Umm, is this correct/fair/acceptable?

[j2k4]

No matter your opinion on the subject, should this be happening?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,353023,00.html

[devilsadvocate]

He said she said. I take it you believe Dr. William Gray's conspiracy theory on why this happened and not the Colorado State University. It could just be possible the school was cutting back for the reason it said and Gray is playing victim.

[j2k4]

He said she said. I take it you believe Dr. William Gray's conspiracy theory on why this happened and not the Colorado State University. It could just be possible the school was cutting back for the reason it said and Gray is playing victim.

Gray is a scientist of some standing, and his forecasts have been an integral part of the mix for quite some time, but allow me to play the, uh, devil's advocate to point out the myriad similar attempts to discredit/disown/de-fund/silence those who do not worship at the altar of global warming, and suggest the likelihood Dr. Gray's story holds more water than the scenario you imagine.

That CSU hews to the current trend in higher education, i.e., that no view or opinion is too divergent (as long as it is it can reasonably described as liberal) to be given a full and fair hearing, is inarguable.

In any case, let us assume (for purposes of this thread) that Dr. Gray's supposition is true.

What do you think?

Additionally, what is your personal view vis a vis global warming, if you don't mind?

[devilsadvocate]

From that I can only guess your answer is yes you believe Dr. Gray and not the school. To answer your question "is this correct/fair/acceptable? Assuming (for purposes of this thread) that Dr. Gray's supposition is true well then it would stink. That is however just an assumption and if Dr. Gray's supposition is false then no foul and Dr. Gray should stop living with a sense of entitlement. Would you agree? Just because Gray is a scientist of "some standing", and his forecasts have been an integral part of the mix for quite some time, doesn't mean they have to be a permanent fixture. Dr. Gray's and your own theory as to what happened is nothing more than speculation. It doesn't matter what my views on climate science are and I say climate science and not political arguments. They are irrelevant to the subject at hand and all we have to go on speculation.

[lynx]

The reasonable way to judge this is to look whether coverage of other material has been restricted.

If it has, and in a balanced way, then CSU's reasoning is valid.
If not, then Dr Gray has a valid point.

That said, I think a little "reading between the lines" is required here.

It seems to me that the crux of this argument surrounds the fact that Dr Gray has passed lead authorship of the yearly hurricane forecasts to Philip Klotzbach. Consequently if Philip Klotzbach moves on then they (CSU) will cease publication of these yearly reports. This seems quite reasonable, since one assumes that they would no longer have rights to publish these reports. One can assume that this situation would result in Dr Gray losing some of his income.

While the arguments for AGW are at best vague, the arguments against AGW are not helped by including what may be just poor judgement on passing control of intellectual rights.

[j2k4]

It doesn't matter what my views on climate science are and I say climate science and not political arguments. They are irrelevant to the subject at hand and all we have to go on speculation.

Nonetheless, I sought to ascertain your view with regard to CSU's decision in the context of Gray's supposition and the popular crusade against dissenting opinion as re global warming.

You seem loathe to express yourself, at least within the parameters of my question.

Insofar as this is true (though not irretrievably, I hope), I will settle for informing you that your presumptions (while speculative) as to my beliefs on global warming are more-or-less correct, but remind you that the subject here is not global warming so much as the apparent suppression of countervailing thought by an institution of "higher learning".

Suppose you look at it as my having tapped you on the shoulder, rather than imagining a cocked fist.

Please feel free to try again.

On another note, hello, lynx - I am, as usual lately, a bit delinquent.

My apologies.

[devilsadvocate]

I don't know how I could be any clearer.

I said if his forecasts were ended because of his global warming views then it stinks. BUT, to say it was is pure speculation.

Seeing as it is just speculation I'll ask again, do you agree that if the school acted as they said they did then Gray needs to get over his sense of entitlement, move on graciously and instead of playing victim perhaps seek funding elsewhere?

Would you at least admit that it's possible the school is telling the truth about why they did it?

I'm not big on conspiracy theories.

[j2k4]

I don't know how I could be any clearer.

I said if his forecasts were ended because of his global warming views then it stinks. BUT, to say it was is pure speculation.

Seeing as it is just speculation I'll ask again, do you agree that if the school acted as they said they did then Gray needs to get over his sense of entitlement, move on graciously and instead of playing victim perhaps seek funding elsewhere?

Would you at least admit that it's possible the school is telling the truth about why they did it?

I'm not big on conspiracy theories.

Neither am I, but this doesn't qualify as much more than a bit of gainsaying on the part of CSU, given the relatively long odds of another such institution defying current convention in order to accomodate Dr. Gray.

I further note the clarity of your prior affirmation; mea culpa.

Do you believe there is a pro-global warming political/media imperative at work, or just an anti- version of same?

[bigboab]

If he is not going to be PC with regard to global warming then he will need to be removed completely. What if he is correct. It would make us all look stupid. I suppose the same applies to anything that, at the moment, is PC.

Hi Kev.

[devilsadvocate]

J2k4: Both schools of thought in the political/media hold bias, and both sides exclude the other viewpoint. All of which are irrelevant to actual scientific theory.

Reputable climate or any other kind of scientists do not include or exclude research because of political agendas. They seek understanding and answers. This doesn't mean that there aren't a few Trojan horses in there.

This said it appears you jumped the gun with your conspiracy theory anyway.

I went back to the link you posted because I was unclear if it was just his forecast funding or if all ties had been cut and the story has been updated.

A pioneering expert on hurricane forecasting is disputing media reports that Colorado State University is pulling its support of his work because of his controversial views on global warming. William Gray, a professor emeritus at Colorado State, is a skeptic of man-made global warming and once said that pro-global warming scientists are "brainwashing our children." An article Monday by the Houston Chronicle that was cited by FOX News claimed that Gray's views had prompted the university to stop promoting his renowned annual North Atlantic hurricane forecasts. The Chronicle quoted a memo Gray sent the university last year accusing it of trying to stifle his views on global warming, but Gray issued a statement Tuesday saying that his status at the university hadn't changed. "We're still putting the forecast out," he said. "CSU continues to support me. I'm in the same office I've been for 41 years now and I hope to stay here some more years and keep working as I always have."