climategate

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from smileybennyhill. Show smileybennyhill's posts

    climategate

    Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: 


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...-organised.html
    There has been no global warming since 1995

    The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.


    Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.


    Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

    And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from shumirules. Show shumirules's posts

    Re: climategate

    Al Gore says nothing to see here move along, pay no attention to the man behind the curtian.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from smileybennyhill. Show smileybennyhill's posts

    Re: climategate

    Al Gore's word good enough for some of you. wink
    The Nobel committee wouldn't give someone a prize they don't deserve.. would they... Any more than the Heisman committee would...




     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from shumirules. Show shumirules's posts

    Re: climategate

    Nothing says it has to be real like fake data.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: climategate

    97% of climatologists believe that there is such a thing as global warming and that mankind plays a role.  I am no scientist so I have to support the vast majority of the experts in this field.  Why are you smarter than they are? 

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelldog1. Show kelldog1's posts

    Re: climategate



       
       Actual video of a group of Republicans interpreting climate change data............

                  http://www.spike.com/video/monkey-party/2691852
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: climategate

    OK.  let's advance the story.  Of course himans have an impact on the envirnoment.  so do cows, plants, volcanoes, and so on.  the real question is man allowed to exist and have an impact on the envirnment?  I say, of course.  To think otherwise is foolish.  You would have to agree that all living things must be removed becasuethey also have an impact on the envirnment, volcanoes must be eliminated, becasue each one does more damage than man could ever do.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: climategate

    "I am no scientist so I have to support the vast majority of the experts in this field.  Why are you smarter than they are? "

    Scientists are smarter than you or I, but they are human, they have the same 'herd' mentality as in other fields, and they make errors. 

    The scientific community was previously "almost unanimous" in the view there was global cooling; from a 1975 Newsweek cover story: 

    "Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from OscarBozachTOTO. Show OscarBozachTOTO's posts

    Re: climategate

    Here is the score card:

    Climate Scientists have:
    1. Destroyed evidence
    2. Illegally blocked release of information
    3. Lied
    4. Decieved the public
    5. Degraded opposing opinions and scientists
    6. Demanded trillions of dollars to solve a problem they knew did not exist
    7. Won a Nobel Prize for their efforts
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: climategate

    In Response to Re: climategate:
    In Response to Re: climategate : That was 10 months before they got caught fudging and hiding the data.  That number has dropped faster than Tiger's pants since.
    Posted by GreginMeffa


    Do you have a link for this supposed change of viewpoint?   No, I am not talking about Tiger...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from OscarBozachTOTO. Show OscarBozachTOTO's posts

    Re: climategate

    In Response to Re: climategate:
    97% of climatologists believe that there is such a thing as global warming and that mankind plays a role.  I am no scientist so I have to support the vast majority of the experts in this field.  Why are you smarter than they are? 
    Posted by Reubenhop


    We're just better informed and not dependent on Obama grants to live. 

    Part of your problem is you are confusing natural fluxuations in temperature with "man-made global warming."  That is part of the deception trick...

    It is like saying that Obama is to blame for the failing economy and then responding "You don't think the economy is failing" when someone disagrees.

    It is disingenuous nonsense designed to fool the dimwitted ...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: climategate

    In Response to Re: climategate:
    Here is the score card: Climate Scientists have: 1. Destroyed evidence 2. Illegally blocked release of information 3. Lied 4. Decieved the public 5. Degraded opposing opinions and scientists 6. Demanded trillions of dollars to solve a problem they knew did not exist 7. Won a Nobel Prize for their efforts
    Posted by OscarBozachTOTO


    Another conspiracy theorist: best link up with Grimfandango and Infowars on the National Threads.   And why exactly are these scientists engaging in this massive fraud?   Some liberal plot to make us a socialist world-nation run by treehuggers?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: climategate

    "[T]he IPCC assessment reports reflect the state of scientific knowledge very well. There have been a few isolated errors, and these have been acknowledged and corrected. What is seriously amiss is something else: the public perception of the IPCC, and of climate science in general, has been massively distorted by the recent media storm. All of these various “gates” – Climategate, Amazongate, Seagate, Africagate, etc., do not represent scandals of the IPCC or of climate science.

    Rather, they are the embarrassing battle-cries of a media scandal, in which a few journalists have misled the public with grossly overblown or entirely fabricated pseudogates, and many others have naively and willingly followed along without seeing through the scam. It is not up to us as climate scientists to clear up this mess – it is up to the media world itself to put this right again, e.g. by publishing proper analysis pieces like the one of Tim Holmes and by issuing formal corrections of their mistaken reporting. We will follow with great interest whether the media world has the professional and moral integrity to correct its own errors."

    - from RealClimate, http://www.realclimate.org/, where the dailymail story referenced above is thoroughly debunked and discredited.

    Funny how the so-called MSM is so revered over the voices of the actual scientists who do the work. 

    Here is the IPCC's latest report in full detail.  The scientific facts are undeniable; the media reports about those facts - much, much less:

    http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch6s6-6.html

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: climategate

    In Response to Re: climategate:
    97% of climatologists believe that there is such a thing as global warming and that mankind plays a role.  I am no scientist so I have to support the vast majority of the experts in this field.  Why are you smarter than they are?  http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html
    Posted by Reubenhop

    "The debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes," said Doran.

