Sentences with phrase «in fraudulent science»

Not exact matches

For example, in a recent Science paper (which the investigation has not identified as fraudulent), Stapel reported that untidy environments encouraged discrimination (Science 332, 251 - 253; 2011).

«We became interested in the plight of people whose career trajectories were derailed because of someone else's unethical behavior — these were people who did nothing wrong themselves but suffered reputational damage merely by being associated with a fraudulent employer or company,» says Takuya Sawaoka of Stanford University, who published a paper today on the «moral spillover» effect in Social Psychological and Personality Science.

See no one in their right mind would ever expect that any person or any Heartland Institute operative would ever stoop this low to «win» a fraudulent argument against SCIENCE.

re «Whereas in Greek mythology»... yes indeed, for that is all you have to support your fraudulent sophistry, Mythological Thinking — not science and zero hard evidence.

Well... after the miserable defeats at Durban, Cancun and Copenhagen, and in combination with the continuing Climategate2.0 exposure of the IPCC's fraudulent science, the global warming debate may be coming to an end, fitfully.

The only reason Climategate is in the news is because it has proved that legitimate policy is based on fraudulent science - and perhaps, more importantly, the facts were found to match the requirement for the policy.

And very effective PR it has been, in that information that they knew (from Marcott's thesis) was total bullshit has been accepted and promoted as science around the world... which I find fraudulent, although certainly YMMV.

It was also fraudulent, for which I hold the lead author responsible — it says right there in their paper that they excluded social science, education, and studies of people's views.

I believe that in the future when such expenditure is found to be based on fraudulent science that there will be many possible lawsuits.

Portraying Dr Mann falsely as producing fraudulent science they are hoping to cast doubt in the minds of the public who can not tell the difference between one study from the thousands that make up the case for AGW and the false claims that false science is harming the «American way of life» which apparently is non negotiable.

Yes, I'm aware that the new Republican House will be holding hearings trying to «prove» that Mann's work and that of all of mainstream climate science is «fraudulent» leading to global warming being a «hoax», but I'm ever hopeful that you at least one foot in the real world and aren't supportive of that la - la - land crew.

In my last telephone conversation with you, I stated (paraphrasing) that «I believe you folks aren't doing anything fraudulent, but you are doing what you feel is correct science in what you believe is a correct way»In my last telephone conversation with you, I stated (paraphrasing) that «I believe you folks aren't doing anything fraudulent, but you are doing what you feel is correct science in what you believe is a correct way»in what you believe is a correct way».

The IPCC is continuing its tradition of fraudulent bogus climate science for the 2013 climate report by utilizing Climategate - style scientists that excel in global warming fabrication and suppressing research that challenges the blatant fabrication.

In a nutshell, the consensus hypothesis that fats and cholesterol cause heart disease is a result of extreme cherry - picking and other fraudulent practices of establishment science.

It was published in Science (8 publications found to be fraudulent) and Nature (5 publications found to be fradulent).

Governments all around the world must wake up and prepare for such events and stop following fraudulent «science» which relies on corrupt data, because young people in particular will pay the price for following the current climate propaganda which is there to justify taxing ordinary people for their energy usage.

If you feel it's wrong for researchers to be suspicious of outliers in such circumstances and to ask questions of the researcher whose work led to the outlier, I'm afraid you're going to find all of science «fraudulent».

But the true climate change deniers first had their way, doing what is unforgiveable (or even fraudulent) in real science, by retrospectively changing old data until it served their ends, by portraying the Earth as a place of Gaian perfection with only modest diversions from the supposed «average» temperature.

«Science is the truth, and pink slime at this point in time is a fraudulent lie.»

Furthermore, the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund views the malicious and fraudulent manner in which the Climatic Research Unit documents were obtained and / or thereafter disseminated, as well as the repeated blogs about them, as providing the basis for civil actions against those who obtained and / or disseminated them and blogged about them.

That's in addition to the Climategate e-mail scandal and dozens of additional scandals that have exposed the «climate science» establishment's use of fraudulent methods, statistical manipulation, censorship, intimidation, and many other unethical and criminal practices

I am wondering in the broader picture, how prevalent and endemic all «fraudulent science» actually is?

, top Republican on the select committee called into question in his opening statement (pdf) at Thursday» s hearing the EPA's heavy reliance on fraudulent science and the IPCC flawed report findings.

The mechanisms such interests use are many — influencing election outcomes by injecting huge sums of money into them (see the NYT editorial on the KOch Brothers and AB32, for example), installing fossil fuel employees in government bureaucracies (BP's ex-chief scientist is currently Head of Science at the DOE, one Steve Koonin, also of Caltech — welcome to the fossil fuel - academic complex), and distorting science to fit their agenda (witness the endless fraudulent claims about zero - emission combustion, despite the persistent absence of any stand - alone protoScience at the DOE, one Steve Koonin, also of Caltech — welcome to the fossil fuel - academic complex), and distorting science to fit their agenda (witness the endless fraudulent claims about zero - emission combustion, despite the persistent absence of any stand - alone protoscience to fit their agenda (witness the endless fraudulent claims about zero - emission combustion, despite the persistent absence of any stand - alone prototypes.)