Climategate 2.0: Santer angry over not being able to silence skeptics

I may be off base, but seems to me the story is that the scientists that were global warmists were under enormous pressure, for both science and payroll, to publish 'proof.' It wasn't there, at least not yet. So they went with models that would look acceptable, afterall, that's what was wanted.

They're burned now.

That doesn't mean that pollutants aren't causing change, but the ability to prove it has now been ramped up.

I think that there are many people who look at science as having some crystal ball to predict exactly what is going to happen.

I know of, conservatively, 2 dozen persons who have died from cancer. Some went in a few months, some in a few years. Some lingered for several years while others actually had a remission prior to passing.

When you take the science of a disease in one person and it can't be determined how long that patient will live inside a few years, one could imagine how difficult it is to predict a global event.

So your point is that science cannot predict many things accurately because there are likely many unaccounted for factors. True.
So why do the global warming freaks push this shit as absolute certainty we're gonna die unless we spend billions of other people's money to solve a problem that may not exist?
 
I've always been stunned that left wing green assholes believe in anything Ken Lay started.

Head honcho of Enron goes hey we can trade bogus credits and make a batch of cash and lefties of today actually want to back Ken?

Just shows what asswipes they are that they don't even know the truth that Ken was the "father" of carbon credits.
 
Did anyone know that Earth day was founded on the 100TH Birthday of the communism leader Lenin? I don't believe this to be a coincidence.

Apparently Green is the new Red.

Ecology%20Flag%20-%20wht%20bkgd.jpg

So seeking a better future for one's descendents is communistic?

What I see here is another extroidinerily ignorant individual.
 
In other words, find a paid off gang of political hacks who support cutting their power and influence down to size.

It would be easier to find an honest politician.



Come on, you ignorant asshole, find me one scientific society, one major university, or one national academy of science that states that AGW is a hoax. Or even incorrect.

You cannot do that, because such does not exist, even in outer Slobovia.

Ah yes, Pattycake, far easier to characterize all the scientists in the world as dishonest, corrupt, and frauds, than admit what a really ignorant dingbat you truly are.
 
Did anyone know that Earth day was founded on the 100TH Birthday of the communism leader Lenin? I don't believe this to be a coincidence.

Apparently Green is the new Red.

Ecology%20Flag%20-%20wht%20bkgd.jpg

So seeking a better future for one's descendents is communistic?

What I see here is another extroidinerily ignorant individual.

Communists are always claiming to seek a better future for our descendents. Stalin and Mao must have each said it 10,000 times.
 
In other words, find a paid off gang of political hacks who support cutting their power and influence down to size.

It would be easier to find an honest politician.

Ah yes, Pattycake, far easier to characterize all the scientists in the world as dishonest, corrupt, and frauds, than admit what a really ignorant dingbat you truly are.

No, only most of the climate scientists sucking on the government tit are corrupt. There's a mountain of emails to support that proposition.
 
In other words, find a paid off gang of political hacks who support cutting their power and influence down to size.

It would be easier to find an honest politician.


Come on, you ignorant asshole, find me one scientific society, one major university, or one national academy of science that states that AGW is a hoax. Or even incorrect.

You cannot do that, because such does not exist, even in outer Slobovia.

Ah yes, Pattycake, far easier to characterize all the scientists in the world as dishonest, corrupt, and frauds, than admit what a really ignorant dingbat you truly are.

So now ALL THE SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD support AGW?

In your fevered dreams, Roxy. :rofl:
 
AGU Position Statement: Human Impacts on Climate

AGU Position Statement
Human Impacts on Climate
Adopted by Council December 2003
Revised and Reaffirmed December 2007

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our scientific understanding of the climate.

During recent millennia of relatively stable climate, civilization became established and populations have grown rapidly. In the next 50 years, even the lower limit of impending climate change—an additional global mean warming of 1°C above the last decade—is far beyond the range of climate variability experienced during the past thousand years and poses global problems in planning for and adapting to it. Warming greater than 2°C above 19th century levels is projected to be disruptive, reducing global agricultural productivity, causing widespread loss of biodiversity, and—if sustained over centuries—melting much of the Greenland ice sheet with ensuing rise in sea level of several meters. If this 2°C warming is to be avoided, then our net annual emissions of CO2 must be reduced by more than 50 percent within this century. With such projections, there are many sources of scientific uncertainty, but none are known that could make the impact of climate change inconsequential. Given the uncertainty in climate projections, there can be surprises that may cause more dramatic disruptions than anticipated from the most probable model projections.

With climate change, as with ozone depletion, the human footprint on Earth is apparent. The cause of disruptive climate change, unlike ozone depletion, is tied to energy use and runs through modern society. Solutions will necessarily involve all aspects of society. Mitigation strategies and adaptation responses will call for collaborations across science, technology, industry, and government. Members of the AGU, as part of the scientific community, collectively have special responsibilities: to pursue research needed to understand it; to educate the public on the causes, risks, and hazards; and to communicate clearly and objectively with those who can implement policies to shape future climate.
The warmest year on record is 1932 second 1998 third 1921
NASA data glitch because of a y2k bug debunked that lie about the 90's..

The glaciers are melting at a rate that would make it 350 years not 35

the oceans are not rising at the predicted rates
Here dumbass:
Speak truth to liberals: Global warming debunking resource guide
This garbage has been debunked so many times that my links have started to disappear.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone know that Earth day was founded on the 100TH Birthday of the communism leader Lenin? I don't believe this to be a coincidence.

Apparently Green is the new Red.

Ecology%20Flag%20-%20wht%20bkgd.jpg

So seeking a better future for one's descendents is communistic?

What I see here is another extroidinerily ignorant individual.

Did I say that? No. Unless you're denying that it was in fact founded on his 100th birthday. I was simply stating a fact to make people think, for once. If nothing else it certainly makes you wonder about the real intentions of the green movement. By throwing around personal insults you've only proved you have no argument.
 

Forum List

Back
Top