Climategate: Totally <bleeping> Awesome!

IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

sounds like a post I made the other day, but a little more written out

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/96672-what-does-climategate-really-mean.html

good OP Manifold. my opinion on climategate

  • It doesn't mean global warming has been debunked.
  • It tells us that some of the scientists who claim global warming is caused by man are akin to those scientists who said Tobacco was safe.
  • It does mean the scientists who have been pushing forward with the man-made global warming theories have been dishonest in their practices.
  • It means that before we pass any legislation, never mind multi-trillion dollar cap and trade legislation, we should re-examine any data that wasn't destroyed or altered.
  • It means several scientists should lose their credentials, respect, and jobs
  • It means the peer reveiw process is not currently credible as emails have shown it was altered to not allow dissenting scientific studies.
  • It means those that were skeptical of the science behind global warming have received some validation of their skepticism
  • It does not mean we should stop trying to reduce pollution and the consumption of foreign oil

And of course the last point, the most important one, will go ignored and we will continue to be complacent, stay the course, even though world population is now at 6.5 billion, which is over 3.5 times the size of the Earth's population at the beginning of the 20th century and roughly double its size in 1960, and all 6.5 billion of us are plugged into some energy source. It's inconceivable that that fact alone wouldn't have a tremendous impact on Mother Earth's environment. If she could speak, she would say this is not a hoax, but she does speak in many ways if only people would start to listen.
 
I'd agree with you except I'm not convinced they cooked the books. There is a lot of disagreement in scientific circles of how to present the data and this group didn't necessarily do something unethical (though of course that possibility exists).

I'm going to reserve judgment until something convincing comes out.



The problem here is that they "enhanced" data and based research on it, then destroyed the original data.

Try doing this on your tax return and see if it stands up under audit.

The Peer Review process needs to have access to the original data or the results of the research are irrelavent.

Example: Code tells Ravi that Code's 1992 Pontiac Bonneville just set the world land speed record, but Code destroyed all of the original data and presents only the "enhanced" data. Enhanced data in this case is a film of Code smiling and saying, "Wow! That was really, really fast! I bet it was the land speed record!"

Should Ravi believe Code or question the results of the enhanced data?

The simple fact that they don't know how to present the data tells me that they don't understand the data and are trying to find a way to support a pre drawn conclusion. If the data is to tell the story and lead them to a conclusion, the data should be presented in an understandable, transparent way.

If the data is to support a pre drawn conclusion it will need to be changed, enhanced, and fit to a path that leads to the conclusion that they already have reached themselves without aid of the data.

By the by, my Bonneville is a great car and it's for sale.

As I said, why not wait for the results of the inquiry?

The emails do not prove that any evidence on climate change was falsified, but they show at least a reluctance to share information with climate sceptics and have led to an independent inquiry during which the head of the university's Climate Research Centre, Phil Jones, has stood aside.

Professor Jones says the emails were "taken completely out of context" and that the university's findings on global warming are backed by at least two research centres in the US.

"One has to wonder if it is a coincidence that this email correspondence has been stolen and published at this time. This may be a concerted attempt to put a question mark over the science of climate change in the run-up to the Copenhagen talks," he said.

Saudis rain on summit&#039;s parade | The Australian
 
so who cares if Manifools thinks somebody is a hacK? The truth is it was a global effort to impose a cap and trade tax and redistribute wealth. You did notice the article I posted yesterday about Australia tabling their cap and trade until the US of KKKA passed theirs?

You are correct as to the real meaning of this fraud.

Politics: rather than the promotion of new sources of energy, the movement has been hijacked by those whose main motivation is the devolution of America, or to accomplish government ownership and control of our energy supply.

Sometimes called the &#8220;Watermelon Effect,&#8221; it is made up of the &#8216;green&#8217; pro-environment policies on the outside, hiding the red Marxist redistributive policies on the inside.

And the denial movement is led by those vested interests who stand to lose money.
 
"It tells us that some of the scientists who claim global warming is caused by man are akin to those scientists who said Tobacco was safe."

this is super funny.....which "scientists" said tobacco was safe? - oh the guys that were paid by big tobacco!

which side is being paid by big oil?


