Climategate Scientist About Face

[jpd80]

.....for 30 pieces of silver from the benefactors?

 

You make a good point.

That was my point in the original quote, a lot of scientists have sold their souls for research grants that prove their own environmental beliefs.

 

The whole climate change argument now relies on the purported "Hockey Stick" changes that have happened in the past 30-40 years. It is essential that these scientists find this data and present it for scrutiny, there's no turning back now because if they cannot put up, it's past time to shut up.

 

Without this primary data, all the other studies based on it are undermined and do not pass muster anymore. A lot of innocent scientists' credibility is now on the line too, the whole lot could come down like a house of cards.

 

And then there's the recriminations.......

 

What a shambles.....

Edited February 19, 2010 by jpd80

[goinbroke2]

The same reason when I see a mechanic on the news caught ripping people off and continuing the old adage "all garages rip you off, all mechanic's are crooks", the few have destroyed the credibility of all. Stereotype's are continued by crap like this.

 

If a scientist now comes out with a "revelation" and then is proven wrong thereafter, everything he's done to that point will be discredited. Should scientist keep everything to themselves? Of course not. That is how it works. "holy crap, look what I've discovered". Followed by, "wow your right, I concur" Or "no your wrong, you misinterpreted this graph or data here". That's how it HAS to work. Not this "I know everything and you must just take my word for it, I don't have to substantiate anything.

 

The modis-operendi of these bedwetters now is to scream the ice has melted or this day last year was colder than today so the earth is heating, then make you think that automatically correlates to MAN MADE earth heating.

 

Is the earth warming? Since the last mini ice age, yup I'd say it is. IS IT MAN MADE? NOW THAT IS THE QUESTION THEY CAN'T ANSWER/PROVE. And every time another example of global warming is presented they use it as proof of MAN MADE global warming. It's a crock of shit, a slight of hand or smoke and mirrors.

 

At this point, all anyone can do is recheck all the facts/data and start over. This "we can't find the data" is all bullshit. If 20 years ago you could get data about 1000 years ago, why can't we get the same data 20 years later? We've forgotten how to do it? The earth is different now? How about doing a forensic investigation on all his paperwork? Strip the room and actually file/account all paperwork? Sure it's a big job...BUT A TRILLION DOLLARS IN CAP AND TRADE BULLSHIT IS EXPENSIVE AND WORTH IT!

[Trimdingman]

Global Warming has become a religion. Believers who have made prophets of, and now worship the likes of Al Gore and Michael Moore, are in the same category as those who supped with Jim Jones. No amount of scientific proof will sway them from their convictions.

[stephenhawkings]

Global Warming has become a religion. Believers who have made prophets of, and now worship the likes of Al Gore and Michael Moore, are in the same category as those who supped with Jim Jones. No amount of scientific proof will sway them from their convictions.

much like compassionate conservatism, something blind masses follow around leaders claiming to be looking out for everyone's best interests.

Drill baby Drill! my favorite oxymoron of the moment!

[stephenhawkings]

Nice try, but I never said that, while my post was an accurate parody of your position in your previous post, along with other posts.

 

Climategate has revealed that those who believe that manmade climate change is happening have based their case on junk science. The case is falling apart right before our eyes. If you believe that only Fox News is reporting that story, you need to become much better informed on this whole subject.

 

Just as you aren't too well versed in the art of parody, you apparently don't understand how science really works. You need to become better informed on that topic so that, to paraphrase the immortal words of The Who, you don't get fooled again.

Sorry my thin caucasion skin some times gets burned on sunny days like today, satire noted.

Junk science? do tell? As last time I turned FOX news on a few sundays ago the commentators mostly agreed in man made global climate change.

As for science I may not know every thing, but I am verse well above average in said matters.

What grand piece of knowledge do you have that backs your claims up? feel free to cite websites, but please make sure they aren't editorial pieces.

[Trimdingman]

much like compassionate conservatism, something blind masses follow around leaders claiming to be looking out for everyone's best interests.

