How, and by who?

Again, science is indeed a doctrine, a doctrine of objective testing and full disclosure of results to dissenting data.

If you're referring to climate change then the available data seems to show an unnatural shift in line with the amount of carbon we humans chucked into the atmosphere since we've been able to do it. There's no data that leads to any competing to this.

Had to Google that, but I can live with that if it makes me understand you better babe<3:lol:

Ramen.

yes, science indeed becomes a religion

the term science is being abused and is indeed promoted as a new doctrine, a new age religion that is settled by consensus.

its just data...its not information, its not conclusive of anything

look at the language [paladisious is] using, its vague and wishy washy. its hardly what anyone could call an example of a settled scientific fact.

you're taking statements out of context now and acting like a child. pointless continuing with you.

Can I ask rice crackers, are you arguing against governments tendency to twist scientific enquiry for their own political gain? Or against science being one way to view the creation and forces that govern us.

Also do you dislike mr Tyson or some other science communicators.

While I would class my self as a scientist for lack of a better word, I do think governments pervert science to push there agendas. Eg climate change.

Who stands to gain from a concerted effort on global warming? The Green movement?

Finding it impossible to embed a gif in my signature. :?

i'm against the whole corruption of science by those who wish to use it as a means of exploitation for financial gain
i'm not against science being used as a means for financial gain, i'm against its corruption

i dont see a solution for it as very big money is invested in certain pre-determined outcomes because they enable those investors to make even more money

the result of this sees international organisations such as the IMF and IPCC, which are in reality private organisations... leaning on governments to deliver a certain doctrine

when Julia Gillard infamously stated, "The Science is In" it represented government delivering corrupted science as fact in the same manner the Vatican delivered certain doctrines during the dark ages. this sort of thing filters down into schooling and such things as national curriculum remove any obstacles.

similar examples occur in the pharmaceutical industry and prior we had the great ozone hole scare which was also corrupted science based on opportunism funded by DuPont in the 1980's.

Cosmic inflation: 'Spectacular' discovery hailed
By Jonathan Amos
Science correspondent, BBC News


The measurements were taken using the BICEP2 instrument at the South Pole Telescope facility


Scientists say they have extraordinary new evidence to support a Big Bang Theory for the origin of the Universe.

Researchers believe they have found the signal left in the sky by the super-rapid expansion of space that must have occurred just fractions of a second after everything came into being.

It takes the form of a distinctive twist in the oldest light detectable with telescopes.

The work will be scrutinised carefully, but already there is talk of a Nobel.

"This is spectacular," commented Prof Marc Kamionkowski, from Johns Hopkins University.

"I've seen the research; the arguments are persuasive, and the scientists involved are among the most careful and conservative people I know," he told BBC News.

The breakthrough was announced by an American team working on a project known as BICEP2.

This has been using a telescope at the South Pole to make detailed observations of a small patch of sky.

The aim has been to try to find a residual marker for "inflation" - the idea that the cosmos experienced an exponential growth spurt in its first trillionth, of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second.


Gravitational waves from inflation put a distinctive twist pattern in the polarisation of the CMB

Theory holds that this would have taken the infant Universe from something unimaginably small to something about the size of a marble. Space has continued to expand for the nearly 14 billion years since.

Inflation was first proposed in the early 1980s to explain some aspects of Big Bang Theory that appeared to not quite add up, such as why deep space looks broadly the same on all sides of the sky. The contention was that a very rapid expansion early on could have smoothed out any unevenness.

But inflation came with a very specific prediction - that it would be associated with waves of gravitational energy, and that these ripples in the fabric of space would leave an indelible mark on the oldest light in the sky - the famous Cosmic Microwave Background.

The BICEP2 team says it has now identified that signal. Scientists call it B-mode polarisation. It is a characteristic twist in the directional properties of the CMB. Only the gravitational waves moving through the Universe in its inflationary phase could have produced such a marker. It is a true "smoking gun".

