Hacked E mails from scientists dispute human caused global warming
- Thread starter rynokron
- Start date
Are you implying you have any data that really proves there is another "REAL" alternative, you are willing to support? It all boils down to, is it an unacceptable level of damage. Damage, is a personal perspective, much as religion, it is infinitely quantifiable. There is NO HUMAN ACTIVITY which does not, in some way, effect the environment.
Everytime the grass is mowed, a tree is feel, drive to a movie, even the act of breathing, has consequences. You are just able to accept the level of damage.
Are you familiar with Chaos Theory?
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Let him have it Wade! Good luck Mold, you are gonna need it...
Let him have it Wade! Good luck Mold, you are gonna need it...
Don't need luck at all, Wade has brought a knife to a gunfight.
Are you implying you have any data that really proves there is another "REAL" alternative, you are willing to support? It all boils down to, is it an unacceptable level of damage. Damage, is a personal perspective, much as religion, it is infinitely quantifiable. There is NO HUMAN ACTIVITY which does not, in some way, effect the environment.
I never said anything about the existence of another "REAL" alternative energy source or the amount of damage we are currently casing. I was just stating that, in fact, we are causing damage. Apparently, we are in agreement that we are affecting the environment.
Next time you you leave your special education classroom you had better check who is lurking down the big kids hall.
What is your point? I went to college so feel free to use all your high school big words...
My point is that there is not pointWwe have chosen to do what we do. End of freaking story. Drive or walk, freeze or stay warm, turn on the lights or be in the dark. Why can't we just learn to get along?
LOL!Who is "we" and why are we supposed to get along? Why are you on this forum?
We are the human race and we are to get along at God's request. Part #2, cuz I ride a sled
Let's take it to the other thread
I already answered that. All human activity does harm. Your keystrokes on your computer do harm. The molecules you are pressing on, are heating up un-naturally, due to your activity. Insert pretty picture I painted for you.
No, I am implying with my post that scientists are munipulating data about global warming for personal and political agendas. Did you even read the article?
Last edited:
He dosen't need to, Al Gore said so!
MSNBC link is now bad. it has apparently "expired" I'm actually shocked that they would post up anything that does not tow the Obama party line. That commie news org is so far up his a$$
Here is a good link
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576009,00.html
Last edited:
EDITORIAL: Hiding evidence of global cooling
Sweet.
This is fantastic news. This news really made my day.
I have never believed in man caused global warming, but instead that the earth goes through cycles of cooling and warming, and this I would hope will blow the doors off of Cap and Trade if it proves to be true (note to mold - I never said that man does not cause pollution). Oh wait, probably won't change much with the folks in control of Congress and the White House. What was I thinking...
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), has indicated that if this holds true when the Senate return from Thanksgiving recess, that he will call for an investigation. He is the Ranking Minority member on the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Something tells me that the Senator in charge of this committee, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), will not allow an investigation to take place.
Let the games begin!!!
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/24/hiding-evidence-of-global-cooling/
EDITORIAL: Hiding evidence of global cooling
Junk science exposed among climate-change believers
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Scientific progress depends on accurate and complete data. It also relies on replication. The past couple of days have uncovered some shocking revelations about the baloney practices that pass as sound science about climate change.
It was announced Thursday afternoon that computer hackers had obtained 160 megabytes of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in England. Those e-mails involved communication among many scientific researchers and policy advocates with similar ideological positions all across the world. Those purported authorities were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global-warming claims.
Professor Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit, and professor Michael E. Mann at Pennsylvania State University, who has been an important scientist in the climate debate, have come under particular scrutiny. Among his e-mails, Mr. Jones talked to Mr. Mann about the "trick of adding in the real temps to each series ... to hide the decline [in temperature]."
Mr. Mann admitted that he was party to this conversation and lamely explained to the New York Times that "scientists often used the word 'trick' to refer to a good way to solve a problem 'and not something secret.' " Though the liberal New York newspaper apparently buys this explanation, we have seen no benign explanation that justifies efforts by researchers to skew data on so-called global-warming "to hide the decline." Given the controversies over the accuracy of Mr. Mann's past research, it is surprising his current explanations are accepted so readily.
There is a lot of damning evidence about these researchers concealing information that counters their bias. In another exchange, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann: "If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone" and, "We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind." Mr. Jones further urged Mr. Mann to join him in deleting e-mail exchanges about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) controversial assessment report (ARA): "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re [the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report]?"
In another e-mail, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann, professor Malcolm K. Hughes of the University of Arizona and professor Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst: "I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don't any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!"
At one point, Mr. Jones complained to another academic, "I did get an email from the [Freedom of Information] person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn't be deleting emails." He also offered up more dubious tricks of his trade, specifically that "IPCC is an international organization, so is above any national FOI. Even if UEA holds anything about IPCC, we are not obliged to pass it on." Another professor at the Climate Research Unit, Tim Osborn, discussed in e-mails how truncating a data series can hide a cooling trend that otherwise would be seen in the results. Mr. Mann sent Mr. Osborn an e-mail saying that the results he was sending shouldn't be shown to others because the data support critics of global warming.
