NSIDC Caught Tampering With Climate Records Watch Global Warmest Crew...DENY FACTS. Shocking!

[Markle]

]You have been in denial about this fraud for many years. You avoid reading anything that does not support your view. That's predictable. Progressives are far less likely to read opposing views than are Conservatives.

I didn't ask you for another weepy rant directed the mean ol' liberals who make you mad because they're always debunking your nonsense with facts and evidence, which is so unfair.

I asked you to explain, in your own words, how NSIDC was faking sea ice data, as you claimed in the thread title.

If you have no such evidence, then be honest enough to admit it. Don't try to deflect, because that just confirms you can't back up your crazy claim, and you only made it because you were parroting some nonsense that you'd been spoonfed.

Please attempt to read the article.

 

[mamooth]

No. The topic of this thread is supposed fraud by the NSIDC, so quite trying to deflect from the topic with irrelevant conspiracy theories.

Tell us, in your own words, exactly what fraud the NSIDC engaged in.

You won't, of course, because you can't. You have no evidence at all for your crazy claim, and you just parroted a weird conspiracy rant. Why not just admit that, instead of digging deeper?

 

[Markle]

No. The topic of this thread is supposed fraud by the NSIDC, so quite trying to deflect from the topic with irrelevant conspiracy theories.

Tell us, in your own words, exactly what fraud the NSIDC engaged in.

You won't, of course, because you can't. You have no evidence at all for your crazy claim, and you just parroted a weird conspiracy rant. Why not just admit that, instead of digging deeper?

Conspiracy theories...is that the best you've got? I bet you're a truther aren't you?

This billion dollar fraud has been going on for years. All your organizations are doing is trying to protect each other's lucrative gravy train.

Bet you don't even know this existed or happened. Right...ANOTHER CONSPIRACY.

As you know, Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC and NASA findings came from EAU.

14th February, 2010

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing (it has now been disclosed that all the “raw data” was DUMPED!

There has been no global warming since 1995

Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good as it should be.

WHAT????
[…]

Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Phil Jones has said that he considered suicide for his part in this worldwide scam.

Let us also recall: The e-mails leaked in the fall of 2009 allow us to trace the machinations of a small but influential band of British and US climate scientists who played the lead role in the IPCC reports. It appears that this group, which controlled access to basic temperature data, was able to produce a "warming" by manipulating the analysis of the data, but refused to share information on the basic data or details of their analysis with independent scientists who requested them -- in violation of Freedom of Information laws. In fact, they went so far as to keep any dissenting views from being published -- by monopolizing the peer-review process, aided by ideologically cooperative editors of prestigious journals, like Science and Nature.

We learn from the e-mails that the ClimateGate gang was able to "hide the decline" [of global temperature] by applying what they termed as "tricks," and that they intimidated editors and forced out those judged to be "uncooperative." No doubt, thorough investigations, now in progress or planned, will disclose the full range of their nefarious activities. But it is clear that this small cabal was able to convince much of the world that climate disasters were impending -- unless drastic steps were taken. Not only were most of the media, public, and politicians misled, but so were many scientists, national academies of science, and professional organizations -- and even the Norwegian committee that awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, the chief apostle of climate alarmism.

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

 

[Crick]

Did it ever occur to you to wonder why, with 5-6 years having passed since CRU's email server was broken in to, the number of climate scientists, scientists in general and the public at large who accept the IPCC's coclusions has done nothing but grow?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Did it ever occur to you to wonder why, with 5-6 years having passed since CRU's email server was broken in to, the number of climate scientists, scientists in general and the public at large who accept the IPCC's coclusions has done nothing but grow?

3% or 0.5% is the actual number of scientists who actually believe this crap.

Is not growing.. Those in the general public who have are alerted to the scam has grown by 58%. The lies by John Cook and others claiming 97% are just that, flat out lies...

 

[Crick]

So where are the yells and screams of protest from climate scientists at the dozen or so surveys, polls and studies that have shown overwhelming support among them for the IPCC conclusions? How do you explain Cook's phase II, where he asked authors face to face what they thought and got an even stronger response accepting AGW?

Anyone arguing that Legate got it right has marked themselves as a complete fool.

 

[Billy_Bob]

So where are the yells and screams of protest from climate scientists at the dozen or so surveys, polls and studies that have shown overwhelming support among them for the IPCC conclusions? How do you explain Cook's phase II, where he asked authors face to face what they thought and got an even stronger response accepting AGW?

Anyone arguing that Legate got it right has marked themselves as a complete fool.

LOL...

What a fool.. You cant even be honest with yourself. How can we expect you to debate honestly?

