Boxer: Hackers should face criminal probe over 'Climategate'

[slackjawed]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

There must be more emails than the ones I read. Where are the 15 year old ones? link please?

 

[Truthmatters]

OK guys I cant find them.

I have read the articles talking about them but cant find teh emails themselves.

Please provide me with these smoking gun emails?

 

[Truthmatters]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

There must be more emails than the ones I read. Where are the 15 year old ones? link please?

From what I read they were from 1996

 

[Immanuel]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

Why would I be embarrassed? I have not commented upon the emails, the study or the data at all because I have not read them. In fact, today is the first time I have even participated in a discussion about this issue.

Immie

 

[del]

OK guys I cant find them.

I have read the articles talking about them but cant find teh emails themselves.

Please provide me with these smoking gun emails?

you first, asshat. let's see the 15 yr old emails that you haven't read.

 

[Meister]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

When statement like this is made, does it really make any difference, LiesMatter?

In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over the last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a “trick” employed by another scientist, Michael Mann, to “hide the decline” in temperatures.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html

 

[Truthmatters]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

Why would I be embarrassed? I have not commented upon the emails, the study or the data at all because I have not read them. In fact, today is the first time I have even participated in a discussion about this issue.

Immie

Then the comment wasnt for you

 

[Immanuel]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

There must be more emails than the ones I read. Where are the 15 year old ones? link please?

From what I read they were from 1996

Um, isn't this right about the time Al Gore jumped on the GW band wagon? That is a question. I don't know if it is true or not.

Immie

 

[Truthmatters]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

When statement like this is made, does it really make any difference, LiesMatter?

In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over the last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a “trick” employed by another scientist, Michael Mann, to “hide the decline” in temperatures.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html

Dr. Mann, a professor at Pennsylvania State University, confirmed in an interview that the e-mail message was real. He said the choice of words by his colleague was poor but noted that scientists often used the word “trick” to refer to a good way to solve a problem, “and not something secret.”


Where the hell are the emails themselves?

 

[uscitizen]

Hasn't it always been with the left (at least the last 20 years) to attack the messenger, and ignore the message?

Yeah like we did with Plames husbands yellowcake report?

 

[Immanuel]

they are 15 year old emails how the hell are they going to prove that data in a study were manipulated?

Think hard about it Immy.

The right is claiming GW doesnt exsist on the back of a few 15 year old emails.

Does the name Orely tates ring a bell?

You guys are going to be very embarrassed when this one pans out.

Why would I be embarrassed? I have not commented upon the emails, the study or the data at all because I have not read them. In fact, today is the first time I have even participated in a discussion about this issue.

Immie

Then the comment wasnt for you

Okay, but you addressed the post to me and used the words "you guys". What did you assume I would think?

Hey, its been a long time since you and I have argued about anything. I'm starting to get nastalic here.

Immie

 

[slackjawed]

The leaked material comprised more than 1,000 e-mails, 2,000 documents, as well as commented Fortran source code, pertaining to climate change research covering a period from 1996 until 2009.
Toss out the 15 year old ones, the rest still indicate that the 'science' behind this religious movement is very dishonest and therefore flawed.

 

[Truthmatters]

Where is your PROOF they show that?

 

[Immanuel]

The leaked material comprised more than 1,000 e-mails, 2,000 documents, as well as commented Fortran source code, pertaining to climate change research covering a period from 1996 until 2009.
Toss out the 15 year old ones, the rest still indicate that the 'science' behind this religious movement is very dishonest and therefore flawed.

May I trouble you for a link if you have one rather than having to hunt down your source?

Please and Thank you.

Immie

 

[Truthmatters]

go get em and we will go through them.

I have not read them and have seen this type of hype from the right before.

How do they prove that data was manipulated?

The Data will prove wether it was manipulated after through investigation.

Its like playing telephone to claim 15 year old emails prove anything.

It's cool when people attack the message without even knowing what the message even is.
It's easy enough for you to Google it, and read the emails, they're all over the internet.
The emails are very incriminating...how do I know? I read the emails.

I cant find them.

Please direct me to the place you found them and read them from.

Or maybe you didnt really read any of them and only read snippets in articles?

 

[Meister]

go get em and we will go through them.

I have not read them and have seen this type of hype from the right before.

How do they prove that data was manipulated?

The Data will prove wether it was manipulated after through investigation.

Its like playing telephone to claim 15 year old emails prove anything.

It's cool when people attack the message without even knowing what the message even is.
It's easy enough for you to Google it, and read the emails, they're all over the internet.
The emails are very incriminating...how do I know? I read the emails.

I cant find them.

Please direct me to the place you found them and read them from.

Or maybe you didnt really read any of them and only read snippets in articles?

Oppps, my mis speak, or the left would say I lied...they are the snippets.

 

[Meister]

Hasn't it always been with the left (at least the last 20 years) to attack the messenger, and ignore the message?

Yeah like we did with Plames husbands yellowcake report?

Are you talking about Plames husbands phoney yellowcake report?

 

[Truthmatters]

So you did not read the emails yet you jumped all over me for not reading them?

This is my whole point with my original post.

You who think this is the smoking gun you wish and dream it is are VER WRONG.

It is bullshit and they are stolen PERSONAL emails where the guys are talking as people and not conspiring to do anything but prove what they believe their scientific investigatoions have proven to them.

They know the asshole scientists who are claiming to be against the theory are bought and paid for by the Corps to kill the thoery.

Your team of scientists are corporate whores and these guys hated them for good reason.

 

[Big Fitz]

The end does NOT justify the means.
That is one fundamental difference between the right and left.

I agree the hackers should be prosecuted under appropriate laws and jurisdictions.

Remember that the next time the libs get a 'Whistleblower' into something they find dangerous. We can count on you demanding their prosecution while the crime goes by unchallenged? Good to know.

Thanks for speaking out for the hypocrites.

 

[Truthmatters]

The end does NOT justify the means.
That is one fundamental difference between the right and left.

I agree the hackers should be prosecuted under appropriate laws and jurisdictions.

Remember that the next time the libs get a 'Whistleblower' into something they find dangerous. We can count on you demanding their prosecution while the crime goes by unchallenged? Good to know.

Thanks for speaking out for the hypocrites.

For them to be whistleblowers they have to uncover something.

This is a bullshit issue and there is no there there