Climate Reasearchers Busted With Own Emails

[Jamo]

I think we oughtta waterboard the basturds and get the truth.

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Jamo

I think we oughtta waterboard the basturds and get the truth.

We can't do that until all the ice melts.

[bomelia]

So Steve..., this behavior by Hadley CRU does not bother you? Does not in anyway sway your belief in the AGW model?

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by bomelia

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,577746,00.html

They admit they tossed the raw temperature data. Now, it will be impossible to check their calculations. Normally, this would mean the compiled data would be rejected and all would have to start over. Let's see what the talking heads will say.

Mike

Who's to say how accurate were temps recorded 200 years ago, 150 years ago and 100 years ago? And that was BEFORE they got caught massaging [AKA: LYING] the data.

[Wes Tausend]

...

These reports are almost like those late night radio UFO tabloids where somebody makes a mountain out of some obscure molehill and then proceeds like everybody knows that this is the crucial evidence that the real truth is a fantastic scenario heard only ...on this station ...on this radio ...at this time. Sensationalism at its finest. Radio music gets old. I like to listen to these radio talk shows, sometimes, on a late lonely drive. They have the most sincere sounding witnesses ever.

Loungoid #1: Rupert Murdoch ( Keith Rupert Murdoch ) basically owns Fox News and The Daily Telegraph's, aka: telegraph.co.uk, through News Corp. News, aka: "shocking discoveries", are "laundered and plumped" back and forth across the pond to make them look like they came from outside sources, sell a little better etc. Not a bad plan.

Loungoid #2: Rupert Murdoch bought a hybrid. And he's going green. Sort of.

Loungoid #3: Rupert Murdoch's National Geographic channel has some neat climate documentaries on occasion. Hey, how about an expose'!

Loungoid #4: ?

Wes

...

[VRM]

Originally Posted by bomelia

So Steve..., this behavior by Hadley CRU does not bother you? Does not in anyway sway your belief in the AGW model?

Mike,
You obviously don't know me well enough to make any kind of accurate statement about what I believe. Maybe you should get the facts rather than making assumptions.

Yes, it bothers me. I'm an engineer, and I run tests and collect data all the time - data and test results are sacred. Making a mistake when collecting data or drawing conclusions from that data is part of the game - so is peer review to make sure that mistakes are found. Deliberately altering data to fit an agenda never goes over well with me. As far as I am concerned these jackasses may as well be working for a K Street lobbyist because that is the sort of credibility they have.

And your assumption of my belief in the AGW model, well, I prefer a much simpler one; Don't sh!t where you eat.
AFAIAC, the jackasses who run around claiming that we are causing global warming cannot prove their assertions. On the other side of that coin, the jackasses running around saying that we are not causing global warming also cannot prove it.

I believe that it is possible, even likely, that the climate is changing (warming in some places, cooling in others), and I think that this change is a natural one. I also believe that people can affect the climate (I think anybody who has ever been to China would agree), but that being able to quantify it is difficult because of the number of variables.

Steve

[Sharroll Celby]

AFAIAC, the jackasses who run around claiming that we are causing global warming cannot prove their assertions. On the other side of that coin, the jackasses running around saying that we are not causing global warming also cannot prove it.

I believe that it is possible, even likely, that the climate is changing (warming in some places, cooling in others), and I think that this change is a natural one. I also believe that people can affect the climate (I think anybody who has ever been to China would agree), but that being able to quantify it is difficult because of the number of variables.

Steve[/quote]

These two paragraphs pretty much sum it up for me. I was thinking the same ideas, but Steve has put it very well.

[bomelia]

Sorry Steve, I was not jabbing you. I was trying to find out where you were on the subject.

Lets face it. This whole thing is about political power and money. Does anybody REALLY think Al "shake my hand for $1200" Gore really gives a crap about the environment? As he heads to Copenhagen on his own jet?

Hell no. The libs have finally found a subject on which they can build a huge political dynamo. Here is a subject that average sheep accept with faith, without ever delving into the science. One does not have to be a rocket scientist to know there is a limit to what population size our planet can sustain. Tune into the news everynight and you are assaulted with horror stories of earthquakes, floods, famine, war... etc. Most of the fols screaming "the debate is over" have never dug into the data. Sheep. All of them. Heading to slaughter. Just like that cow in the Far Side Comics trying to break into line at the slaughter house.

BTW, I absolutely despise the term "climate change denier". Sounds suspiciously similar to "halocaust denier" does it not?

These bastards at Hadley CRU have been caught with their pants down. Phuk 'em.

[Ron61]

Climate changes are a part of nature and have been since the Earth was formed. However what we are putting into the air may speed up this warming cycle for a few years and make the cooling off cycle a few years longer, but we are for the most part talking about changes that take hundreds and thousands of years. In my opinion the part about us causing this warming cycle is pure BS. And I haven't noticed any of our Politicians who are so alarmed abut it giving up their jets and joy rides. Al Gore comes to mind as does Pelosi and her gang.

Ron

[bomelia]

You said it Ron. This is all about a power grab by the Federal Government.

[Jamo]

Read today that the Brits removed the e-mailing moron from the global warimng research group.

[bomelia]

But, the fish rots from the head down.

I will not be happy about this till they clearly state the hockey stick curve must be recompiled and evaluated by all.

Mike

[392cobra]

Al Gore Cancels Climate Lecture in Copenhagen

AP

Former Vice President Gore cancels lecture, citing unforeseen changes in his schedule.

