Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Russia puts out some of the highest quality of scientists in the world.Gee, if only they were as trustworthy as the Russians.Center for American Progress and Union of Concerned Scientists....Good thing that they're completely non-partisan and have funding sources are beyond reproach, huh?
Christy and Spencer didn't 'fudge' a thing. Through the HONEST process of peer-review, errors were later found. And, through the HONEST process of peer-review both published additional data, additional methodology, additional analyses. There were no tricks involved. There was no 'fudging' involved. All was above board. All was quite normal, too, in the expansion of scientific knowledge.Still the pathological liar, I see.So are Roy Spencer, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick and a slew of other skeptics.They are scientists.....
But since political hack sites like Center for American Progress don't pimp them out, they don't count, huh?
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
Christy and Spencer didn't 'fudge' a thing. Through the HONEST process of peer-review, errors were later found. And, through the HONEST process of peer-review both published additional data, additional methodology, additional analyses. There were no tricks involved. There was no 'fudging' involved. All was above board. All was quite normal, too, in the expansion of scientific knowledge.Still the pathological liar, I see.So are Roy Spencer, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick and a slew of other skeptics.
But since political hack sites like Center for American Progress don't pimp them out, they don't count, huh?
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
Leave it to political hacks like you and dilettantes in science to call it something it is not.
Both you and Rocks make me cringe in how you play at science and as a result, you do science a disservice.
Sure, we're supposed to believe that, even though this is their field of speciality, they had no idea which sign to use to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift and just happened to guess the wrong sign which just happened to support their bias. After all, even though they had no idea of which sign to use, there were no books or other scientists to consult.Christy and Spencer didn't 'fudge' a thing. Through the HONEST process of peer-review, errors were later found. And, through the HONEST process of peer-review both published additional data, additional methodology, additional analyses. There were no tricks involved. There was no 'fudging' involved. All was above board. All was quite normal, too, in the expansion of scientific knowledge.Still the pathological liar, I see.So are Roy Spencer, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick and a slew of other skeptics.
But since political hack sites like Center for American Progress don't pimp them out, they don't count, huh?
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
Leave it to political hacks like you and dilettantes in science to call it something it is not.
Both you and Rocks make me cringe in how you play at science and as a result, you do science a disservice.
Yeah, you're supposed to believe that. Unless you have no confidence in the peer-review process. Is that the case for you, Ed?Sure, we're supposed to believe that, even though this is their field of speciality, they had no idea which sign to use to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift and just happened to guess the wrong sign which just happened to support their bias. After all, even though they had no idea of which sign to use, there were no books or other scientists to consult.Christy and Spencer didn't 'fudge' a thing. Through the HONEST process of peer-review, errors were later found. And, through the HONEST process of peer-review both published additional data, additional methodology, additional analyses. There were no tricks involved. There was no 'fudging' involved. All was above board. All was quite normal, too, in the expansion of scientific knowledge.Still the pathological liar, I see.
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
Leave it to political hacks like you and dilettantes in science to call it something it is not.
Both you and Rocks make me cringe in how you play at science and as a result, you do science a disservice.
Still the psychotic foaming-at-the-mouth attack dog, I see.Still the pathological liar, I see.So are Roy Spencer, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick and a slew of other skeptics.They are scientists.....
But since political hack sites like Center for American Progress don't pimp them out, they don't count, huh?
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
Yeah, you're supposed to believe that. Unless you have no confidence in the peer-review process. Is that the case for you, Ed?Sure, we're supposed to believe that, even though this is their field of speciality, they had no idea which sign to use to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift and just happened to guess the wrong sign which just happened to support their bias. After all, even though they had no idea of which sign to use, there were no books or other scientists to consult.Christy and Spencer didn't 'fudge' a thing. Through the HONEST process of peer-review, errors were later found. And, through the HONEST process of peer-review both published additional data, additional methodology, additional analyses. There were no tricks involved. There was no 'fudging' involved. All was above board. All was quite normal, too, in the expansion of scientific knowledge.
Leave it to political hacks like you and dilettantes in science to call it something it is not.
Both you and Rocks make me cringe in how you play at science and as a result, you do science a disservice.
Well, there you go again, it's you deniers who claim the peer review system is corrupted by the good old boy system. It's you deniers who rarely submit your claims to peer review and then cry foul when the few that do get submitted get shot down.Yeah, you're supposed to believe that. Unless you have no confidence in the peer-review process. Is that the case for you, Ed?Sure, we're supposed to believe that, even though this is their field of speciality, they had no idea which sign to use to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift and just happened to guess the wrong sign which just happened to support their bias. After all, even though they had no idea of which sign to use, there were no books or other scientists to consult.Christy and Spencer didn't 'fudge' a thing. Through the HONEST process of peer-review, errors were later found. And, through the HONEST process of peer-review both published additional data, additional methodology, additional analyses. There were no tricks involved. There was no 'fudging' involved. All was above board. All was quite normal, too, in the expansion of scientific knowledge.
