DenierGate?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: DenierGate?

    Lions and tigers and bears oh my!!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: DenierGate?

    In Response to Re: DenierGate?:
    In Response to Re: DenierGate? : I love it. The right gets its brain in a wad and its panties in a tizzy over innocent "Climategate" emails. But leaked evidence that the right is making donations to spread anti-warming disinformation.... ...meh who cares.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow


    Yea that's it! geez

    Groups who believe in Man caused climate change will dispute, falsify and harass all those that do not think climate change is man made and vice versa!

    The leaked docs were from an independent source with no dog in the hunt so to speak; that proved one side was actually communicating and directing their own people to falsify and and report bogus info to support their theory. That's the difference!!
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: DenierGate?

    Heh.

    The 'institute' basically said that one of the incriminating leaked emails was a "fake"...

    ...but that they would take vigorous legal action and sue anyone who didn't take them off the web immediately.

    Why do they care where it's posted if it's fake anyway?
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: DenierGate?

    In Response to DenierGate?:
    The Heartland Institute responded on Wednesday to an apparent leak of confidential documents that contained lists of high-profile donors and details of future projects to discredit climate change in public schools, saying in a statement that the documents were "stolen" and that at least one was a "total fake." While the free-market think tank said that it could not confirm the authenticity of any of the documents, it singled out one, a two-page document headlined "Confidential Memo: Heartland Climate Strategy," as completely fraudulent and urged media outlets not to report on any of the leaked documents. The Guardian , however, notes that the memo in question largely repeats information contained in the other documents, and the New York Times , likewise, points out that the group is "known for attacking climate science." The Guardian also reports that some of the documents contained details on future projects such as a $100,000 campaign to "dissuade teachers from teaching science.” A list of donors was also leaked, including corporate backers such as Microsoft and GlaxoSmithKline, a multinational drug company that contributed $50,000 in the past two years to support a medical newsletter. (Microsoft said its donation was earmarked for a technology newsletter and came in the form of free software, which it often gives to non-profits.) While the Chicago-based institute would not confirm the donor list was authentic, it nonetheless issued a public apology "to the donors whose identities were revealed by this theft." Interestingly, no oil companies were listed as donors, much to the surprise of environmentalists who have traditionally thought the companies had been secretly funding such climate change-questioning work. However, the Times points out that the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, which, according to the documents, contributed $25,000 last year and was expected to contribute $200,000 this year, controls major oil refiner Koch Industries. ExxonMobil used to fund the group but backed out in 2005 after Greenpeace reported that they had donated up to $800,000 to the group. Politico has more on the memos and the fallout here .   http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/02/16/heartland_institute_climate_memo_free_market_think_tanks_says_leaked_climate_documents_were_stolen_and_fake.html     "Climategate" turned out to be a bunch of hot air (and that's being nice). No wrongdoing uncovered.   Let's see what happens with the Anti-ClimateGate
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow


    we all get that global warming is a liberal sacrament, and in your narrow world view beyond criticism.  We also notice that oyu have adopted the Bush term "climate change", as "global warming" has not panned out, scientifically or politically.

    So, in order to show you sensitivity to your sacraments that you would never allow for Christians, and say believe what you want.  The instant you involve our children via the school, I want actual science taught, not this global warming junk, which is neither scientific or of educational value. 

    Keep it in your liberal church.  Maybe have group meetings at the local Planned Parenthood where you can discuss global warming and contraception, but leave your religion of global warming out of the public school system.
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: DenierGate?

