A Look At Who 'Cleared' The Climate Scientists

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Annie, Apr 25, 2011.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Looks like the whole process that got them in trouble when the light fell on the emails, is being repeated by the investigation:

    Lobbyists who cleared 'Climategate' academics funded by taxpayers and the BBC - Telegraph

     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. skookerasbil
    Online

    skookerasbil Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    24,161
    Thanks Received:
    2,911
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +6,181
    What a scam.............doesnt raise the eyebrow of a single k00k though!!!:D:D To assholes like Chris and Old Rocks, 100% legit!!

    I think we have all spent a few moments fantasizing about inventing something and making millions. The really smart inventors dont think first about the product they'll sell...........they think about the segment of the population they can fleece with ease THEN get to work on the scam. Thats the secret. Idenfity a group that you know would buy a bag of dog doo for $1,000.00 a pop and package it just right = mega-profits.


    Everybody knows what this is....................

    [​IMG]


    Its a Turbonator............a BS product that is a total scam!! Millions bought the thing and I will bet you all the tea in China AND my house that environmental assholes like Rocks and Chris couldnt get one of these in their cars fast enough. Like I said.........identify the suckers and go make the product.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2011
  3. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,191
    Thanks Received:
    1,070
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,441
    While Oxburgh was a less than totally neutral choice I would have been OK with it if the investigation was competently done. It wasnt. UEA set the agenda for what was examined and it ignored the controversial papers that were brought up by Climategate. The interview transcripts were not made public and the whole thing only took less than 3 days, including writing the actual Report! It is hard not to come to the conclusion that it was just a whitewash.

    The other British inquiry was no better. Jones was under suspicion of conspiring to delete emails to thwart FOI requests and Muir Russell admitted that his commission did not even ASK Jones if he made those requests or if emails were subsequently deleted! (at least one of the principals involved has since admitted that Jones' request was carried out and emails were deleted)
     
  4. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    Yeah....Like G. Gordon Liddy vouching for Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Mitchell and Hunt. :lol:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,072
    Thanks Received:
    5,473
    Trophy Points:
    1,773
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,502
    The Kooks...The AGW manipulators continue their crap...Not suprised at all

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMqc7PCJ-nc"]YouTube - Hide the decline - satire on global warming alarmists[/ame]
     
  6. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,072
    Thanks Received:
    5,473
    Trophy Points:
    1,773
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,502
    With a wax seal from Nixon...
     
  7. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,466
    Thanks Received:
    5,410
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,305
    Waaaaah......waaaaah, they didn't repeat my lies. sob, snivel.

    Lordy, lordy, you fellows lost. Not a single scientific society anywhere in the world agrees with your idiocy. Not a single Academy of Science, not even lower Slobovia, not a single major university.

    The evidence stands. The globe is warming, and the manmade GHGs are the cause.
     
  8. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,191
    Thanks Received:
    1,070
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,441
    hahaha, you consider that relavent? was OJ innocent or just found not guilty?

    the globe has warmed slightly since the Little Ice Age. so what? catastrophe? highly unlikely.

    the second, and mostly unconnected portion of your statement is that GHGs caused it. unproven and also highly unlikely
     
  9. konradv
    Online

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,546
    Thanks Received:
    2,554
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,662
    Only to the chronically logic-impaired. :cool:
     
  10. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,191
    Thanks Received:
    1,070
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,441
    logic impaired? like the climategate inquiries that thought they could find out what happened by studiously ignoring any questions about what went on?or logically impaired like the media who proclaimed exonneration without seeing if the questions were answered? integrity of scientists- did the hockey team conspire to delete incriminating emails on the manipulation of IPCC2007?. integrity of the science- were the data clipped, trimmed and disguised to support the hockey team's pet theory? the answer to both questions is yes, yet most people believe they were found not guilty.

    I can at least understand the oversimplified logic of konradv's fixation on the small effect of CO2 while he ignores the large effects of water in its different forms. but it is the same style of propaganda that says look here but dont look there.

    I have seen a lot of evidence, and much of it confuses evidence of warming with proof of GHG involvement. logic is a commodity in short supply in many places.
     

Share This Page