Drill baby Drill! my favorite oxymoron of the moment!

 

That is not what conservatism is about. Conservatism exposes myths and fantasies to the truth (except real religions like Christianity). Anybody who refuses to listen to real scientists who say that man-made global warming is a hoax is the one who is brainwashed and blindly following. I would be willing to look at any proof on either side. The left wants you to believe. The right wants you to investigate and get the truth. The left fights tooth and nail against any scrutiny of their religious dogma, just like any other religion. The right stands for individualism. The left stands for collectivism. Collectivism means following an idea as a group; not thinking as individuals. If the idea is wrong, as it will inevitably be proven to be at some point, the whole group will take on a more and more dogmatic stance and shut down dissent, or else go down as a whole like the Titanic. A wrong idea by an individual can be easily corrected, and the free-thinking individuals can learn from it and move to a higher intellectual level.

[grbeck]

Sorry my thin caucasion skin some times gets burned on sunny days like today, satire noted.

Junk science? do tell? As last time I turned FOX news on a few sundays ago the commentators mostly agreed in man made global climate change.

As for science I may not know every thing, but I am verse well above average in said matters.

What grand piece of knowledge do you have that backs your claims up? feel free to cite websites, but please make sure they aren't editorial pieces.

 

The problem that those who advocate manmade global warming typically get to apply a double standards, trot out misinformation and approach it as a religious belief, all the while shouting about the need to accept "science."

 

Where is the double standard? We are told that this year's snowy winter is not proof that manmade global warming is not happening, because we can't look at the weather and use that judge whether the globe is warming because of carbon dioxide emissions.

 

But just 15 months ago Robert Kennedy Jr. said the lack of snow in D.C. was evidence of global warming, and no one bothered to correct him on this supposed mistake:

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/RFK-79834057.html

 

We are also told that regional conditions are not reflective of global warming...but (alleged) glacier melt, or lack of snow in the Himalayas is proof of global warming (even though the Himalayan example turned out to be false).

 

There is also the problem of faulty - or even outright fraudulent - data. During a part of the Middle Ages (roughly 1000-1400 AD), temperatures were warmer than those of today. The "scientists" (one uses the word loosely here) were so disturbed by this that they constructed a phony temperature record using tree-ring proxies (tossing out those data that showed warming). This proxy data was so bad that when it showed cooling during the period 1975-2000 (which contradicted the more accurate instrument readings) they had to use "tricks" to "hide the decline". And now the disgraced Dr. Phil Jones, of CRU e-mail fame, says that they don't even have the data any more.

 

He also stated that virtually identical increases in temps that we are seeing today occured in the late 1800s as well as earlier in the 1900s.

 

The models used by those who believe that manmade global warming is happening have been consistently wrong. Not a single one predicted the lack of warming over the past 15 years (as acknowledged by even Dr. Jones).

 

You also need to understand how science works...if you believe that global warming is being driven by manmade carbon dioxide emissions, and is now occurring, then YOUR SIDE bears the burden of proof. It is not the obligation of skeptics to prove that it isn't happening. That would require them to prove that something that may not be happening really isn't happening. Real science doesn't work that way. The evidence that propoents of the manmade theory of global warming have relied on turns out to have been riddled with fraud and errors. It is nothing more than junk science. Proving it is happening is Step A...your side is not even there yet. Until that basic goal is achieved, do not ask others to prove that something that may not be happening really isn't happening.

Edited February 19, 2010 by grbeck

[grbeck]

much like compassionate conservatism, something blind masses follow around leaders claiming to be looking out for everyone's best interests.

Drill baby Drill! my favorite oxymoron of the moment!

 

Compare apples to apples...compassionate conservatism is just another name for big-government activism. Unlike the belief in manmade global warming, it's not a religious belief masquerading as science.

[stephenhawkings]

I am not bringing GOd into this, nor have I ever, but you can measure the CO2 levels, and see that they have risen.

I am not going to say that the ice caps will melt and flood all the coasts, but CO@ levels have risen.