Speaking at the press conference to announce the results, Prof John Kovac of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and a leader of the BICEP2 collaboration, said: "This is opening a window on what we believe to be a new regime of physics - the physics of what happened in the first unbelievably tiny fraction of a second in the Universe."

The signal is reported to be quite a bit stronger than many scientists had dared hope. This simplifies matters, say experts. It means the more exotic models for how inflation worked are no longer tenable.

The results also constrain the energies involved - at 10,000 trillion gigaelectronvolts. This is consistent with ideas for what is termed Grand Unified Theory, the realm where particle physicists believe three of the four fundamental forces in nature can be tied together.

But by associating gravitational waves with an epoch when quantum effects were so dominant, scientists are improving their prospects of one day pulling the fourth force - gravity itself - into a Theory of Everything.

The sensational nature of the discovery means the BICEP2 data will be subjected to intense peer review.

It is possible for the interaction of CMB light with dust in our galaxy to produce a similar effect, but the BICEP2 group says it has carefully checked its data over the past three years to rule out such a possibility.

Other experiments will now race to try to replicate the findings. If they can, a Nobel Prize seems assured for this field of research.

Who this would go to is difficult to say, but leading figures on the BICEP2 project and the people who first formulated inflationary theory would be in the running.

One of those pioneers, Prof Alan Guth from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told the BBC: "I have been completely astounded. I never believed when we started that anybody would ever measure the non-uniformities of the CMB, let alone the polarisation, which is now what we are seeing.

"I think it is absolutely amazing that it can be measured and also absolutely amazing that it can agree so well with inflation and also the simplest models of inflation - nature did not have to be so kind and the theory didn't have to be right."

British scientist Dr Jo Dunkley, who has been searching through data from the European Planck space telescope for a B-mode signal, commented: "I can't tell you how exciting this is. Inflation sounds like a crazy idea, but everything that is important, everything we see today - the galaxies, the stars, the planets - was imprinted at that moment, in less than a trillionth of a second. If this is confirmed, it's huge."

Scientists have heralded a "whole new era" in physics with the detection of "primordial gravitational waves" – the first tremors of the big bang.

The minuscule ripples in space-time are the last prediction of Albert Einstein's 1916 general theory of relativity to be verified. Until now, there has only been circumstantial evidence of their existence. The discovery also provides a deep connection between general relativity and quantum mechanics, another central pillar of physics.

You can't prove gravity therefore all science is wrong /endcreationistargument :lol:

It's just a theory! Plenty of scientists disagree about gravity! It's all a conspiracy to line the pockets of airlines and ladder manufacturers!

:lol: exactly, therefore all of science is completely wrong ;)

1. the finance industry
2. the oil and gas industry
3. solar panel manufacturers
4. wind farm operators (which dont work when the wind is either too strong or too weak therefore NG cogen plants are on site and thus ultimately become another example of 2.)
5. various fad alternative energy opportunists, eg electric car makers

1 & 2 are the two main ones

the finance industry kicked it off and the oil and gas industry got in later when they realised how they could make money out of it. thats the tipping point at which it became an unstoppable force.

destroy or greatly reduce the coal industry and replace with natural gas generated electricity. despite the fact that combustion of natural gas creates more so called greenhouse gases. natural gas itself a worse greenhouse gas, but its under the ground so doesnt contribute to the so called global warming there (if you believe that theory)

What would it take for people to believe that climate change was indeed being caused by carbon emissions?

BTW. Just a hypothetical. Don't lose your panties over it.

Just putting it out there, but if the proof we've already got isn't enough then what else can you do? Y'know, short of all the carbon emissions in the atmosphere becoming so concentrated that they swirl into a giant Kurtwood Smith head bellowing "YOU ALL DID THIS!"

What would it take for people to believe that climate change was indeed being caused by carbon emissions?

BTW. Just a hypothetical. Don't lose your panties over it.

how about scientific proof for starters

So, do you believe the earth is warming, and that the cause is unknown? Or do you believe the earth is not warming?

how about scientific proof for starters

the oil and gas industry is singular here as natural gas is invariably mined wherever oil is found and by the same corporations

they're not in competition