Repeatedly throughout the e-mails that have been made public, proponents of global-warming theories refer to data that has been hidden or destroyed. Only e-mails from Mr. Jones' institution have been made public, and with his obvious approach to deleting sensitive files, it's difficult to determine exactly how much more information has been lost that could be damaging to the global-warming theocracy and its doomsday forecasts.
We don't condone e-mail theft by hackers, though these e-mails were covered by Britain's Freedom of Information Act and should have been released. The content of these e-mails raises extremely serious questions that could end the academic careers of many prominent professors. Academics who have purposely hidden data, destroyed information and doctored their results have committed scientific fraud. We can only hope respected academic institutions such as Pennsylvania State University, the University of Arizona and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst conduct proper investigative inquiries.
Most important, however, these revelations of fudged science should have a cooling effect on global-warming hysteria and the panicked policies that are being pushed forward to address the unproven theory.
Sweet.
This is fantastic news. This news really made my day.
I have never believed in man caused global warming, but instead that the earth goes through cycles of cooling and warming, and this I would hope will blow the doors off of Cap and Trade if it proves to be true (note to mold - I never said that man does not cause pollution). Oh wait, probably won't change much with the folks in control of Congress and the White House. What was I thinking...
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), has indicated that if this holds true when the Senate return from Thanksgiving recess, that he will call for an investigation. He is the Ranking Minority member on the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Something tells me that the Senator in charge of this committee, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), will not allow an investigation to take place.
Let the games begin!!!
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/24/hiding-evidence-of-global-cooling/
EDITORIAL: Hiding evidence of global cooling
Junk science exposed among climate-change believers
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Scientific progress depends on accurate and complete data. It also relies on replication. The past couple of days have uncovered some shocking revelations about the baloney practices that pass as sound science about climate change.
It was announced Thursday afternoon that computer hackers had obtained 160 megabytes of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in England. Those e-mails involved communication among many scientific researchers and policy advocates with similar ideological positions all across the world. Those purported authorities were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global-warming claims.
Professor Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit, and professor Michael E. Mann at Pennsylvania State University, who has been an important scientist in the climate debate, have come under particular scrutiny. Among his e-mails, Mr. Jones talked to Mr. Mann about the "trick of adding in the real temps to each series ... to hide the decline [in temperature]."
Mr. Mann admitted that he was party to this conversation and lamely explained to the New York Times that "scientists often used the word 'trick' to refer to a good way to solve a problem 'and not something secret.' " Though the liberal New York newspaper apparently buys this explanation, we have seen no benign explanation that justifies efforts by researchers to skew data on so-called global-warming "to hide the decline." Given the controversies over the accuracy of Mr. Mann's past research, it is surprising his current explanations are accepted so readily.
There is a lot of damning evidence about these researchers concealing information that counters their bias. In another exchange, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann: "If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone" and, "We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind." Mr. Jones further urged Mr. Mann to join him in deleting e-mail exchanges about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) controversial assessment report (ARA): "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re [the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report]?"
In another e-mail, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann, professor Malcolm K. Hughes of the University of Arizona and professor Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst: "I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don't any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!"
At one point, Mr. Jones complained to another academic, "I did get an email from the [Freedom of Information] person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn't be deleting emails." He also offered up more dubious tricks of his trade, specifically that "IPCC is an international organization, so is above any national FOI. Even if UEA holds anything about IPCC, we are not obliged to pass it on." Another professor at the Climate Research Unit, Tim Osborn, discussed in e-mails how truncating a data series can hide a cooling trend that otherwise would be seen in the results. Mr. Mann sent Mr. Osborn an e-mail saying that the results he was sending shouldn't be shown to others because the data support critics of global warming.
Repeatedly throughout the e-mails that have been made public, proponents of global-warming theories refer to data that has been hidden or destroyed. Only e-mails from Mr. Jones' institution have been made public, and with his obvious approach to deleting sensitive files, it's difficult to determine exactly how much more information has been lost that could be damaging to the global-warming theocracy and its doomsday forecasts.
We don't condone e-mail theft by hackers, though these e-mails were covered by Britain's Freedom of Information Act and should have been released. The content of these e-mails raises extremely serious questions that could end the academic careers of many prominent professors. Academics who have purposely hidden data, destroyed information and doctored their results have committed scientific fraud. We can only hope respected academic institutions such as Pennsylvania State University, the University of Arizona and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst conduct proper investigative inquiries.
Most important, however, these revelations of fudged science should have a cooling effect on global-warming hysteria and the panicked policies that are being pushed forward to address the unproven theory.
Last edited:
Can you imagine all the Twinkies crying in their granola over this? I'm going to rub a few faces in this doo-doo.
We've known for a long time that this was a one way ticket for liberals/progressives to extort revenue from the masses. Another scam bites the dust!!! Yippie!!
Algore, you are nothing but a fraud, a cheat and a maggot. You need to be placed into a special prison were they snort detergent and plook each other all the time.
We've known for a long time that this was a one way ticket for liberals/progressives to extort revenue from the masses. Another scam bites the dust!!! Yippie!!
Algore, you are nothing but a fraud, a cheat and a maggot. You need to be placed into a special prison were they snort detergent and plook each other all the time.
Similar threads