It might not mean warmer temps for everyone, but CO2 levels have risen.

 

Man might not kill or completely destroy the earth, but we have had an impact, any one seen Hoover dam? or the great wall of China?

 

Man does effect his surroundings, Love Canal anyone?

 

man does leave behind traces of his existence that aren't always desirable, how abotu those pesky 20,000+ objects in the sky NASA tracks?

 

I wouldn't recommend it, but for those who don't believe, put your lips on the tail pipe of the family car, and have the wife start the engine up and take a deep breath, still not getting it?

 

well maybe after Yucca mountain is set up we can have a field trip and then we can figure out how man hasn't changed a single thing.

 

until then Pray on to TRIMS Christianity and every thing will be OK!

[RangerM]

I am not bringing GOd into this, nor have I ever, but you can measure the CO2 levels, and see that they have risen.

I am not going to say that the ice caps will melt and flood all the coasts, but CO@ levels have risen.

It might not mean warmer temps for everyone, but CO2 levels have risen.

But today's CO2 levels are well below levels in the past, well before the invention of the coal-fired power plant or the SUV.

 

It doesn't matter THAT they've risen; it's WHY (as in what are the major contributing factors) they've risen.

Man might not kill or completely destroy the earth, but we have had an impact, any one seen Hoover dam? or the great wall of China?

 

Man does effect his surroundings, Love Canal anyone?

You'd think, by your estimation, that my unfiltered and untreated well water should be extremely contaminated, due to Love Canal or whatever other catastrophe you could name, except for the fact that such things are localized, not global.

man does leave behind traces of his existence that aren't always desirable, how abotu those pesky 20,000+ objects in the sky NASA tracks?

 

I wouldn't recommend it, but for those who don't believe, put your lips on the tail pipe of the family car, and have the wife start the engine up and take a deep breath, still not getting it?

How about breathing the fossil fuel combustion fumes that it took to post your screed on the internet? Everytime someone reads your post, represents more CO2 emitted to power that space on their monitor.

well maybe after Yucca mountain is set up we can have a field trip and then we can figure out how man hasn't changed a single thing.

 

until then Pray on to TRIMS Christianity and every thing will be OK!

Everything IS ok...........except maybe you. I swear the amount you've overblown man's effect here is about as crazy as a 9/11 truther dissertation.

[Trimdingman]

I read an interesting article in to-day's Toronto Sun by Lorrie Goldstein. He points out how the global warmists are rightly saying that this year's record snowfall in the US should not be taken as proof that global warming is a hoax. He goes on to quote David Suzuki on the lack of snow in Vancouver for the Olympics, saying: "I've watched in horror as the snow just melted away from Cypress Mountain and it's even more horrifying to me to think of helicopters airlifting snow from Manning Park to fill it up again." Quoting Lorrie: "In addition to Suzuki's apparently low tolerance for horror, climatically speaking, his foundation chimed in man-made global warming clearly had a hand in the lack of snow."

 

There is a double standard. Global warmists can use any weather event as proof of global warming, but Global Warming skeptics can't. There are many examples of this in Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth", also. It is time for these ex-Commies to go back to the drawing board and come up with some new scare tactic to further their agenda.

[RangerM]

I read an interesting article in to-day's Toronto Sun by Lorrie Goldstein.

 

You might like George Will's column.....

 

Blinded by Science

By George Will

 

WASHINGTON -- Science, many scientists say, has been restored to her rightful throne because progressives have regained power. Progressives, say progressives, emulate the cool detachment of scientific discourse. So hear now the calm, collected voice of a scientist lavishly honored by progressives, Rajendra Pachauri.

 

He is chairman of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which shared the 2007 version of the increasingly weird Nobel Peace Prize. Denouncing persons skeptical about the shrill certitudes of those who say global warming poses an imminent threat to the planet, he says:

 

"They are the same people who deny the link between smoking and cancer. They are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder -- and I hope they put it on their faces every day."

