ClimateGate Totally Ignored By TV News Outlets Except Fox

[Modbert]

Modo, I have already stated twice about my misuse of the word normal where I should of said it was uncommon. It was only after I realized my error. If you want to continue to act five, and be like "Oh my god, you made a error! You're human!" then be my guest.

However, I'll ask again, do you want to discuss this like adults or do you want to act like you've discovered a new planet with pointing out something I've already admitted?

A yes or no will be enough by the way. I don't need a long-winded answer.

 

[Si modo]

Modo, I have already stated twice about my misuse of the word normal where I should of said it was uncommon. ....

Finally. I mistook nothing. YOU were flat wrong.

.... It was only after I realized my error. If you want to continue to act five, and be like "Oh my god, you made a error! You're human!" then be my guest.

However, I'll ask again, do you want to discuss this like adults or do you want to act like you've discovered a new planet with pointing out something I've already admitted?

A yes or no will be enough by the way. I don't need a long-winded answer.

Now that you have finally acted somewhat like an adult, sure.

 

[Modbert]

Now that you have finally acted somewhat like an adult, sure.

I wasn't wrong about it being not rare. I was wrong about my word usage. I have admitted that three times now. Now, we can move on and discuss this more throughly. I have acted like an adult throughout this thread by the way.

 

[Si modo]

Now that we are all agreed that marginalization and dishonesty are NOT the norm in the scientific community, let's continue.

 

[Big Fitz]

I'm not doing anything to your manhood. I'm simply saying you should apologize for jumping to shove your self-righteousness in my face when you should of asked me to clarify. You could of avoided typing all that up by asking me a simple question.

Then you should not have used the phrase 'man up'. The inherent assumption made by that statement is that the person it is directed at is being immature, or somehow less of a 'man'. This unto itself if I want to split hairs is worth an apology. But since I am a 'man', I also know I'm a big enough man to have a thick skin to this kinda stuff and don't need an apology.

Calling me self righteous though I do find a tad insulting, as I was not being self righteous at all. I was correcting a logical fallacy that is for some unfathomable reason often popped off by many an ignorant environmentalist. Whether or not you hold to these things was unclear. I could have asked, but instead erred on the side of public service and clarified the issue for everyone else (receiving a thanks in the matter as well) to see.

So take from this what you want, but I've still nothing to apologize for, nor are you obligated to apologize to me for your shots, real or imagined. We can both pull up our big boy panties and soldier on.

 

[Modbert]

Now that we are all agreed that marginalization and dishonesty are NOT the norm in the scientific community, let's continue.

Thanksgiving dinner was good.

 

[saveliberty]

It is not normal practice. Perhaps as a freshman undergraduate student, not even a student of the sciences, you THINK you know what you're talking about with respect to the scientific community, but you do not.

It is not normal practice. Finding one example or even ten examples of it actually happening does nothing to prove that it IS a normal practice. Look up the definition of normal.

My age in this case has no foundation and for you to try to use that against me is dishonest. What matters is the knowledge on the subject.

What I'm saying is that this sort of behavior being exhibited in this case supposedly is not uncommon. So while you and others may like to act like it is, it is an ugly truth of Science at times.

Why do you think scientists have to be so protective and secretive of their work until they finish it? If everyone was hunky dory and so honest, why hide anything?

There would have been no discovery of HIV, by anyone, if others hadn't made breakthroughs before them. The roles of science is to seek the truth, wherever that may lie in the field of endeavor. Formulate a question, hypothesis, test, observe, record, make conclusion. May be done many times before finding something worth sharing, until then competitive folks keep it quiet, otherwise bragging might get it stolen.

In this case, over nearly 2 decades it seems that there was one 'group' that gained control of universities, government grants and ears, then publications of 'Standard.' They were preventing other sides to even submit; meanwhile passing off their papers as 'peer reviewed' even when their numbers, conclusions, etc., were questioned. They refused government requests for FOI materials, it appears they destroyed emails and 'lost' data.

Robert, you are really defending that?

Indeed, as a scientist, you are supposed to be noting in your findings ANY possible problem with them. It is often difficult to eliminate all variables except the one being studied. You must account for this in your data collection and clearly report what you did to avoid the variables.

You shouldn't be preventing dissenting research and publishing of papers, but preparing a paper to refute the findings. Despite their background as people of science, human nature kicked in and they lied when caught.

 

[Si modo]

My age in this case has no foundation and for you to try to use that against me is dishonest. What matters is the knowledge on the subject.

