Why is a Russian newspaper suddenly a reliable source for climate science?

  • Thread starter Thread starter beren
  • Start date Start date
B

beren

Guest
These same people were the propaganda machine of the USSR, now suddenly it seems like certain people think it is a reliable source for information on climate science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda#The_post-Soviet_period
 
Even during the times of the USSR, Russian scientists were among the best in the world. They had problems with economic policy and the freedom of it's people -- not with scientific analysis.

Much of the propaganda arm of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union is probably now working with the AGW movement in the US, trying to make Communism rise from the grave.
 
Your question is asking by to validate something which is crap. Did you ever play fact of crap?

The answer is it's not.

Q: Why did Al Gore murder 20 million people?

A: He didn't.

Q: No avoiding the questions now, tell my why.

A: I hate leading questions that make their own statement and are not looking for an answer. A better question would be "Is a Russian newspaper a reliable source for climate science? Why or why not?"
 
I have cooperated for many years with the Arctic Research Institute in St Petersburg, and among the geologists, meteorologists, paleontologists, oceanographers and permafrost scientists there, the AGW hypothesis is not considered to be correct.
These are knowledgeable people who have spent their lives working in the Siberian Arctic. They have not been bombarded with the hysterical propaganda that we have in the west, neither have they been coerced into accepting the 'man made, catastrophe soon' doctrine by threats of loss of job or withdrawal of research grant like scientists in the west, so they are free to speak as they find.
.It is an ironic twist of fate that on this topic, the scientists in the former Soviet Union are freer to speak than those in the west.

In December I received a report from ARI that the figures for November show that in the Siberian Arctic, the ice is 30% thicker that it was in November the previous year.
 
Simply put, Pravda is not reliable for anything. I have seen the spamming on here the past couple of days. It's sad the sources people rely on to "prove" their preconceived notions.
Once a person decides on something they can always find sources to back them up.
Such disinformation is a scourge on society.

Edit: Some people seem to be greatly misinformed about "Russian Science". To say that Russian scientists are far ahead of Europe and the US is simply wrong. During WWI, WWII and the Cold War, Russian scientists excelled at engineering and physics having to do with military matters. They did not, by any means, greatly excel past any other industrialized nations. In the areas of biology and genetics, the Rusians were decades behind the rest of the world. They have done much to catch up, but as late as the 1990s hardly any scientific paper published by a Soviet biologist was received as serious work in the West. Soviet bilogists were found to be too ignorant of the world scientific literature, and in the case of geneticists, too prone to fabricate data.
Basically, using a Russian newspaper (Pravda) article, that is not based on climatology to somehow demonstrate that we are entering an ice age and that global warming is completely bunk, is so dishonest it is not even wrong.
 
The article in question is not a reliable piece of scientific news.

However, the "Drudge Report" ran with the headline, and now every right-wing neocon blogger is discussing the article. And every reader of right-wing neocon blogs who don't care about the reliability of a source, or scientific evidence, or science, is now spamming Yahoo! Answers with links to the article and newspaper in question.
 
Now I know that Dana is a fraud and not what he claims to be. If he wasn't a fraud he would know that Meteorology is the study of the global climate. I guess that's why he disregards such eminent climate scientists such as Dr. Richard Lindzen and other prominent climate scientists.
 
I want to hear what all countries scientists have to say. I don't understand why you would think russian scientists are not credible sources. It is arrogant to think only those scientists that agree with you are credible.
 
Read the other articles in Pravda, it's not much of a source for anything let alone climate science. The deniers are really scraping the bottom of the the barrel on this one.
 
Back
Top