 

Do not judge him as harshly as he speaks of others. Nothing prepared him for the unnerving horror of encountering disagreement. Global warming alarmists, long cosseted by echoing media, manifest an interesting incongruity -- hysteria and name calling accompanying serene assertions about the "settled science" of climate change. Were it settled, we would be spared the hyperbole that amounts to Ring Lardner's "Shut up, he explained."

 

The global warming industry, like Alexander in the famous children's story, is having a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day. Actually, a bad three months, which began Nov. 19 with the publication of e-mails indicating attempts by scientists to massage data and suppress dissent in order to strengthen "evidence" of global warming.

 

But there already supposedly was a broad, deep and unassailable consensus. Strange.

 

Next came the failure of The World's Last -- We Really, Really Mean It -- Chance, aka the Copenhagen climate change summit. It was a nullity, and since then things have been getting worse for those trying to stampede the world into a spasm of prophylactic statism.

 

In 2007, before the economic downturn began enforcing seriousness and discouraging grandstanding, seven Western U.S. states (and four Canadian provinces) decided to fix the planet on their own. California's Arnold Schwarzenegger intoned, "We cannot wait for the United States government to get its act together on the environment." The 11 jurisdictions formed what is now called the Western Climate Initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, starting in 2012.

 

Or not. Arizona's Gov. Jan Brewer recently suspended her state's participation in what has not yet begun, and some Utah legislators are reportedly considering a similar action. She worries, sensibly, that it would impose costs on businesses and consumers. She also ordered reconsideration of Arizona's strict vehicle emission rules, modeled on incorrigible California's, lest they raise the cost of new cars.

 

Last week, BP America, ConocoPhillips and Caterpillar, three early members of the 31-member U.S. Climate Action Partnership, said: Oh, never mind. They withdrew from USCAP. It is a coalition of corporations and global warming alarm groups that was formed in 2007 when carbon rationing legislation seemed inevitable and collaboration with the rationers seemed prudent. A spokesman for Conoco said: "We need to spend time addressing the issues that impact our shareholders and consumers." What a concept.

 

Global warming skeptics, too, have erred. They have said there has been no statistically significant warming for 10 years. Phil Jones, former director of Britain's Climatic Research Unit, source of the leaked documents, admits it has been 15 years. Small wonder that support for radical remedial action, sacrificing wealth and freedom to combat warming, is melting faster than the Himalayan glaciers that an IPCC report asserted, without serious scientific support, could disappear by 2035.

 

Jones also says that if during what is called the Medieval Warm Period (circa 800-1300) global temperatures may have been warmer than today's, that would change the debate. Indeed it would. It would complicate the task of indicting contemporary civilization for today's supposedly unprecedented temperatures.

 

Last week, Todd Stern, America's Special Envoy for Climate Change -- yes, there is one; and people wonder where to begin cutting government -- warned that those interested in "undermining action on climate change" will seize on "whatever tidbit they can find." Tidbits like specious science, and the absence of warming?

 

It is tempting to say, only half in jest, that Stern's portfolio violates the First Amendment, which forbids government from undertaking the establishment of religion. A religion is what the faith in catastrophic man-made global warming has become. It is now a tissue of assertions impervious to evidence, assertions which everything, including a historic blizzard, supposedly confirms and nothing, not even the absence of warming, can falsify.

[RangerM]

Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels

 

Study claimed in 2009 that sea levels would rise by up to 82cm by the end of century – but the report's author now says true estimate is still unknown

 

Link to article

 

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

 

The study, published in 2009 in Nature Geoscience, one of the top journals in its field, confirmed the conclusions of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It used data over the last 22,000 years to predict that sea level would rise by between 7cm and 82cm by the end of the century.

 

At the time, Mark Siddall, from the Earth Sciences Department at the University of Bristol, said the study "strengthens the confidence with which one may interpret the IPCC results". The IPCC said that sea level would probably rise by 18cm-59cm by 2100, though stressed this was based on incomplete information about ice sheet melting and that the true rise could be higher.

