(January 2, 2014 at 9:14 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote:(January 2, 2014 at 6:20 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: You see, you said you weren't accusing them of covering up evidence, but now here you are. That's exactly what the creationists say about evolution! They say they get persecuted for publishing it, even the guy who advocates the stork theory of reproduction says the same thing.I'm not saying anything about the IPCC covering it up. I was talking about scientists being fearful to publish contrary results for what it may do to their reputation. Unfortunately yes creationists say the same thing about evolution. But it happens in every field to some (very small) extent because sometimes scientists are thinking more about themselves then they are about the science. Its not a conspiracy, it just the fact that they are human with hopes and fears too.
What? If you have results and you don't publish it you are covering it up. That is the definition of covering it up. Do you have evidence of this? I'm really not interested in trying to guess if imaginary data exists to support your points, especially when I have seen so many publications that have data supporting just the opposite.
If you spent time and money (a lot of money) doing research and then end up not publishing, you are hurting your own career. If you fake data, you are hurting your career and if caught, well you're pretty much done for. So if you are going to suppose that these things go on just because you think they do ... I don't see why I need to disregard the data that actually exist because the opposite can just as easily happen.