What I'm saying is that this sort of behavior being exhibited in this case supposedly is not uncommon. So while you and others may like to act like it is, it is an ugly truth of Science at times.

Why do you think scientists have to be so protective and secretive of their work until they finish it? If everyone was hunky dory and so honest, why hide anything?

There would have been no discovery of HIV, by anyone, if others hadn't made breakthroughs before them. The roles of science is to seek the truth, wherever that may lie in the field of endeavor. Formulate a question, hypothesis, test, observe, record, make conclusion. May be done many times before finding something worth sharing, until then competitive folks keep it quiet, otherwise bragging might get it stolen.

In this case, over nearly 2 decades it seems that there was one 'group' that gained control of universities, government grants and ears, then publications of 'Standard.' They were preventing other sides to even submit; meanwhile passing off their papers as 'peer reviewed' even when their numbers, conclusions, etc., were questioned. They refused government requests for FOI materials, it appears they destroyed emails and 'lost' data.

Robert, you are really defending that?

Indeed, as a scientist, you are supposed to be noting in your findings ANY possible problem with them.
It is often difficult to eliminate all variables except the one being studied. You must account for this in your data collection and clearly report what you did to avoid the variables.

You shouldn't be preventing dissenting research and publishing of papers, but preparing a paper to refute the findings. Despite their background as people of science, human nature kicked in and they lied when caught.

Absolutely. One's work is considered incomplete if this is not included. Peer-review is supposed to find those omissions, as well. The reviewer will point those omissions out to the author and return the work to the author for this inclusion.

 

[blu]

I enjoy the people who say the emails prove GW wrong when they don't even understand basic science. they could easily be replaced with parrots or a copy/paste bot.

 

[Oddball]

I enjoy blind loyalists who deflect and change the subject, in a lame attempt to distract from the issue at hand. They could easily be replaced with parrots or a copy/paste bot.

 

[blu]

nope, I didn't believe in GW since day 1, I just don't see why the republicans are starting a circle jerk over content they don't even understand.

 

[Oddball]

First of all, I'm not a republican. Haven't even voted for one since '94.

Secondly, you don't need to be a PhD in linguistics to recognize language that indicates fudging of numbers in your favor, destruction of repudiating evidence (in the legal world, that's known as obstruction), collusion to exclude those who produce that evidence from the process, and conspiracies to destroy careers and publications that don't toe your line. Then, we're also looking at criminal charges of fraud, as it relates to the research grants these hacks have received, under the guise of doing above-board scientific research.

And that's before the coders have gone to work to unravel all the information.

If that's science, I don't want to hear about that bridge for sale.

 

[Big Fitz]

First of all, I'm not a republican. Haven't even voted for one since '94.

Secondly, you don't need to be a PhD in linguistics to recognize language that indicates fudging of numbers in your favor, destruction of repudiating evidence (in the legal world, that's known as obstruction), collusion to exclude those who produce that evidence from the process, and conspiracies to destroy careers and publications that don't toe your line. Then, we're also looking at criminal charges of fraud, as it relates to the research grants these hacks have received, under the guise of doing above-board scientific research.

And that's before the coders have gone to work to unravel all the information.

If that's science, I don't want to hear about that bridge for sale.

How about some nice ocean view property in Wyoming? You'd want that wouldn't you?

 

[saveliberty]

First of all, I'm not a republican. Haven't even voted for one since '94.

Secondly, you don't need to be a PhD in linguistics to recognize language that indicates fudging of numbers in your favor, destruction of repudiating evidence (in the legal world, that's known as obstruction), collusion to exclude those who produce that evidence from the process, and conspiracies to destroy careers and publications that don't toe your line. Then, we're also looking at criminal charges of fraud, as it relates to the research grants these hacks have received, under the guise of doing above-board scientific research.

And that's before the coders have gone to work to unravel all the information.

If that's science, I don't want to hear about that bridge for sale.

How about some nice ocean view property in Wyoming? You'd want that wouldn't you?

I was under the impression that is where ocean front property was going to be.

 

[saveliberty]

Modo, I have already stated twice about my misuse of the word normal where I should of said it was uncommon. It was only after I realized my error. If you want to continue to act five, and be like "Oh my god, you made a error! You're human!" then be my guest.

However, I'll ask again, do you want to discuss this like adults or do you want to act like you've discovered a new planet with pointing out something I've already admitted?

A yes or no will be enough by the way. I don't need a long-winded answer.

Consider yourself bopped with a cardboard tube. Have a nice day.

 

[Big Fitz]

First of all, I'm not a republican. Haven't even voted for one since '94.