 

Many scientists criticised the IPCC approach as too conservative, and several papers since have suggested that sea level could rise more. Martin Vermeer of the Helsinki University of Technology, Finland and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany published a study in December that projected a rise of 0.75m to 1.9m by 2100.

 

Siddall said that he did not know whether the retracted paper's estimate of sea level rise was an overestimate or an underestimate.

 

Announcing the formal retraction of the paper from the journal, Siddall said: "It's one of those things that happens. People make mistakes and mistakes happen in science." He said there were two separate technical mistakes in the paper, which were pointed out by other scientists after it was published. A formal retraction was required, rather than a correction, because the errors undermined the study's conclusion.........

[Ford Jellymoulds]

 

DAILY MAIL..

Weather forecasters say the outlook for the rest of the this week is 'bleak', after rain and snow hit the UK during the weekend, accompanied by temperatures as low as minus -18c.

As much as 4in of snow fell across parts of Britain, with Wales, the Midlands and South Yorkshire receiving the biggest falls. More snow is expected in South Wales and the Midlands today.

 

Britain is on course for its coldest February in 32 years, and overnight temperatures plunged to as low as -18c in Braemar (0f) in the Scottish Highlands - colder than parts of Canada.

LINK

Edited February 22, 2010 by Ford Jellymoulds

[stephenhawkings]

But today's CO2 levels are well below levels in the past, well before the invention of the coal-fired power plant or the SUV.

 

It doesn't matter THAT they've risen; it's WHY (as in what are the major contributing factors) they've risen.

 

You'd think, by your estimation, that my unfiltered and untreated well water should be extremely contaminated, due to Love Canal or whatever other catastrophe you could name, except for the fact that such things are localized, not global.

 

How about breathing the fossil fuel combustion fumes that it took to post your screed on the internet? Everytime someone reads your post, represents more CO2 emitted to power that space on their monitor.

 

Everything IS ok...........except maybe you. I swear the amount you've overblown man's effect here is about as crazy as a 9/11 truther dissertation.

boy I am glad your so smart to point out how dumb every one else is, must be all that clean well water! TRIMDINGMAN could probably learn a few things from you!

Edited February 22, 2010 by stephenhawkings

[goinbroke2]

It's not that everyone else here is dumb...just you.

 

 

I went to grab some dinner and the blow hards are on the left wing radio again, letting the climate bedwetters go on and on and on and just agreeing with them. And then someone who doesn't believe gets two words in and...they got to go to a commercial. :rolleyes:

So, I called....yup, once it was established I'm what they call a "denier" then not only was I cut off but when I turned the radio back up he made an under-his-breath comment loud enough to be heard on radio "some people just won't accept that the science is settled". WTF!! I dialed right back but was told they're not accepting anymore calls. I said he just took another call. Then the answer was "well you already got a call in today" and then hung up on me! HOLY F%^&!!

95.7 news radio in Halifax NS is the most biased/unprofessional radio station I've ever heard!!!

 

Yes I am writing them (again)

[EgoFG]

That "Global Warming" is not really happening the biggest evidence is the renaming of the concept to now be "Climate Change".

 

Is man impacting the world - Yes.

We pollute, we kill species ... yes we do stuff, but so do all creatures.

 

Are we having an irreversible impact on the world - maybe, but so do many things (tell me again - why don't we have dinosaurs any more ?).

 

Are we causing effects in an avoidable manner that will be to man's long term detriment ?

Without this becoming a religious discussion, I cannot say for sure, and neither, apparently, can scientists.

[RangerM]

boy I am glad your so smart to point out how dumb every one else is, must be all that clean well water! TRIMDINGMAN could probably learn a few things from you!

I admit (after reading my post again) that I came across as a bit condescending. I apologize.

 

Stephen, I do not now, nor have I ever, thought you are (or were) dumb, just incorrect.

 

Read what you wrote again. You use an example like "Love Canal" as proof that man has terrible (and irreversible) impact on a global scale. That's just wrong.

