The Sun-Climate Effect

Einstein wasn't a scientist in 1905 he was a PATENT CLERK a PERMANENT position in 1905 when he posted the 4 papers when he posted the papers getting a PHD in 1906 doesn't automatically mean he is a scientist, and his 4 papers was in 1905 BEFORE he got his PHD Certificate which was January 15, 1906. (LINK)

J. Harland Bretz was fighting the Geology consensus of his day (from the 1920's-1979) over the geology of Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana concerning massive and repeated floods scarring large areas of Eastern Washington they though he was a crank for many decades until the evidence became too hard to ignore by 1979 when they finally capitulated. (LINK)

Alfred Wegener was a Meteorologist who discovered a lot of evidence that South America and Africa were once joined then spread apart because of the evidence found on both continents Geology consensus of the day (1920's-1960's) said he was wrong and for only 40 years they said he was wrong until plate tectonics hypothesis explained what Wegener was trying to prove and what Geologists of the day resisted the obvious evidence Wegener had produced because they were LOUSY scientists.

Humason was a HIGH SCHOOL DROP OUT a fact YOU ignored because he had ZERO science-based degree which came many years later in 1950, he had worked as a high school drop out for 31 years from 1919 to 1950 when he gets his basic degree as usual you missed the point in that he wasn't a "scientist" and Hubble didn't give Humason credit for a lot of the work he put in that Hubble took for himself.

You can't even stick with the truth and follow the history accurately really pathetic!

 

The thing about science is that humans can make mistakes.

But, this example shows how they get taken care of.

 

That is total nonsense. He was a Phd candidate, with a noted major professor when his studies led to the dissertation that earned him his Phd, published in 2005.

And, his work on relativity, mass/energy, etc. were also done collaboratively with other major physicists of the time.

Trying to run down Einstein's education is just plain preposterous. He was one of Earth's noted geniuses, not comparable to anyone you mention in climatology.

You and Hays fall for guys like the computer coder at woodfortrees, not even bothering to figure out what is objective is, and WUWT, run by a total nonscientists who selects papers on the basis of whether they support his preconceived notions.

You can't go after Einstein after that kind of nonsense.

 

The vast majority of climatologists throughout the world agree that Earth is warming and that humans are the major contributor to that warming.

Suggesting they have no "legitimate experimentation" is just plain ludicrous.

 

DANG!! you're finally catching on to what several of us have been trying to tell you. Yes SOME do "get taken care of". Some are still waiting for that to happen, however so arguing "it's peer reviewed" isn't conclusive proof.

 

Again, can you name even one experiment?

 

This is just more false claims.
No one is running down Einstein; his works were achievements largely of solitary genius.
Annus mirabilis papers - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Annus_mirabilis_papers

The annus mirabilis papers are the four papers that Albert Einstein published in Annalen der Physik (Annals of Physics), a scientific journal, in 1905.

 

Yeah, that was "peer reviewed" was it? (sarcasm alert).

 

What planet are you on since you are posting a series of falsehoods against what I wrote which is fully backed by the Wikipedia LINK you ignored here is what I wrote at POST 226:

"Einstein wasn't a scientist in 1905 he was a PATENT CLERK a PERMANENT position in 1905 when he posted the 4 papers when he posted the papers getting a PHD in 1906 doesn't automatically mean he is a scientist, and his 4 papers was in 1905 BEFORE he got his PHD Certificate which was January 15, 1906. (LINK)"

What I wrote was 100% true and supported by the sources I provided which you obviously ignored and never disputed that he was a PHD candidate as the link YOU ignored twice pointed it out.

In 1905 he was working as a Patent Clerk a permanent job FACT LINK

===

By law you can't claim you are a doctorate until you receive the CERTIFICATE of PHD which he did on January 15 1906 FACT LINK

Never disputed his education or his seminal achievements and his additional 1916 papers was also remarkable.

