A lot of people working in physics have nothing to do with climate change directly, so the idea they would be part of some giant conspiracy strikes me as fanciful at best.

It depends if there is grant money there or not.

Westwall -

No, you never proved anything, nor did you ever think you had proved anything.

No response because this wasn't addressed to me.
 
Asterism -

A couple of the posters who made the intitial suggestion have already posted on this thread.

Do you see them explaining their thinking?

If this was a specific call-out and not a request for opinion, you should have worded your original post differently.

Where did you study Journalism?
 
Asterism -

Do you think Hillary only employs liberals? Do you think Bush only employed conservatives?

I think when either hired advisors, they looked for the best available people, and people whose ideology did not contradict their own.

The idea that a conservative minister would deliberately hire a socialist science advisor makes no sense.

It depends if there is grant money there or not.

Advisors did not get paid with grants. They are salaried. Again, you are suggesting staff paid by a conservative government are lying....why?

The funny thing is, I've been told numerous times that staff do what govt wants them to do...apparently this happens only in left-wing adminsitrations. In rightwing administrations they do the exact opposite.
 
Last edited:
Asterism -

Do you think Hillary only employs liberals? Do you think Bush only employed conservatives?

I think when either hired advisors, they looked for the best available people, and people whose ideology did not contradict their own.

The idea that a conservative minister would deliberately hire a socialist science advisor makes no sense.

Well then you must investigate why George W. Bush's signature "No Child Left Behind" legislation was primarily authored by the very liberal Sen. Ted Kennedy.

Politics makes for strange bedfellows. You can endeavor to question the premise all you want, but it's most certainly a reality and has been for a very long time.
 
Well then you must investigate why George W. Bush's signature "No Child Left Behind" legislation was primarily authored by the very liberal Sen. Ted Kennedy.

Politics makes for strange bedfellows. You can endeavor to question the premise all you want, but it's most certainly a reality and has been for a very long time.

I accept the premise to some extent - but this does not explain why people seem to believe Socialist governments rely on Socialist scientific information, and Conservative governments rely on Socialist scientific information.

The idea is simply a nonsense.

When we think of a new conservative politician who is not from a scientific background - he's going to want answers from someone who is patently NOT a socialist. Obviously.
 
Asterism -

Do you think Hillary only employs liberals? Do you think Bush only employed conservatives?

I think when either hired advisors, they looked for the best available people, and people whose ideology did not contradict their own.

The idea that a conservative minister would deliberately hire a socialist science advisor makes no sense.

It depends if there is grant money there or not.

Advisors did not get paid with grants. They are salaried. Again, you are suggesting staff paid by a conservative government are lying....why?

The funny thing is, I've been told numerous times that staff do what govt wants them to do...apparently this happens only in left-wing adminsitrations. In rightwing administrations they do the exact opposite.

Since you edited your comments:


Advisors did not get paid with grants. However, grants funded the authority and power of their offices as well as fostered their careers after leaving their appointed positions. It's the very nature of these political positions.

And yes, in "rightwing administrations" staff does what they are told. However, they are not always told to adhere to political ideologies. Bush '41 and the EPA, Obama and drone strikes are good examples.
 
Saigon, by what basis can you claim that Finland's government is conservative?

By the fact that the largest party in government (Kokoomus) is strongly Conservative.

There is also a left-wing party (SDP) in the coalition, so it is a Blue/Red government.

The Prime Minister and President are both Conservatives right now.

More grants, more credibility, more manipulation if they can control the money pipeline.

Firstly, the party that won the election ALREADY controls the money.

Secondly, no European ministry or government can control or manipulate universities. The system is set up to make that virtually impossible.
 
However, grants funded the authority and power of their offices as well as fostered their careers after leaving their appointed positions. It's the very nature of these political positions.

No, they don't.

Advisory bodies are salaried staff. There are no grants involved. They work for ministries and/or the Office of the PM.

Directors General (here in Finland) are poltically appointed, but in most of Europe they are permanant positions.
 
Well then you must investigate why George W. Bush's signature "No Child Left Behind" legislation was primarily authored by the very liberal Sen. Ted Kennedy.

Politics makes for strange bedfellows. You can endeavor to question the premise all you want, but it's most certainly a reality and has been for a very long time.