[BlackHorse]

Just as a side note, "your so smart" should be "you're so smart".

[Trimdingman]

It's not that everyone else here is dumb...just you.

 

 

I went to grab some dinner and the blow hards are on the left wing radio again, letting the climate bedwetters go on and on and on and just agreeing with them. And then someone who doesn't believe gets two words in and...they got to go to a commercial. :rolleyes:

So, I called....yup, once it was established I'm what they call a "denier" then not only was I cut off but when I turned the radio back up he made an under-his-breath comment loud enough to be heard on radio "some people just won't accept that the science is settled". WTF!! I dialed right back but was told they're not accepting anymore calls. I said he just took another call. Then the answer was "well you already got a call in today" and then hung up on me! HOLY F%^&!!

95.7 news radio in Halifax NS is the most biased/unprofessional radio station I've ever heard!!!

 

Yes I am writing them (again)

 

Canada has got to have the largest land mass to people ratio of any country on the planet. Canadians should not be concerned with "man-made" anything. Canada is virtually uninhabited.

 

Go into any church. Interrupt the sermon and ask a question. Ask the preacher to give you some concrete proof than what he is saying is true and not some made up lies. You will get the same reaction as you get if you question the Global Warming religion.

[stephenhawkings]

Canada has got to have the largest land mass to people ratio of any country on the planet. Canadians should not be concerned with "man-made" anything. Canada is virtually uninhabited.

 

Go into any church. Interrupt the sermon and ask a question. Ask the preacher to give you some concrete proof than what he is saying is true and not some made up lies. You will get the same reaction as you get if you question the Global Warming religion.

Amen.

Go to any university in Canada and tell me what happens.

[goinbroke2]

And what, ask the kids that "know" toyota builds the best cars and domestic's all went bankrupt a few years ago and are all owned by the government now?

 

The kids that "know" that all software/songs etc should by law be made freeware because it's "their right" to have access to information after all that's what the "freedon to information act" was about?

 

The kids that think everything from education to medicine to guaranteed jobs when they finish school is a right?

 

THOSE are the same kids you want me to ask whether MMGW is true or not?

 

The same kids who equate the earth heating up as proof that man is causing it? Or the earth is cooling is again proof that man is causing it?

 

Today they announced on the radio that kids in Halifax from K-3 donated $120,000 to the Haiti cause. One of the kids on the radio said "I had this money saved for a playstation but these people don't have anything". They went on to say that the kids were learning a valuable lesson.

My first thought was, yeah, kids can be preyed upon and will willingly give up everything for a cause if they are indoctrinated properly.

 

This will certainly teach them that in 5-10years when Haiti again needs international help and again needs billions that they'll be the first line of defence for poor little Haiti.

 

Since the last ice age the earth IS warming. It has had up and down trends of multiple years but it is still slowly warming. There is certainly no proof beyond the handwringing "we must be doing something". What caused the earth to go from warmer temps than today to an ice age in the first place? Or warm up until the mini ice age? Or warm SINCE the mini ice age?

 

You can't blame man for everything...although there are opologist who hand wring over anything and everything I guess.

 

Again, PROVE IT AND PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE YOU. Other than that, go away.

[stephenhawkings]

I admit (after reading my post again) that I came across as a bit condescending. I apologize.

 

Stephen, I do not now, nor have I ever, thought you are (or were) dumb, just incorrect.

 

Read what you wrote again. You use an example like "Love Canal" as proof that man has terrible (and irreversible) impact on a global scale. That's just wrong.

local, regional, or global they are all part of the same system, earth.

[RangerM]

local, regional, or global they are all part of the same system, earth.

If you get a paper cut on your finger, your foot doesn't hurt; and your finger heals itself. Earth's ecosystem is similar.

[suv_guy_19]

If you get a paper cut on your finger, your foot doesn't hurt; and your finger heals itself. Earth's ecosystem is similar.

 

Bad analogy. If your foot gets bit by a rattle snake then it's going to affect your finger.