    In Response to DenierGate?:
    The Heartland Institute responded on Wednesday to an apparent leak of confidential documents that contained lists of high-profile donors and details of future projects to discredit climate change in public schools, saying in a statement that the documents were "stolen" and that at least one was a "total fake." While the free-market think tank said that it could not confirm the authenticity of any of the documents, it singled out one, a two-page document headlined "Confidential Memo: Heartland Climate Strategy," as completely fraudulent and urged media outlets not to report on any of the leaked documents. The Guardian , however, notes that the memo in question largely repeats information contained in the other documents, and the New York Times , likewise, points out that the group is "known for attacking climate science." The Guardian also reports that some of the documents contained details on future projects such as a $100,000 campaign to "dissuade teachers from teaching science.” A list of donors was also leaked, including corporate backers such as Microsoft and GlaxoSmithKline, a multinational drug company that contributed $50,000 in the past two years to support a medical newsletter. (Microsoft said its donation was earmarked for a technology newsletter and came in the form of free software, which it often gives to non-profits.) While the Chicago-based institute would not confirm the donor list was authentic, it nonetheless issued a public apology "to the donors whose identities were revealed by this theft." Interestingly, no oil companies were listed as donors, much to the surprise of environmentalists who have traditionally thought the companies had been secretly funding such climate change-questioning work. However, the Times points out that the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, which, according to the documents, contributed $25,000 last year and was expected to contribute $200,000 this year, controls major oil refiner Koch Industries. ExxonMobil used to fund the group but backed out in 2005 after Greenpeace reported that they had donated up to $800,000 to the group. Politico has more on the memos and the fallout here .   http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/02/16/heartland_institute_climate_memo_free_market_think_tanks_says_leaked_climate_documents_were_stolen_and_fake.html     "Climategate" turned out to be a bunch of hot air (and that's being nice). No wrongdoing uncovered.   Let's see what happens with the Anti-ClimateGate
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow



    http://dailybayonet.com/2012/02/hippies-hate-heartland/

    What the Heartland documents show is how badly warmists have been beaten by those with a fraction of the resources they’ve enjoyed.

    Al Gore spent $300 million advertising the global warming hoax. Greenpeace, the WWF, the Sierra Club, The Natural Resources Defense Council, NASA, NOAA, the UN and nation states have collectively poured billions into climate research, alternative energies and propaganda, supported along the way by most of the broadcast and print media.

    Yet they’ve been thwarted by a few honest scientists, a number of blogs and a small pile of cash from Heartland.

    Here’s a clue for DeSmog, Joe Romm and other warmists enjoying a little schadenfreude today. It’s not the money that’s beating you, it’s the message.

    Your climate fear-mongering backfired. You cried wolf so often the villagers stopped listening. Then Climategate I & II gave the world a peek behind the curtain into the shady practices, petty-feuding and data-manipulation that seems to pass for routine in climate ‘science’.

    So enjoy the moment, warmists, because what this episode really demonstrates to the world is how little money was needed to bring the greatest scam in history to its knees. That’s not something I’d think you’d want to advertise, but knock yourselves out. It’s what you do best.

     


     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: DenierGate?

    In Response to Re: DenierGate?:
    In Response to Re: DenierGate? : Yeah ok. That's about as intelligent as "get government out of my medicare!"
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow



    Moving the goal posts, AGAIN!!! 

    can you make any argument without moving the goal posts?

    BTW:  Government should be out of medicare.  that's a no-brainer.
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: DenierGate?

