So, Jones and AGW Theory was acquitted huh..

[westwall]

According to Lord Oxburgh...the Science was not the subject of their study. Go figure.

Oxburgh and the Jones Admission Climate Audit

 

[Big Fitz]

According to Lord Oxburgh...the Science was not the subject of their study. Go figure.

Oxburgh and the Jones Admission Climate Audit

Oooh wow! London just immolated on this little tidbit!

So much for the science.

 

[Oddball]

Here's the Delingpole piece:

Sneaky, bullying, self-pitying Climategate scientists write to Sir Muir Russell inquiry begging: 'Make it a whitewash hat trick!'

Does the tragicomedy ever end with these warmist dudes?

 

[fyrenza]

What they are doing is SO important that they cannot allow the FACTS to get in the way...

They are like these other folks that just can't admit they're wrong,

even when EVERYTHING ~ fact and supposition ~ points to the truth.

 

[Big Fitz]

What they are doing is SO important that they cannot allow the FACTS to get in the way...

They are like these other folks that just can't admit they're wrong,

even when EVERYTHING ~ fact and supposition ~ points to the truth.

They're doing the same thing they do every night, Pinky.

Trying to take over the world.

The sad part is, they are.

 

[Old Rocks]

Hmmm...... Dr. Mann completely exonerated, no basis to any of the charges.

http://live.psu.edu/fullimg/userpics/10026/Final_Investigation_Report.pdf

 

[Old Rocks]

According to Lord Oxburgh...the Science was not the subject of their study. Go figure.

Oxburgh and the Jones Admission Climate Audit

Yes, they have been. And Steve McIntyre has shown himself to be an ass once again.

 

[gslack]

Oldoscks and sockos try and downplay truth again...

 

[Old Rocks]

Time for the skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty.

Univ. of East Anglia climate unit exonerated: Time for skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty? - Yahoo! Answers

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
It is unlikely that "skeptics" will address their dishonesty, but they can be made financially accountable. Generally, a party that brings a frivolous case to court is responsible for the costs. Since CRU is exonerated, the costs of the proceedings falls on the "skeptics". I am sure the bill for the inquiry was in the millions and there will be additional administrative costs associated with collecting the debt. In addition, I think that Jones should now seek damages for lost productivity plus substantial punitive damages. The costs can be split among the newspapers and other media that published dishonest articles about Jones and the CRU. In response to future requests for information, Jones should send a copy of the most recent IPCC report and all scientific publications referenced therein. There will of course be a per page printing charge $1 for the IPCC report plus copyright fees of $30 to $40 payable for each of the 8000 plus papers referenced by the IPCC report. The approximately 200,000 pages of information (1000 kg) should be couriered on same day service to the "skeptic" requesting information. The "skeptic" will be responsible for the courier charges.

 

[Big Fitz]

Time for the skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty.

Univ. of East Anglia climate unit exonerated: Time for skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty? - Yahoo! Answers

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
It is unlikely that "skeptics" will address their dishonesty, but they can be made financially accountable. Generally, a party that brings a frivolous case to court is responsible for the costs. Since CRU is exonerated, the costs of the proceedings falls on the "skeptics". I am sure the bill for the inquiry was in the millions and there will be additional administrative costs associated with collecting the debt. In addition, I think that Jones should now seek damages for lost productivity plus substantial punitive damages. The costs can be split among the newspapers and other media that published dishonest articles about Jones and the CRU. In response to future requests for information, Jones should send a copy of the most recent IPCC report and all scientific publications referenced therein. There will of course be a per page printing charge $1 for the IPCC report plus copyright fees of $30 to $40 payable for each of the 8000 plus papers referenced by the IPCC report. The approximately 200,000 pages of information (1000 kg) should be couriered on same day service to the "skeptic" requesting information. The "skeptic" will be responsible for the courier charges.

your proof is based on a fucking opinion poll of answers given by anonymous members on Yahoo.

You are just....

Nope... nope. You're no longer worth it shitbag. Same lies day in day out. Same false claims. You're a broken record of braindamage.

 

[Old Rocks]

Hell, I succeeded in getting you sputtering like a dry old maid.

 

[daveman]

Time for the skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty.

Univ. of East Anglia climate unit exonerated: Time for skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty? - Yahoo! Answers

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
It is unlikely that "skeptics" will address their dishonesty, but they can be made financially accountable. Generally, a party that brings a frivolous case to court is responsible for the costs. Since CRU is exonerated, the costs of the proceedings falls on the "skeptics". I am sure the bill for the inquiry was in the millions and there will be additional administrative costs associated with collecting the debt. In addition, I think that Jones should now seek damages for lost productivity plus substantial punitive damages. The costs can be split among the newspapers and other media that published dishonest articles about Jones and the CRU. In response to future requests for information, Jones should send a copy of the most recent IPCC report and all scientific publications referenced therein. There will of course be a per page printing charge $1 for the IPCC report plus copyright fees of $30 to $40 payable for each of the 8000 plus papers referenced by the IPCC report. The approximately 200,000 pages of information (1000 kg) should be couriered on same day service to the "skeptic" requesting information. The "skeptic" will be responsible for the courier charges.

Gaea's achin' pancreas...are you really holding Yahoo Answers up as a knowledgeable source?