COPENHAGEN -- Climate campaigner Al Gore has canceled a lecture he was supposed to deliver in Copenhagen.

The former vice president and Nobel Peace Prize winner had been scheduled to speak to more than 3,000 people at a Dec. 16 event hosted by the Berlingske Tidende newspaper group.

The group says Gore canceled the lecture Thursday, citing unforeseen changes in his schedule.

Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider says the decision was made because of "all the events going on with the summit." Dec. 16 is a key date for the meeting because that's when the ministerial segment starts.

Chief editor Lisbeth Knudsen says it's a "great disappointment" that Gore canceled and that all tickets will be refunded.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...re-copenhagen/

[392cobra]

Boxer Suggests Leaked E-Mails Represent 'Criminal' Hacker Conspiracy


Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., is calling the leaked e-mails from climate scientists at a British university research unit a "theft" and "crime" that should be investigated, despite calls from Republicans to investigate the contents of the e-mails themselves -- not the way they were leaked.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...er-conspiracy/

[Sharroll Celby]

AFAIAC, the jackasses who run around claiming that we are causing global warming cannot prove their assertions. On the other side of that coin, the jackasses running around saying that we are not causing global warming also cannot prove it.

I believe that it is possible, even likely, that the climate is changing (warming in some places, cooling in others), and I think that this change is a natural one. I also believe that people can affect the climate (I think anybody who has ever been to China would agree), but that being able to quantify it is difficult because of the number of variables.

Steve[/quote]

These two paragraphs pretty much sum it up for me. I was thinking the same ideas, but Steve has put it very well.[/quote]

Still applies!

[bomelia]

I think these idiots running around screaming Climate Change and attending 17,000 people conferences are suffering from the "Observer Effect" (sometimes, incorrectly called the Heisenberg uncertainty principle). What they measure is influenced by their actions (all that fuel burned by jets, cars, boats, trains, etc to get to the event, HVAC while there, cabs while there, lighting....)

Freddie, glad to see your article about Al "shake my hand for $1200" Gore. One less emitter of hot greenhouse gases at the lecturn. I was hoping we would start to see this. Also, I heard Obama's stay will be VERY short.

Mike

[392cobra]

Anybody else remember the last Climate Crisis ?I wonder how many of the 18 people who wrote that book had (D) after their names ?



Many of you are too young to remember, but in 1975 our government pushed "the coming ice age."

Random House dutifully printed "THE WEATHER CONSPIRACY … coming of the New Ice Age." This may be the only book ever written by 18 authors. All 18 lived just a short sled ride from Washington, D.C. Newsweek fell in line and did a cover issue warning us of global cooling on April 28, 1975. And The New York Times, Aug. 14, 1976, reported "many signs that Earth may be headed for another ice age."

OK, you say, that's media. But what did our rational scientists say?

In 1974, the National Science Board announced: "During the last 20 to 30 years, world temperature has fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade. Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end…leading into the next ice age."

You can't blame these scientists for sucking up to the fed's mantra du jour. Scientists live off grants. Remember how Galileo recanted his preaching about the earth revolving around the sun? He, of course, was about to be barbecued by his leaders. Today's scientists merely lose their cash flow. Threats work.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/03/cli...gy-sutton.html

[Tom Kirkham]

A must read if you want to understand "hide the decline" and see how much fraud that the perps have done to us.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...gates_hid.html

Looks like a lot of people should be taking up residence at the gray bar hotel.

[Ralphy]

In reading articles about pro warming. I have to question their motives. Are they meeting to stop warming. Or are they meeting to distribute money from advanced countries to poor?

It also reads that they still love a little drama.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Last-b...&asset=&ccode=

Gotta love Ted Turner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSlB1nW4S54

[392cobra]

Originally Posted by Ralphy

In reading articles about pro warming. I have to question their motives. Are they meeting to stop warming. Or are they meeting to distribute money from advanced countries to poor?

Yep.


Socialists Demand Trillions in “Climate Debt”

AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | December 7, 2009

Proposals for “climate change financing” include a Comprehensive World Climate Change Fund, into which payments could be made, and a global carbon tax.

You don't need to attend the United Nations climate change conference to know what's really going on.

Ignoring the fallacies behind the "science" of man-made global warming, a new U.N. report on "climate justice" says the U.S. and other countries owe $24 trillion in "climate debt" to the rest of the world. The report, "Climate Justice for a Changing Planet," argues that the United States is "historically the largest global emitter" of greenhouse gas emissions and therefore has the biggest "debt" to pay.

But another U.N. report puts the figure at $45 trillion.
President Obama seems prepared to accept this bogus claim by attending the United Nations conference on December 18.

The U.S. failure to pay, argues leftist Canadian writer Naomi Klein, has already produced "climate rage" and a "global movement for climate justice" led by Bolivia's socialist President Evo Morales. The implication is that if the U.S. doesn't pay up, protests and even violence could break out.

In a statement, the Morales regime declared that "What we call for is full payment of the debt owed to us by developed countries for threatening the integrity of the Earth's climate system, for over-consuming a shared resource that belongs fairly and equally to all people, and for maintaining lifestyles that continue to threaten the lives and livelihoods of the poor majority of the planet's population."

In other words, Americans are supposed to feel guilty over having a successful industrial economy. It is a system that has produced more wealth for more people than any in human history.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/social...-climate-debt/