    In Response to Re: DenierGate?:
    In Response to Re: DenierGate? : Exhibit A. People who have less money are right? What's there a minority movement of mostly unemployed persons much maligned recently? Their name had a verb....  can't recall. Something about causing the subject to be in a location. _______________________ Exhibit B. Or ". Yet they’ve been thwarted by a few honest scientists, a number of blogs and a small pile of cash from Heartland. " = On May 1, 2003, Bush became the first sitting President to make an arrested landing in a fixed-wing aircraft on an aircraft carrier [ 2 ] [ 3 ] when he arrived at the USS Abraham Lincoln in a Lockheed S-3 Viking , dubbed Navy One , as the carrier returned from combat operations in the Persian Gulf . He posed for photographs with pilots and members of the ship's crew while wearing a flight suit . A few hours later, he gave a speech announcing the end of major combat operations in the Iraq War . Far above him was the warship's banner stating "Mission Accomplished." Bush was criticized for the historic jet landing on the carrier as an overly theatrical and expensive stunt. For instance, they pointed to the fact that the carrier was well within range of Bush's helicopter , and that a jet landing was not needed. [ 4 ] Originally the White House had stated that the carrier was too far off the California coast for a helicopter landing and a jet would be needed to reach it. On the day of the speech, the Lincoln was only 30 miles (48 km) from shore but the administration still decided to go ahead with the jet landing. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer admitted that Bush "could have helicoptered, but the plan was already in place. Plus, he wanted to see a landing the way aviators see a landing." [ 5 ] The Lincoln made a scheduled stop in Pearl Harbor shortly before the speech, docked in San Diego after the speech, and returned to her home port in Everett, Washington on May 6, 2003. The S-3 that served as "Navy One" was retired from service and placed on display at the National Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, Florida on July 17, 2003. The museum makes it clear that Bush was a passenger — not the pilot — of the plane. [ 6 ] While Bush trained and served as a jet pilot in the Air National Guard flying F-106 fighters, he was never trained to land on a carrier. The banner stating "Mission Accomplished" was a focal point of controversy and criticism. Navy Commander and Pentagon spokesman Conrad Chun said the banner referred specifically to the aircraft carrier's 10-month deployment (which was the longest deployment of a carrier since the Vietnam War ) and not the war itself, saying "It truly did signify a mission accomplished for the crew." [ 7 ] The White House claimed that the banner was requested by the crew of the ship, who did not have the facilities for producing such a banner. Afterward, the administration and naval sources stated that the banner was the Navy's idea, White House staff members made the banner, and it was hung by the U.S. Navy personnel. White House spokesman Scott McClellan told CNN , "We took care of the production of it. We have people to do those things. But the Navy actually put it up." [ 8 ] According to John Dickerson of Time magazine , the White House later conceded that they actually hung the banner but still insists it had been done at the request of the crew members. [ 9 ] Whether meant for the crew or not, the general impression created by the image of Bush under the banner has been criticized as premature, especially later as the guerrilla war began. Subsequently, the White House released a statement saying that the sign and Bush's visit referred to the initial invasion of Iraq. Bush's speech noted: "We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous." [ 10 ] "Our mission continues...The War on Terror continues, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide." However the speech also said that: "In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." [ 10 ] When he received an advance copy of the speech, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld took care to remove any use of the phrase "Mission Accomplished" in the speech itself. Later, when journalist Bob Woodward asked him about his changes to the speech, Rumsfeld responded: "I was in Baghdad , and I was given a draft of that thing to look at. And I just died, and I said my God, it's too conclusive. And I fixed it and sent it back… they fixed the speech, but not the sign." [ 11 ] Bush did offer a "Mission Accomplished" message to the troops in Afghanistan at Camp As Sayliyah on June 5, 2003 — about a month after the aircraft carrier speech: "America sent you on a mission to remove a grave threat and to liberate an oppressed people, and that mission has been accomplished." [ 12 ] For critics of the war, the photo-op became a symbol of the Bush administration 's unrealistic goals and perceptions of the conflict. Anti-war activists questioned the integrity and realism of Bush's "major combat" statement. The banner came to symbolize the irony of Bush giving a victory speech only a few weeks after the beginning of a relatively long war. Many in the administration came to regret the slogan. Karl Rove later stated, "I wish the banner was not up there." [ 13 ] In a less publicized incident, Rumsfeld also declared an end to major combat operations in Afghanistan on May 1, a few hours before Bush's announcement. [ 14 ] [ edit ] Subsequent comments In November 2008, Bush indicated that he regretted the use of the banner, stating in a CNN interview, "To some, it said, well, 'Bush thinks the war in Iraq is over,' when I didn't think that. It conveyed the wrong message." [ 15 ] In January 2009, Bush said that "Clearly, putting 'Mission Accomplished' on an aircraft carrier was a mistake". [ 16 ]   _____________________________________________________________     Potential defense: Wikipedia is a liberal.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow


    This is GREAT!!! Stumped and beaten so, throw Bush in there blame it on him (i guess)  and run!! bbbwwwaaaaa!!!!
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share