Great. You've just provided proof that it was you and others who actually questioned the origin and funding of the first article I cited, as I said. Thank you.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

Allusion #3

Allusion #4

and finally, a day later...the truth:
yeah...it was in your own link and specifically what WOI was talking about. Chinese scientist, in China.
And obviously, having suddenly realized what WOI (and I), were talking about, rather than concede the fact that this isn't some racists reaction on our part but a possibility of real political influence by a very strict communist government, you start propping up the scientist because he is supported by US funding.
Well, thank you very much.

And this of course, led to the discussion of peer review and funding.


(sorry for the break in between, I had a call from a communist country that I had to take)

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

Yes, again you've provided proof that it was others who were very concerned about the origin and funding of one of the four articles I cited, as I said.

Now, here are other attempts you have made to attribute words and views to me (spin) that you have yet to back up. [Emphasis mine] If you can support any of these claims, I can only hope to see it since I have asked you to back up the first claim more than three times now.

I am hopeful, but am also weary of correcting the false attributions.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

No...the question was one of political influence my dear spinmeister.

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

Your memory has failed you:

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

I really do have guests coming from over seas and must run. I will be sure to ask them their feelings about political influence on the scientific process and will report back.

Oh...and if you're seriously fatigued Si modo, you could always entertain yourself with the issue of peer review funding...which you introduced.

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

YOU introduced funding in an effort to alleviate our concerns in regard to the Chinese scientist you cited. Remember:

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

Yes, yes, I answered such a pressing question that had so much importance to WOI, you, and others.

I have to laugh at the irony of my needing to state several times that the origin of the authors and their funding is irrelevant to me as long as the publication is peer-reviewed. When told that my lack of concern is "bullshit" and faced with doubters of the quality of that citation (based on funding), I post the funding. THEN, JHC makes the claim that I give importance to the funding when evaluating the quality of a citation. It is very disingenuous on her part.

JHC, let me know when you actually understand the difference between peer-review for funding (done before the science is carried out) and peer-review for publications (done after the science is done). Maybe that apparent lack of understanding is the fundamental issue you have with my posts.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

You make it clear that your argument with Global Warming is that political influence weighs too strongly in favor of Global Warming.
You cite a Chinese scientist, working in communist China, as a source.
Someone asks if it isn't suspicious that a scientist from a communist country, (the most energy hungry country on earth right now), might also be suspect of political bias.
You go on for 3 pages alluding to racial bias on our part and ignoring the possibility of Chinese government influence on Chinese scientists - you even claim that only you had access to this from work...(which I quietly laughed at because it was RIGHT THERE IN YOUR OWN LINK).
You finally concede that indeed, it was right there in your link (although you didn't actually confess that it was right there all along and what WOI had first questioned)...and to alleviate the embarrassment of this 3 page tirade, you comment that the scientist received funding from the NSF which is peer reviewed.

So I present a Chinese scientist who critiques such peer reviewed funding and you got all confused and said that only legitimate scientific questions receive such funding...

which brought us right back to the beginning...scientific consensus.

If your argument is valid, then scientist in opposition to the general consensus will receive funding as well as scientists in favor of global warming and then you cannot claim political bias.

If your argument is not valid, then scientists in opposition to the general consensus do not receive funding because of political bias - which means your propping up of the original citation of the Chinese scientist is worthless.

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

It looks like that one is free access, but did you get access to the full text of all four citations? But, of course, why am I asking? You admitted earlier that you didn't look.
Nothing to confess. I can't tell what databases allow free access when I am at work. Try accessing the other three citations.

No confusion on my part except trying to follow your convolutions and false claims. Hey, any support for the other false claims you have made about my posts?

Consensus for funding. It's specific.

As both do, so my argument is valid (when discussing the science).

The "propping up", as you call it, is in response to your and others attempts to claim the origin and funding of the scientists is important when evaluating the quality of a citation to a peer-reviewed article/letter/communication.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

SO peer review is the shield you use to protect your citations from scrutiny of political bias but peer review of IPCC findings is crap?
OK. That makes sense...if you're an ideological blinkered kinda gal.

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

"Shield" is the word you choose to use. I, as do most scientists focused on research, use the fact that a citation is from a peer-reviewed publication as a litmus test for quality. If you look at the OP, you will see the the IPCC was disingenuous in representing the nature of the results of their peer-review for their statements.
Yet another perception of yours that has no basis. I shan't expect you to back it up, though, as you haven't backed up any of your other perceptions about me or my posts. But, I do have ideas that the discussion should be open, honest, civil, and have scientific integrity when discussing science.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition