EPA Scientist Silenced in Coverup

map · #1 (**permalink**) 12-09-2009, 09:51 PM

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34747

Ron61 · #2 (**permalink**) 12-10-2009, 07:15 AM

I don't think we can lose much more credibility as it has all been lost in the past year.

I also read an article some time ago in one of the space magazines that Mars is experiencing a warming cycle. I wonder how the apologist will manage to blame that on the U.S.

Ron

bobcowan · #3 (**permalink**) 12-10-2009, 02:41 PM

The libs are in a panic now. They all knew it was a hoax, and every hoax is eventually found out. Over the course of a decade they've managed to keep the secret. They've wasted too much time in pushing through their agenda. Now they see the house of cards falling down, and they have to scramble.

Excaliber · #4 (**permalink**) 12-10-2009, 05:50 PM

It's way deeper than a simple Lib or Conservative stand point running the game here.

Consider this:
NASA has an immense amount of "tree ring" data showing temperatures through the decades. Many othe bodies of science, in various countries around the world, also hold important data as it concerns historic temperature readings. They have had this data for years, it continues to grow. So why won't they release it? NASA itself, regardless of what party is or isn't in power has steadfastly refused to release it.

It's deeper than pointing the finger at any one group, this dam thing is a major international conspiracy with billions of dollars and thousands of jobs at stake. The truth MUST be hidden, as it was when Bush was in power, as it is when Obama is in power. I hope this ClimateGate thing blows the lid of this once and for all.

Ron61 · #5 (**permalink**) 12-11-2009, 04:40 AM

Ernie,

The truth MUST be hidden, as it was when Bush was in power, as it is when Obama is in power. I hope this ClimateGate thing blows the lid of this once and for all.

Actually I agree with you but I noticed that you forgot to mention Clinton. NASA had that data when he was in power also. I would like to see them make all of the so called agencies who are pushing this make their real data public.

Ron

Excaliber · #6 (**permalink**) 12-11-2009, 07:30 AM

Perhaps before Clinton even? That is the point Ron, WHY are these various groups so secret about this fundamental research data?

Ron61 · #7 (**permalink**) 12-11-2009, 08:42 AM

Ernie,

Just guessing but my guess would be there is a lot of money involved and they may lose a lot of it if the actual facts were ever made public. It seems everything any more winds up with money being the reason behind it.

Ron

dcdoug · #8 (**permalink**) 12-11-2009, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Consider this:
NASA has an immense amount of "tree ring" data showing temperatures through the decades. Many othe bodies of science, in various countries around the world, also hold important data as it concerns historic temperature readings. They have had this data for years, it continues to grow. So why won't they release it? NASA itself, regardless of what party is or isn't in power has steadfastly refused to release it.

If they indeed have all this data and are withholding it for some reason (I don't know much about it and am not really big on conspiracy theories), why can't you request it under the Freedom of Information Act? It's not like its an imminent threat to national security. It's frickin' tree data.

Excaliber · #9 (**permalink**) 12-11-2009, 09:32 AM

There have been many attempts to get the NASA data and other data, for some reason, it hasn't happened. Maybe now it will, what with ClimateGate going on...

I'm not big on conspiracy theory stuff either, but something is going on with so many different "institutions" so closely gaurding their data.

bomelia · #10 (**permalink**) 12-11-2009, 10:11 AM

BTW, as I recall, this is an OLD story, the person in question was an economist? Not sure why this is making the rounds again.

jolsen42 · #11 (**permalink**) 12-12-2009, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron61

Ernie,

Just guessing but my guess would be there is a lot of money involved and they may lose a lot of it if the actual facts were ever made public. It seems everything any more winds up with money being the reason behind it.

Ron

Bingo! Any dissenting opinions are swept away. So much for peer review.
The science must stand on its own.

In science the burden of proof is on the theory.

The theory must provide the proof.

If the theory makes a prediction, which it must to not simply be a hypothesis, and the prediction is wrong then the theory is discarded.

That is part of the scientific method.

The AGW theory predicts that CO2 causes global warming.

CO2 is higher now then it was in 1998.

Average global temperature has been declining since 1998

The prediction made by the theory is wrong therefore the theory must be discarded.

It is called the scientific method. It only takes one wrong result to discard a theory.

Since the oceans are cooler AND the air is cooler AND there is more ice at the poles, where did the heat go?

It escaped through the CO2 and into space, since C02 can not block heat.

C02 does not block the movement of energy.

'No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.' Albert Einstein

John O