 

[Billy_Bob]

HAHAHAHAAAAhahahaaaaa... Let's see the data.

Here's some

Really, let's see yours.

And yet. you have no Empirical, Observed, evidence that man is causing any of this and no evidence of how your perceived correlation is man caused.. while ignoring natural variation..

Your graphs mean jack shit... There pretty, but mean nothing.

In Support of the A in AGW

 

[Markle]

Did it ever occur to you to wonder why, with 5-6 years having passed since CRU's email server was broken in to, the number of climate scientists, scientists in general and the public at large who accept the IPCC's coclusions has done nothing but grow?

Broken into but you do not deny that what was found was fraudulent efforts to conceal the FACT that all the groups who profit most from the scam were, and are manipulating data.

Now we have another scandal revealed.

 

[mamooth]

Conspiracy theories...is that the best you've got? I bet you're a truther aren't you?

After being directly asked 3 times, you still haven't provided any evidence for your initial claim that NSIDC was faking data. Instead, you keep going off on hysterical conspiracy cult rants.

You've been busted, fraud. You tried to push a faked story about NSIDC, you got caught, and now you're crying, and trying to deflect by any means possible.

Meanwhile, I'm carving another notch in my fraud-smacking stick. About to fall apart, that stick is, it's got so many notches in it.

You still have a chance to demonstrate you're not a fraud. Just show us this evidence that NSIDC faked data. Or retract your claim. Or have another meltdown, and confirm to everyone your fraudulent nature.

So, are you getting paid to push your various fabrications? Just asking. If you are, your bosses aren't getting their money's worth. You're a very inept shill.

 

[mamooth]

3% or 0.5% is the actual number of scientists who actually believe this crap.

Very few medical papers now specifically endorse the germ theory of disease.

Hence, according to Billy's astonishingly stupid standards, most medical researchers actively reject the germ theory of disease.

And since nobody is actually stupid enough to fail that spectacularly, it means Billy is being deliberately dishonest when he uses that same train of logic with climate science.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Look, the ice refused to melt according to the AGW Models, clearly labeling it as a DENIER! So it got adjusted accordingly

 

[Markle]

Conspiracy theories...is that the best you've got? I bet you're a truther aren't you?

After being directly asked 3 times, you still haven't provided any evidence for your initial claim that NSIDC was faking data. Instead, you keep going off on hysterical conspiracy cult rants.

You've been busted, fraud. You tried to push a faked story about NSIDC, you got caught, and now you're crying, and trying to deflect by any means possible.

Meanwhile, I'm carving another notch in my fraud-smacking stick. About to fall apart, that stick is, it's got so many notches in it.

You still have a chance to demonstrate you're not a fraud. Just show us this evidence that NSIDC faked data. Or retract your claim. Or have another meltdown, and confirm to everyone your fraudulent nature.

So, are you getting paid to push your various fabrications? Just asking. If you are, your bosses aren't getting their money's worth. You're a very inept shill.

I take it you continue to refuse to read the article I posted. Not at all surprising. As you know, Progressives are far less likely read information which does not support their view. Conservatives, on the other hand, are far more likely to read and consider opposing views.

Read more:
Icegate: Now NSIDC Caught Tampering With Climate Records

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Awww...the Global Warming worshipers are NOT going to like this, not one bit!

Icegate: Now NSIDC Caught Tampering With Climate Records

by JAMES DELINGPOLE28 Apr 20161,726

James Delingpole
“It is not my job to sit down and read peer-reviewed papers because I simply haven't got the time … I am an interpreter of interpretations.” [4]“[URL='http://youtu.be/0wmuhKzYp4s?t=1m26s']Climate change denier James Delingpole doesn't do science,” YouTube Video uploaded by user “sciencenotvoodo0” on January 25, 2011. Adapted from BBC one's “Science Under Attack.”[/URL]

Credentials

• Degree in English Literature.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

December 1, 2015

James Delingpole wrote a blog on Breitbart.com celebrating the death of Maurice Strong, a respected Canadian businessman, diplomat and high-ranking United Nations official. Delingpole's piece, titled “Ding Dong - The Godfather of Global Warming is Dead!”, described Maurice Strong: “he probably did more to make your world a more expensive, inconvenient, overregulated, hectored, bullied, lied-to, sclerotic, undemocratic place than anyone post Hitler, Stalin and (his personal friend) Mao.”

(In sharp contrast, The New York Times obituary for Maurice Strong quoted UNEP executive director Achim Steiner crediting Strong with “making “history by launching a new era of international environmental diplomacy.”)

