Phil Jones Rolled...Game Over.

[Old Rocks]

I have seen where that the scientists in this controversy made statements in the heat of the moment. I see no evidence that they have faked any data at all. Nor that they have destroyed any data.

What I have seen is the attempt by those that would gain from our continueing on the present suicidal course using this to forestall any attempt to address the problem of global warming and the resultant climate change.

And, bluntly, they have been, and will continue to be successful.

 

[Old Rocks]

Can someone here explain to me WHY NASA would FAKE data? What's their motivation?

Don't you know!!!!!! They are in the employ of those evil beings inhabiting the hollow moon.

 

[Charles Stucker]

PURE DATA!!!! DISPUTE THE DATA or STFU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Data? What data?

Jones is admitting he destroyed the data and there's been no warming since 1995

Wait wait wait. I've seen warming - just last week it was colder than it is this week, so obviously there is warming!
In fact I expect it to continue warming (with a few fluctuations) to a high point in August.
Might even get as warm as it was last year.
Obviously you people are in deNile.

 

[code1211]

Can someone here explain to me WHY NASA would FAKE data? What's their motivation?

I can't explain it. I can show it to you. Follow the link.

“The hardest part is trying to influence the nature of the measurements obtained…” Watts Up With That?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

One mo' time:

The Wisconsin deglaciation that caused sea levels to rise 500 feet and swamp many prior civilization is an example of Global Warming, finding an area of the troposphere that is warmer than it was last year is NOT Global Warming.

 

[skookerasbil]

nobody cares about either glaciers or NASA after this weekend!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[concept]

PURE DATA!!!! DISPUTE THE DATA or STFU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Data? What data?

Jones is admitting he destroyed the data and there's been no warming since 1995

This should end any argument by the global warming idiots but it won't.

 

[skookerasbil]

Can someone here explain to me WHY NASA would FAKE data? What's their motivation?

Don't you know!!!!!! They are in the employ of those evil beings inhabiting the hollow moon.

s0n...........let me tell you something. You might as well trek on out to Mt Everast and take a gandor up to the summit in your birthday suit and scream from the top, "Im a big warming guy!!!"

Nobody cares about your crap anymore s0n...............but if you insist on publically humiliating yourself, then you go right ahead. I enjoy cooming in here for some laughs every so often............

 

[sherp]

Phil Jones, of CRU and IPCC infamy, has admitted that the data has been fudged and faked.

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Mail Online

Time to let it go.

Told you they would not get past it. Pretty soon they will be claiming he was never a scientist and that he was paid by the Oil Companies.

Right now, he is claiming he is just "a simple scientist". Phil, Phil, Phil.
Phil appears to be claiming that he has hundreds of thousands of pieces of data in his office, all unorganized. I read it was Phil who was Suicidal. No doubt if any of the IFS, MIGHTS, COULDS, etc actually come to pass, the future generations will take care of it. Not of course, Glaciorgate, Amazongate, Africiagate and the like. I love everything high tech and my car. I have no intention of going back to horse and buggy days but the Warmerns are sure welcome to do so.

 

[elvis]

So the glaciers in the Cascades and Rockies that I have personally seen, are just faking their retreat?

The North Arctic Ice Cap is just faking the measured volume of it's ice since 2005?

The Greenland and Antarctic Caps are faking out the GRACE satellite into thinking that they have lost giga-tons of ice?

There have now been hundreds, if not thousands, of papers published in peer review journals stating that AGW is a fact, and measuring the effects of that fact.

you can see the mount st helens from your house. that makes you an authority, wight
sawah?

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[sherp]

Can someone here explain to me WHY NASA would FAKE data? What's their motivation?

I think they have lost their luster, got their budget cut and not going to the stars much. They want to keep the infusion of cash flowing into their coffers. As always, follow the money.

 

[Charles Stucker]

There have now been hundreds, if not thousands, of papers published in peer review journals stating that AGW is a fact, and measuring the effects of that fact.

There were hundreds, if not thousands of calculations on the permutations of epicycles in the Ptolemaic system of astronomy. Strangely they are now all considered WRONG.

Your appeal to authority fails once again.

Did you know that most of the increase of Urban temperatures can be traced to greater human population densities and increased coverage by concrete? This is a known fact published in a large number of "peer" reviewed articles.
How much of the increase in the "warmer" data is caused by this particular effect?
Can you make that calculation? If so I would like to see it. I suppose that seems an unfair request, given how little science you know, but without something you have nothing save you anecdotal evidence. My anecdotal evidence is that the weather has not been particularly warm in the last decade or so, which neatly balances your anecdotal evidence.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Good night Dude try to come up with some REASONABLE arguments the next time we meet.

I want to know, you stupid infantile idiot, why

15 FUCKING YEARS OF LYING

is okay with you.

I'll wait.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

So the glaciers in the Cascades and Rockies that I have personally seen, are just faking their retreat?

The North Arctic Ice Cap is just faking the measured volume of it's ice since 2005?

The Greenland and Antarctic Caps are faking out the GRACE satellite into thinking that they have lost giga-tons of ice?

There have now been hundreds, if not thousands, of papers published in peer review journals stating that AGW is a fact, and measuring the effects of that fact.

You're reduced to nothing other than a simpleton "yeahbut."

Oh wait, for you that would be a promotion!

Your argument, for real, is "yeahbut?"

C'mon now.

 

[edthecynic]

C'mon guys....It's over.

Old Rocks, edthecynic, Spiderman Tuba, Chris, Cold Fusion38, and the rest......

THEY FRIGGIN' LIED TO YOU!!!

Have you no pride or dignity?

The only liars are you CON$!

As I pointed out to you, the quote you CON$ cite was made up. I pointed out to you that there were only 2 words in "quotation" marks and I also pointed out how you "out of context" crybabies never quote anyone accurately.

As a typical CON$ervatard, knowing he said no such thing, you never posted the interview IN CONTEXT.

In reality he said something completely different, like 15 years is not a long enough of a period to be statically significant in science. Close but not quite long enough. He actually said the trend from 1995 to 2009, the 15 years in question, was a positive 0.12C per decade.

You know that's what he actually said which is why you won't post the actual quote even now, especially now!

 

[Oddball]

I'll score you as a big "NO" for that pride and dignity thingy.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

In reality he said something completely different, like 15 years is not a long enough of a period to be statically significant in science. Close but not quite long enough. He actually said the trend from 1995 to 2009, the 15 years in question, was a positive 0.12C per decade.

You know that's what he actually said which is why you won't post the actual quote even now, especially now!

Why don't you post a link to it?

 

[edthecynic]

After years of hectoring skeptics, Jones now suggests that there has been no statistically significant warming, but like a drowning man clinging to a straw he still claims — contrary to his own evidence — that the recent warming is predominantly man-made. Jones just happened to omit that the rate of warming in 1860-1880, 1910-1940, and 1976-1998 were exactly the same. The only warming derived from industrialization could be 1976-1998, and yet his own data suggests that all these events were natural. Furthermore, Jones conceded that it was warmer in Roman and Medieval times — when there was no heavy industry.

Pajamas Media Climategate: A Defiance of Arrogant Political Power

You gotta love the truly STUPID things the revisionists come up with and CON$ swallow whole.

We are now to believe the industrial revolution that began in the 18th century in Europe and the 19th century in the US really didn't begin until the late 20th century.

 

[edthecynic]

I'll score you as a big "NO" for that pride and dignity thingy.

I said you would not post the whole quote in context, and true to form you didn't. CON$ are soooooooo predictable!

Post the interview and prove me wrong. You won't because you know you are lying, making you a PREMEDITATED liar.