Secondly, you don't need to be a PhD in linguistics to recognize language that indicates fudging of numbers in your favor, destruction of repudiating evidence (in the legal world, that's known as obstruction), collusion to exclude those who produce that evidence from the process, and conspiracies to destroy careers and publications that don't toe your line. Then, we're also looking at criminal charges of fraud, as it relates to the research grants these hacks have received, under the guise of doing above-board scientific research.

And that's before the coders have gone to work to unravel all the information.

If that's science, I don't want to hear about that bridge for sale.

How about some nice ocean view property in Wyoming? You'd want that wouldn't you?

I was under the impression that is where ocean front property was going to be.

No no... you're thinking Nevada.

 

[saveliberty]

How about some nice ocean view property in Wyoming? You'd want that wouldn't you?

I was under the impression that is where ocean front property was going to be.

No no... you're thinking Nevada.

Neat, that stuff is cheap right now.

 

[Annie]

I was under the impression that is where ocean front property was going to be.

No no... you're thinking Nevada.

Neat, that stuff is cheap right now.

Chicago, salt.

On the other hand, are there serious problems with water? Salinity? Yes. Do we want lower costs? Listen to the opposition. It's an extension of 'hide the decline.'

 

[Political Junky]

The Obama administration has another reason to hate Fox: it appears to be the only national television news outlet in America interested in the growing ClimateGate scandal.

Despite last Friday morning's bombshell that hacked e-mail messages from a British university suggested a conspiracy by some of the world's leading global warming alarmists -- many with direct ties to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- to manipulate temperature data, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and NBC through Monday evening have completely ignored the subject.

LexisNexis searches indicate that NPR appears to also be part of this news boycott.

By contrast, here are some of the stories news organizations apparently favored by the Obama adminstration have covered since ClimateGate broke:

ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Friday did a very lengthy piece about Oprah Winfrey ending her syndicated daytime talk show
ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Monday did a lengthy piece on new revelations involving the marital affair of Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.)
CBS "Evening News" Saturday reported a ten-year-old pianist playing at Carnegie Hall
CBS "Evening News" Sunday did lengthy pieces on the website FreeCreditReport.com not being free and the movie "New Moon"
CBS "Evening News" Monday did lengthy pieces about defective drywall and a man who makes money wearing t-shirts
NBC "Nightly News" Friday reported on Switzerland's supercollider being turned back on
NBC "Nightly News" Saturday did a somewhat lengthy report on food carts
NBC "Nightly News" Sunday reported the release of British singer Susan Boyle's CD, and then followed it up with another report Monday on her promoting it.
It's not that these aren't valid news stories, but should they ALL be of greater importance than a scandal involving scientists from around the world including some employed by NASA and American colleges?

ClimateGate Totally Ignored By TV News Outlets Except Fox | NewsBusters.org

And Fox is like a dog with a bone ... they won't let go of that story.

 

[Big Fitz]

The Obama administration has another reason to hate Fox: it appears to be the only national television news outlet in America interested in the growing ClimateGate scandal.

Despite last Friday morning's bombshell that hacked e-mail messages from a British university suggested a conspiracy by some of the world's leading global warming alarmists -- many with direct ties to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- to manipulate temperature data, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and NBC through Monday evening have completely ignored the subject.

LexisNexis searches indicate that NPR appears to also be part of this news boycott.

By contrast, here are some of the stories news organizations apparently favored by the Obama adminstration have covered since ClimateGate broke:

ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Friday did a very lengthy piece about Oprah Winfrey ending her syndicated daytime talk show
ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" Monday did a lengthy piece on new revelations involving the marital affair of Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.)
CBS "Evening News" Saturday reported a ten-year-old pianist playing at Carnegie Hall
CBS "Evening News" Sunday did lengthy pieces on the website FreeCreditReport.com not being free and the movie "New Moon"
CBS "Evening News" Monday did lengthy pieces about defective drywall and a man who makes money wearing t-shirts
NBC "Nightly News" Friday reported on Switzerland's supercollider being turned back on
NBC "Nightly News" Saturday did a somewhat lengthy report on food carts
NBC "Nightly News" Sunday reported the release of British singer Susan Boyle's CD, and then followed it up with another report Monday on her promoting it.
It's not that these aren't valid news stories, but should they ALL be of greater importance than a scandal involving scientists from around the world including some employed by NASA and American colleges?

ClimateGate Totally Ignored By TV News Outlets Except Fox | NewsBusters.org

And Fox is like a dog with a bone ... they won't let go of that story.

Like Woodward and Burnstein.