You can't bother to be truthful about what I said about Albert Einstein which was in no way derogatory maybe it is you suffering from illusions since you never quoted me at all.

The rest of your prejudiced rant isn't worth responding to as they are immature and foolish.

 

C'mon, of course it was "peer reviewed". If, of course, you consider people who already agree with you as "peers".

 

McIntyre and McClittock are statisticians. They analyzed the Mann methodology and showed the dishonesty. There is a reason that the hockey stick is not used by the IPCC anymore.

 

Golly. So if this is your true position, why do you still defend the hockey stick results?

 

So, now you are suggesting that since he is on record as having a job, he couldn't possibly have been a Phd candidate at a prestigious German university?

You just are not thinking these things through.

Using Einstein as a representation of those without credentials is the most astounding direction I've ever heard taken by anyone who denigrates credentials.

 

That review took place because of the fact that the hockey stick paper was published and thus of interest and focus throughout climatology.

THAT was the point. Review and publishing is an important part of scientific process. Simply being a study completed somewhere does not get the kind of focus and review that is provided by respected journals.

 

Peer review is only one level of validation.

Missing even THAT level of validation is a serious sign.

 

He used Einstein as an example of someone making progress even though they had no academic qualifications.

The suggestion was that Einstein validates his willingness to ignore expertise, education and credentials in choosing who to believe.

And, that is just plain astoundingly ridiculous.

 

Another of your false claims. That's not what he said.

 

Why do you keep believing there is no God?

 

It absolutely IS what he said.

He used Einstein as an example of an individual without credentials.

And, the reason was that he was arguing that people who have no credentials should still be believed - especially if they hold HIS OWN position!!

 

LOL.. I know you tried. But total fail.

 

HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW.....,

You are sure have a hard time being a decent person who continually misrepresent what I post over and over again not once have I made such an assertion heck you don't even quote it because it doesn't exist.

The falsehood maker writes:

How come you can't quote me saying it?

Here is what I actually stated:

"Einstein wasn't a scientist in 1905 he was a PATENT CLERK a PERMANENT position in 1905 when he posted the 4 papers when he posted the papers getting a PHD in 1906 doesn't automatically mean he is a scientist, and his 4 papers was in 1905 BEFORE he got his PHD Certificate which was January 15, 1906. (LINK)"

Has it sunk in finally?

What I wrote was 100% true and supported by the sources I provided which you obviously ignored and I never disputed that he was a PHD candidate as the link YOU ignored twice pointed it out.

In 1905 he was working as a Patent Clerk a permanent job FACT LINK

===

Fact as shown in the Wikipedia link you continually ignored already posted this before:

Never disputed it.

FACT as shown in the Wikipedia Link you continually ignored already posted this before

Einstein wasn't a scientist in 1905 he was a PATENT CLERK a PERMANENT position in 1905 when he posted the 4 papers when he posted the papers getting a PHD in 1906 doesn't automatically mean he is a scientist, and his 4 papers was in 1905 BEFORE he got his PHD Certificate which was January 15, 1906. (LINK)

Never disputed it that he was a PHD candidate in 1905 and that he got a PHD certificate in January 1906, correctly stated that he was a FULL time Patent Clerk in 1903 as shown in the link you never read:

and this for second time:

Never stated that his having a permanent job prevented him from publishing 4 papers and get his PHD certificate in January 1906 as I have several times posted he did all this for real.

You are pathetic!

 

LOL, what song are you tap-dancing to, now?

 

You just LOVE to try to denigrate Einstein!!

But, he completed his PhD dissertation in 1905 at University of Zurich and was awarded his Phd for that work.

If he was also actually working as a patent clerk while doing that, it's even MORE credit to his brilliance.

But, that wasn't your intent.

You want to pretend that anyone off the street is smarter than those who have serious credentials.

And, that is just more hate for educated thought.

 

No quotes huh then you have NOTHING to run on.