Leave it to political hacks like you and dilettantes in science to call it something it is not.
Both you and Rocks make me cringe in how you play at science and as a result, you do science a disservice.
I love it!Still the psychotic foaming-at-the-mouth attack dog, I see.Still the pathological liar, I see.So are Roy Spencer, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick and a slew of other skeptics.
But since political hack sites like Center for American Progress don't pimp them out, they don't count, huh?
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
I get it now...One group of guys can't make an error and later correct it, while it's totally acceptable for another bunch to cook and destroy data, intimidate scientific journal editors, and omit contravening information if they need to "redefine what peer review means".
Glad you're so up front about your intellectual dishonesty.
Horseshit. Like all commies, they're ideologues and useful idiots first.And who modified the Japanese data sets, the American data sets, the Chinese data sets, the Canadian data sets ......... and so on. They all show the same thing. A rapid warming since 1850, with major effects in the Arctic in the last decade.
Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails « Climate Progress
This is reposted from the Union of Concerned Scientists Global Warming Blog. Another good, detailed debunking can be found at the Pew Center for Global Climate Change.
The manufactured controversy over emails stolen from the University of East Anglias Climatic Research Unit has generated a lot more heat than light over the past two weeks. Experts at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) have concluded that while the emails do raise some valid concerns about scientific integrity, they do not indicate that climate data and research have been compromised.
UCSs analysis of the emails and the debate surrounding them aims to correct popular misconceptions about what the emails say, put them in scientific context and explain the importance of scientific integrity.
You mean McIntyre and McKitrick aren't well versed in the use and misuse of mathematics and statistics?I love it!
You try to pass off McIntyre and McKitrick as "scientists" and by your "logic" that makes me intellectually dishonest and you the poor perpetual victim.
Still the pathological liar, I see.So are Roy Spencer, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick and a slew of other skeptics.They are scientists.....
But since political hack sites like Center for American Progress don't pimp them out, they don't count, huh?
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
Whatever they are well versed in, THEY ATE NOT SCIENTISTS, which YOU said they were.You mean McIntyre and McKitrick aren't well versed in the use and misuse of mathematics and statistics?I love it!
You try to pass off McIntyre and McKitrick as "scientists" and by your "logic" that makes me intellectually dishonest and you the poor perpetual victim.
Ross McKitrick - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Stephen McIntyre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But I imagine if my team had got caught red-handed making shit up, and also was so emotionally attached to their results as you, I'd try to deflect, defame and misdirect my way out of it, too.
It's fun to watch you spin.They aren't climate scientists. But neither are meteorologists, physicians or geologists....All of which have seats on the IPCC.
However, since mathematics, statistics and economics do qualify as quasi-scientific disciplines it can indeed be said that they are scientists in their fields.
Now, go fetch Michael Mann's suits from the cleaners, Kent.
For the "well versed" watchdogs they pretend to be, why didn't they catch Spencer and Christy using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Drift?You mean McIntyre and McKitrick aren't well versed in the use and misuse of mathematics and statistics?I love it!
You try to pass off McIntyre and McKitrick as "scientists" and by your "logic" that makes me intellectually dishonest and you the poor perpetual victim.
Right. and your 'prefered' experts are pure as the driven snow. You know, the ones caught committing massive fraud and false science to cover their greed?For the "well versed" watchdogs they pretend to be, why didn't they catch Spencer and Christy using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Drift?You mean McIntyre and McKitrick aren't well versed in the use and misuse of mathematics and statistics?I love it!
You try to pass off McIntyre and McKitrick as "scientists" and by your "logic" that makes me intellectually dishonest and you the poor perpetual victim.
Just as I guessed....A voluntarily skewed result.OldRocksinthehead said:The authors contacted 10,200 scientists listed in the 2007 edition of the American Geological Institute's Directory of Geoscience Departments and received 3,146 responses to their two questions:
Now, tell us all that one about how the Sun revolves around the Earf, Pope Prattlus!
Christy and Spencer didn't 'fudge' a thing. Through the HONEST process of peer-review, errors were later found. And, through the HONEST process of peer-review both published additional data, additional methodology, additional analyses. There were no tricks involved. There was no 'fudging' involved. All was above board. All was quite normal, too, in the expansion of scientific knowledge.Still the pathological liar, I see.So are Roy Spencer, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick and a slew of other skeptics.
But since political hack sites like Center for American Progress don't pimp them out, they don't count, huh?
McIntyre has a BS in math, McKitrick is an economist, and Spencer, (LimpBoy's climatologist) is the only scientist, but he along with his partner John Christy got caught fudging the Troposphere data by using the opposite sign to correct for Diurnal Satellite Drift.
Deniers have nothing but phony "data" and phony "scientists."
Leave it to political hacks like you and dilettantes in science to call it something it is not.
Both you and Rocks make me cringe in how you play at science and as a result, you do science a disservice.