    If that data showing the changes in temps are made up then isn't the conclusion "made up"? If they are shown the true data (which conveniently has been destroyed) would they come to the same conclusion? I believe they wouldn't.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: climategate

    In Response to Re: climategate:
    "[T]he IPCC assessment reports reflect the state of scientific knowledge very well. There have been a few isolated errors, and these have been acknowledged and corrected. What is seriously amiss is something else: the public perception of the IPCC, and of climate science in general, has been massively distorted by the recent media storm. All of these various “gates” – Climategate, Amazongate, Seagate, Africagate, etc., do not represent scandals of the IPCC or of climate science. Rather, they are the embarrassing battle-cries of a media scandal, in which a few journalists have misled the public with grossly overblown or entirely fabricated pseudogates, and many others have naively and willingly followed along without seeing through the scam. It is not up to us as climate scientists to clear up this mess – it is up to the media world itself to put this right again, e.g. by publishing proper analysis pieces like the one of Tim Holmes and by issuing formal corrections of their mistaken reporting. We will follow with great interest whether the media world has the professional and moral integrity to correct its own errors." - from RealClimate, http://www.realclimate.org/ , where the dailymail story referenced above is thoroughly debunked and discredited. Funny how the so-called MSM is so revered over the voices of the actual scientists who do the work.  Here is the IPCC's latest report in full detail.  The scientific facts are undeniable; the media reports about those facts - much, much less: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch6s6-6.html
    Posted by Mattyhorn


    Even though scientific method is a series of steps, keep in mind that new information or thinking might cause a scientist to back up and repeat steps at any point during the process. A process like the scientific method that involves such backing up and repeating is an iterative process.  The scientific method falls victim to the strength of hypothesis one is try to prove.  Hence the scientific method is subject to the foibles of the popular expression “figures lie and liars figure” and for many the basis of proof has to do with whether you are buying or selling.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from OscarBozachTOTO. Show OscarBozachTOTO's posts

    Re: climategate

    To the man-made global warming believers:

    1. The UK global warming alarmist just admitted there has been no global warming for 15 years
    2. He admits destroying data to back up his previous claims
    3. We also learned that the Mann-Hockey stick data has also been deleted to prevent peer review .. .meaning the hockey stick chart is a 100% fraud

    These are facts... you are spewing Al Gore propaganda nonsense.... move on already.
     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansonbrother. Show Hansonbrother's posts

    Re: climategate

    looks like someone gets all their cues from Sean Hannity. Kudos for parrotting someone else's talking points
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: climategate

    Newtster, I saw Lomborg speak about Copenhagen and the bs of thousands of people coming together to stop MMGW and reduce carbon in the atmosphere. He was practically laughing as he described the 400+ PRIVATE jets and @1500 limos. He said they put more CO in the atmosphere getting to Copenhagen than most people do in their entire adult life!

    He is practical and out for keeping the planet working not $$$$ like the other clowns (Gore et al).

    http://www.lomborg.com/publications/the_skeptical_environmentalist/


     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: climategate

    In Response to Re: climategate:
    Its only been 3 months since they got caught lying, fudging, hiding and blacklisting. Why would such things cast any doubt?  I mean really. But wait, we could start at the top of the thread: Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
    Posted by GreginMeffa


    You might want to read the article as opposed to someone's summary of his views.  He said it was "possible" that it was warmer in Medieval times BUT there is (obviously) a lack of scientific worldwide data for the period.  And as they say, most anything is "possible".  And he is only one of many who support the theory.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from smileybennyhill. Show smileybennyhill's posts

    Re: climategate

    The fact that we've had no warming in the last 15 yrs and in fact have been cooling for the past 5, seems to say the GW Chicken Little (Al Gore et al) types are off their meds.
    Either way, there is sure as hel not enough information to trash a way of life, grind the US economy to a halt and regress into the paleo period lifestyle, as far as our carbon "footprint" is concerned.  It would take absolute, irrefutable evidence and I don't think there is a way to do that.  So far, the models have not panned out as hyped by the "truthers". 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from shumirules. Show shumirules's posts

    Re: climategate

    When Al Gore lives in a 1200 sq foot home fly at most once per year, turns off the A/C in his home in july, when he bikes to the supermaket I may start to belive all of Al's BS.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from OscarBozachTOTO. Show OscarBozachTOTO's posts

    Re: climategate

    In Response to Re: climategate:
    looks like someone gets all their cues from Sean Hannity. Kudos for parrotting someone else's talking points
    Posted by Hansonbrother


    Speak for yourself.... you still believe Al Gore... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from smileybennyhill. Show smileybennyhill's posts

    Re: climategate

    There are ever increasing numbers of scientists who question the science and the theories of man caused climate change.  Those 97% you spoke of, who publish, also probably have @ 97% who receieve grants from govt or loobyists who have a vested interest in perpetuating the claim of man cause CC..    They are also mostly academics who have an agenda to promote as well.  It would be interesting to see a survey of "working" scientists.  
     Here is one of many:
    William M. Gray , Professor Emeritus and head of The Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University : "This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood. Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential." [25] "I am of the opinion that [global warming] is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people." [26] "So many people have a vested interest in this global-warming thing—big labs and research and stuff. The idea is to frighten the public, to get money to study it more." [27]
    Tim Patterson [33] , paleoclimatologist and Professor of Geology at Carleton University in Canada: "There is no meaningful correlation between CO 2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO 2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years. On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO 2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?" [34] [35]
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share