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

If you ever needed (more) proof that the professional deniers are driven by a mindless rage devoid of any actual science, I urge you to read James Delingpole’s latest piece.
Denier Delingpole Wishes For ‘Climate Nuremberg’, Says ‘Hanging Is Far Too Good’ For Climate Scientists!
It will nauseate you — consider yourself warned. But I think it’s important to dissect this hate speech in detail because Delingpole seems to think that hate speech isn’t hate speech if you just use rhetoric — the figures of speech, like metaphor.

Should Michael Mann be given the electric chair for having concocted arguably the most risibly inept, misleading, cherry-picking, worthless and mendacious graph – the Hockey Stick – in the history of junk science?

Should George Monbiot be hanged by the neck for his decade or so’s hysterical promulgation of the great climate change scam and other idiocies too numerous to mention?

Should Tim Flannery be fed to the crocodiles for the role he has played in the fleecing of the Australian taxpayer and the diversion of scarce resources into pointless projects like all the eye-wateringly expensive desalination plants built as a result of his doomy prognostications about water shortages caused by catastrophic anthropogenic global warming?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Awww...the Global Warming worshipers are NOT going to like this, not one bit!

Icegate: Now NSIDC Caught Tampering With Climate Records

by JAMES DELINGPOLE28 Apr 20161,726

The entire thread claiming NASA , NOAA and NSIDC are corrupt frauds is based on the insane rants of an English major who proclaims he does not have time to read Science...he also wants to kill Scientists.... you denialist are a shameless unhinged bunch LOL

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

]You have been in denial about this fraud for many years. You avoid reading anything that does not support your view. That's predictable. Progressives are far less likely to read opposing views than are Conservatives.

I didn't ask you for another weepy rant directed the mean ol' liberals who make you mad because they're always debunking your nonsense with facts and evidence, which is so unfair.

I asked you to explain, in your own words, how NSIDC was faking sea ice data, as you claimed in the thread title.

If you have no such evidence, then be honest enough to admit it. Don't try to deflect, because that just confirms you can't back up your crazy claim, and you only made it because you were parroting some nonsense that you'd been spoonfed.

Please attempt to read the article.

the article by the English literature dude who says he does not have time to read science and wants to kill Scientists?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Did it ever occur to you to wonder why, with 5-6 years having passed since CRU's email server was broken in to, the number of climate scientists, scientists in general and the public at large who accept the IPCC's coclusions has done nothing but grow?

Broken into but you do not deny that what was found was fraudulent efforts to conceal the FACT that all the groups who profit most from the scam were, and are manipulating data.

Now we have another scandal revealed.

Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the

1. Global Warming
2. Fight Misinformation

Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the "Climategate" Manufactured Controversy

The manufactured controversy over emails stolen from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit has generated a lot more heat than light. The email content being quoted does not indicate that climate data and research have been compromised. Most importantly, nothing in the content of these stolen emails has any impact on our overall understanding that human activities are driving dangerous levels of global warming. Media reports and contrarian claims that they do are inaccurate.


Investigations Clear Scientists of Wrongdoing

Six official investigations have cleared scientists of accusations of wrongdoing.

• A three-part Penn State University cleared scientist Michael Mann of wrongdoing.
• Two reviews commissioned by the University of East Anglia"supported the honesty and integrity of scientists in the Climatic Research Unit."
• A UK Parliament report concluded that the emails have no bearing on our understanding of climate science and that claims against UEA scientists are misleading.
• The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Inspector General's office concluded there was no evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of their employees.
• The National Science Foundation's Inspector General's office concluded, "Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct...we are closing this investigation with no further action."

Other agencies and media outlets have investigated the substance of the emails.

• The Environmental Protection Agency, in response to petitions against action to curb heat-trapping emissions, dismissed attacks on the science rooted in the stolen emails.
• Factcheck.org debunked claims that the emails put the conclusions of climate science into question.
• Politifact.com rated claims that the emails falsify climate science as "false."
• An Associated Press review of the emails found that they "don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions."

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

As you know, Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC and NASA findings came from EAU.

14th February, 2010

Phil Jones Exonerated by British House of Commons ...
'Climategate' review clears scientists of dishonesty over data ...
The review is the third and final inquiry into the email affair, dubbed "climategate", and effectively clears Professor Phil Jones, head of the CRU, ...

Climategate Scientist Cleared in Inquiry, Again - Scientific ...

'Climategate' Investigation Clears U.S. Scientists
The latest investigation by the U.S. Commerce Department was conducted after Inhofe requested an inquiry into the emails on May 26, 2010. The response, sent to Inhofe this past Friday, states:

In our review of the CRU emails, we did not find any evidence that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data comprising the [Global Historical Climatology Network] dataset or failed to adhere to appropriate peer review procedures.

CLICK HERE to view the full report.