I accept the premise to some extent - but this does not explain why people seem to believe Socialist governments rely on Socialist scientific information, and Conservative governments rely on Socialist scientific information.

The idea is simply a nonsense.

When we think of a new conservative politician who is not from a scientific background - he's going to want answers from someone who is patently NOT a socialist. Obviously.

Good luck finding a climatologist that isn't on the bandwagon of AGW. That's part of the problem.
 
Asterism -

I am a journalist, but like many journalists, I did not study journalism.

There aren't many jobs in languages here, although I also do some language consulting from time to time. I own a small company through which I can sell both my journalism and writing (I'm currently working on my third book) and consultancy. Going into journalism seemed like a very natural progression after some years working asa language trainer and then an editor in book publishing.
 
Good luck finding a climatologist that isn't on the bandwagon of AGW. That's part of the problem.

The fact that all climatologists agree on climate change is no more evidence of a conspiracy than the idea that all doctors agree Ebola comes from Africa. Quite the contrary.

I don't think a person on this site honestly believes people studying physics are all raging communists. I suspect more vote conservative than socialist.

At the point it became clear that almost everyone with a PhD in Physics agreed on climate change, most Sceptics SHOULD have started to question their own beliefs. Probably most did, but on this site there is a core of a half-dozen posters who lack that willingness.
 
Saigon, by what basis can you claim that Finland's government is conservative?

By the fact that the largest party in government (Kokoomus) is strongly Conservative.

There is also a left-wing party (SDP) in the coalition, so it is a Blue/Red government.

The Prime Minister and President are both Conservatives right now.

They are only conservative compared to the very left of center nature of your political dynamic. They are a few steps to the right but your command economy and very regimented lifestyle that is provided by the structure of your government is not conducive to anything approaching conservative.

That doesn't make them inherently bad, but the context matters.

More grants, more credibility, more manipulation if they can control the money pipeline.

Firstly, the party that won the election ALREADY controls the money.

Not true. Private foundations, entrenched non-discretionary programs, and collaborative efforts are not subject to the whims of the party in charge in the short term. American politics is like playing a game of checkers before deciding who makes a move in chess.

Secondly, no European ministry or government can control or manipulate universities. The system is set up to make that virtually impossible.

That's a subject for a separate thread. However in the US, individual interests can dictate massive amounts of federal funding.
 
However, grants funded the authority and power of their offices as well as fostered their careers after leaving their appointed positions. It's the very nature of these political positions.

No, they don't.

Advisory bodies are salaried staff. There are no grants involved. They work for ministries and/or the Office of the PM.

Directors General (here in Finland) are poltically appointed, but in most of Europe they are permanant positions.

I think maybe the reason for your disconnect here is the actual disconnect you have from American politics.
 
They are only conservative compared to the very left of center nature of your political dynamic.

Not at all - Kokoomus are right wing by standard.

The fact that issues like public transport, abortion or healthcare aren't major political issues here does not change that. Conservatism retains its core principles anywhere on earth.

Most posters here would admire much of the Kokoomus manifesto - even if they might be surprised to find issues like climate change or abortion are not political issues here.
 
I think maybe the reason for your disconnect here is the actual disconnect you have from American politics.

The thing is, a LOT of research into climate is conducted in Europe, and I know how the system works here. My wife works for a University, so I know how that system works.

Research here really is left to experts -it is not the domain of politicians.

Of course I understand the US systems are different, but US posters need to accept that if University Helsinki Physics Dept researches cloud formation, it is because a Professor wanted to do it - not because he was told to prove cloud formation proves climate change is this or that.

Put it this way - I have never heard of a Sandinavian science study being accused of bias.
 
Asterism -

I am a journalist, but like many journalists, I did not study journalism.

There aren't many jobs in languages here, although I also do some language consulting from time to time. I own a small company through which I can sell both my journalism and writing (I'm currently working on my third book) and consultancy. Going into journalism seemed like a very natural progression after some years working asa language trainer and then an editor in book publishing.

Honestly, I agree with that premise.

I'm educated as a linguist and a Decision Scientist. While my linguistics might not be relevant to Climatology (it does help in my communication skills), I think my studies and experience in statistics, system design, and software development are.

What is your opinion?
 

Forum List

Back
Top