You backed the wrong horse, Skippy. If they had science on their side, they wouldn't have to resort to such dishonesty.

 

[Old Rocks]

Climate change scandal: MPs exonerate professor - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

Professor Phil Jones, the climate scientist at the centre of the scandal over the leak of sensitive emails from a university computer, has been largely exonerated by a powerful cross-party committee of MPs who said his scientific reputation remains intact.


There was no evidence that Professor Jones, head of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA), deliberately withheld or manipulated data in order to support the idea that global warming was real and that it was influenced by human activities, according to a report by the Commons Science and Technology Committee.

However, the MPs criticised Professor Jones and climate scientists in general for being too possessive and secretive about the raw scientific data and computer codes they use to establish the link between global warming and human activities. They also criticised the UEA for fostering a culture of non-disclosure of scientific information to climate sceptics.

 

[Old Rocks]

Time for the skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty.

Univ. of East Anglia climate unit exonerated: Time for skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty? - Yahoo! Answers

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
It is unlikely that "skeptics" will address their dishonesty, but they can be made financially accountable. Generally, a party that brings a frivolous case to court is responsible for the costs. Since CRU is exonerated, the costs of the proceedings falls on the "skeptics". I am sure the bill for the inquiry was in the millions and there will be additional administrative costs associated with collecting the debt. In addition, I think that Jones should now seek damages for lost productivity plus substantial punitive damages. The costs can be split among the newspapers and other media that published dishonest articles about Jones and the CRU. In response to future requests for information, Jones should send a copy of the most recent IPCC report and all scientific publications referenced therein. There will of course be a per page printing charge $1 for the IPCC report plus copyright fees of $30 to $40 payable for each of the 8000 plus papers referenced by the IPCC report. The approximately 200,000 pages of information (1000 kg) should be couriered on same day service to the "skeptic" requesting information. The "skeptic" will be responsible for the courier charges.

Gaea's achin' pancreas...are you really holding Yahoo Answers up as a knowledgeable source?

You backed the wrong horse, Skippy. If they had science on their side, they wouldn't have to resort to such dishonesty.

Dave, ol' ass, it is better than reading your lack of reply to anything at all. Thus far, you offer yap-yap, with zero backing data.

 

[daveman]

Time for the skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty.

Univ. of East Anglia climate unit exonerated: Time for skeptics to address their intellectual dishonesty? - Yahoo! Answers

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
It is unlikely that "skeptics" will address their dishonesty, but they can be made financially accountable. Generally, a party that brings a frivolous case to court is responsible for the costs. Since CRU is exonerated, the costs of the proceedings falls on the "skeptics". I am sure the bill for the inquiry was in the millions and there will be additional administrative costs associated with collecting the debt. In addition, I think that Jones should now seek damages for lost productivity plus substantial punitive damages. The costs can be split among the newspapers and other media that published dishonest articles about Jones and the CRU. In response to future requests for information, Jones should send a copy of the most recent IPCC report and all scientific publications referenced therein. There will of course be a per page printing charge $1 for the IPCC report plus copyright fees of $30 to $40 payable for each of the 8000 plus papers referenced by the IPCC report. The approximately 200,000 pages of information (1000 kg) should be couriered on same day service to the "skeptic" requesting information. The "skeptic" will be responsible for the courier charges.

Gaea's achin' pancreas...are you really holding Yahoo Answers up as a knowledgeable source?

You backed the wrong horse, Skippy. If they had science on their side, they wouldn't have to resort to such dishonesty.

Dave, ol' ass, it is better than reading your lack of reply to anything at all. Thus far, you offer yap-yap, with zero backing data.

The thing is, you've got it backward. It's up to the AGW cult to prove their case. They have failed to do so. Therefore, no AGW.

You're welcome.

 

[Big Fitz]

Hell, I succeeded in getting you sputtering like a dry old maid.

Yes crocks... ya got me.

No, I'm just giving up on reading your posts. They have no connect with reality, only some freaky fever dream fantasy you hope some day to inflict on all of us while you gibber and drool over the end of the world unless you rule it.

A regular Dr. Horrible you are and I'm through being your audience or giving you the platform to speak.

So here's me, pulling your mic. Sod off you pathetic git and may you suffer what you have wished for others to live in.

 

[daveman]

Hell, I succeeded in getting you sputtering like a dry old maid.

Yes crocks... ya got me.

No, I'm just giving up on reading your posts. They have no connect with reality, only some freaky fever dream fantasy you hope some day to inflict on all of us while you gibber and drool over the end of the world unless you rule it.

A regular Dr. Horrible you are and I'm through being your audience or giving you the platform to speak.

So here's me, pulling your mic. Sod off you pathetic git and may you suffer what you have wished for others to live in.

Hey! That's not nice! Dr. Horrible is at least funny and entertaining.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yap-yap.

 

[gslack]

Yap-yap.

Oldsocks and the faithful must be having fits... No one is buying your bullshit save a few idiots and socks....

Notice how little support you are getting lately? yeah rats left the sinking ship huh pal....

 

[Old Rocks]

Nah, they just don't have the sense of humor that I have. Watching you ignoramouses making fools of yourselves time after time is amusing, and shows what the next idiocys that the deniers are going to throw at the public are.