Big oil doesn't need to pay anyone to say anything.

If you haven't noticed, the entire world runs on fossil fuels. Fossil fuels move us, warm us cool us, feed us, clothe us and connect us. Without them, we'd starve about the time we freeze.

Which side is being paid by government?

Hence the Saudis getting cranky about it, they stand to lose big time if the west looks for new sources of energy. And that's what's at stake for them. If we move away from fossil fuels it will hurt them. And in my country it will hurt vested interests, we being - apparently - the largest exporter of coal in the world.

We also have most of the world's uranium, you reckon that's going to stir up some debate on non-fossil fuels energy sources?
 
IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

sounds like a post I made the other day, but a little more written out

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/96672-what-does-climategate-really-mean.html

good OP Manifold. my opinion on climategate

  • It doesn't mean global warming has been debunked.
  • It tells us that some of the scientists who claim global warming is caused by man are akin to those scientists who said Tobacco was safe.
  • It does mean the scientists who have been pushing forward with the man-made global warming theories have been dishonest in their practices.
  • It means that before we pass any legislation, never mind multi-trillion dollar cap and trade legislation, we should re-examine any data that wasn't destroyed or altered.
  • It means several scientists should lose their credentials, respect, and jobs
  • It means the peer reveiw process is not currently credible as emails have shown it was altered to not allow dissenting scientific studies.
  • It means those that were skeptical of the science behind global warming have received some validation of their skepticism
  • It does not mean we should stop trying to reduce pollution and the consumption of foreign oil

And of course the last point, the most important one, will go ignored and we will continue to be complacent, stay the course, even though world population is now at 6.5 billion, which is over 3.5 times the size of the Earth's population at the beginning of the 20th century and roughly double its size in 1960, and all 6.5 billion of us are plugged into some energy source. It's inconceivable that that fact alone wouldn't have a tremendous impact on Mother Earth's environment. If she could speak, she would say this is not a hoax, but she does speak in many ways if only people would start to listen.

Pollution is a real and measurable problem that all people should be trying to find ways to reduce. Smog, poisioned water bodies, dumping of garbage in the ocean, acid rain, cfc and the ozone....all measurable things that we already know exist.

We should all be trying to clean that up.

Now we have these dirtbag scientists who lied, manipulated, and destroyed data totally discrediting, in many american's minds, not only the global warming movement but environmentalists in general. This makes me angry.
 
which side is being paid by BIG GOVERNMENT to do reasearch. Maybe those in government wanted a man-made global warming outcome so they could tax the crap out of citizens and corporations to get their personal special interests rich.

See where that came from now?

Big tobacco paid scientists to say tobacco was safe so they could get rich selling it
Big Govt paid for scientific research and scientists told them what they wanted to hear to continue to receive funding.

Its a very small stretch.
No, it is a loony conspiracy theory...all our politicians would have to be involved and sign off on such a conspiracy...both Bushes, Clinton, etc.

Indeed it is. Since both bushes and clinton were all part of the same progressive political machine i guess they could have all been part of it.

the same puppet masters pull the bush/clinton strings and issues of little importance to them like abortion and gay marriage are used to create the illusion of diversity and choice..this is a massive conspiracy that rivals even 9/11
 
No, it is a loony conspiracy theory...all our politicians would have to be involved and sign off on such a conspiracy...both Bushes, Clinton, etc.

Indeed it is. Since both bushes and clinton were all part of the same progressive political machine i guess they could have all been part of it.

the same puppet masters pull the bush/clinton strings and issues of little importance to them like abortion and gay marriage are used to create the illusion of diversity and choice..this is a massive conspiracy that rivals even 9/11

Remind me the names of the puppet masters again?----I always forget
 
And the denial movement is led by those vested interests who stand to lose money.
Care to clue us all in to who this involved in this "denial movement" and how it is organized?

Its those of us who were skeptical of the science behind the "man-made" global warming idea. Cap and trade stands to cost us money....or was he thinking someone corporate?
 
IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, there is nothing here except a struggle within academia where the battles are fierce because the prizes are usually small and involving small men.

manipulating data is what many do. peer review helps, but surprise....scientists are human.

the agenda of those directly involved in climate warming science is an open secret. the agenda of those fighting science is shrouded. as far as cooking the books goes...we need to see exactly what was supposed to be cooked first.

judgement witheld until facts are in
d.
:cool:
 
Indeed it is. Since both bushes and clinton were all part of the same progressive political machine i guess they could have all been part of it.

the same puppet masters pull the bush/clinton strings and issues of little importance to them like abortion and gay marriage are used to create the illusion of diversity and choice..this is a massive conspiracy that rivals even 9/11

Remind me the names of the puppet masters again?----I always forget

Yes please, list the puppet masters. Enquiring minds want to know.
 
Indeed it is. Since both bushes and clinton were all part of the same progressive political machine i guess they could have all been part of it.

the same puppet masters pull the bush/clinton strings and issues of little importance to them like abortion and gay marriage are used to create the illusion of diversity and choice..this is a massive conspiracy that rivals even 9/11

Remind me the names of the puppet masters again?----I always forget

it is a fairly vast international network of the wealthiest and most powerful working through many rockefeller front groups like the.. CFR.. Tri lateral commission ..w.h.o members of the bilderbergs

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI5hrcwU7Dk[/ame]
 
Last edited:
the same puppet masters pull the bush/clinton strings and issues of little importance to them like abortion and gay marriage are used to create the illusion of diversity and choice..this is a massive conspiracy that rivals even 9/11

Remind me the names of the puppet masters again?----I always forget

it is a fairly vast international network of the wealthiest and most powerful working through many rockefeller front groups like the.. CFR..lateral commission ..w.h.o members of the bilderbergs

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI5hrcwU7Dk[/ame]

good scene.
 
From what I understand that isn't what they did but I know nothing I can say will change your mind. Scientists disagree on methods to distill data all the time.

We'll wait and see what happens. I personally think that this is much ado about nada.

that's why they don't throw it away.

Climate change data dumped - Times Online
I agree...they shouldn't have thrown it away. And even though it isn't clear *this* group of scientists were employed when the data was thrown away they should have at the very least started over.
 
Totally agree Manifold.

The fact that these scientist cooked the books to back up what they are proposing speaks volumes to me. They also purged the real data to back up their findings. They want everyone to believe that we humans are the sole cause for "Global Warming.".This is something they apparantly can't prove without fudgiing their findings. Guess they don't look into the history of the planet to often either.

Most aren't claiming human activity is the "sole cause" of global warming, but one of a number of contributing factors coming together at the wrong time to create "perfect storm". Unfortunately, human activity is the only factor we can hope to have any control over.

Thanks for being a perfect example of yet another partisan hack. :)
 
IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

What's "awesome" is the political football the global warming issue has become. I can't remember the scientist's name on Morning Joe (Dr. Bach.....???), who has been a guest on that program before, taking to task The Wall Street Journal for jumping into the fray, all but calling environmental scientists golddiggers. The doc's point was that scientists (on both "sides" of the issue) are dedicated to their work; let them sort it out, and although he didn't just come right out an say it, just shut the fuck up unless you're a scientist yourself. It serves no purpose to fan the flames using the topic of global warming as a blow torch to gain political favor for one side or the other..
Good. Al Gore SHOULD STFU. He should have never even opened his mouth about it, ever, unless he was going to be honest in relaying the science.
 
CO2 right now is at .0038 percent of the atmosphere. If we do nothing it might get all the way up to
.005% of the atmosphere in 100 years. if we do everything they tell us to it will only rise to about
.0045% so we are basically being asked to under go econmic castration to reduce the rise in the amount of atmospheric CO2 by .0005%. And you wonder why people are asking if this trip is really necessary. Oh and one of the unfoseen consequences of the incresed cost of energy usage is likely to be a dramatic increase in deforestation as people unwilling to freeze to death but unable to heat their homes as they once were start using wood again.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top