The Warmergate Scandal

[concept]

*yawn*

Crickets...

 

[keee keee]

warmest winter in history no summer to speak of, didn't even run my air this year except to see if it worked. What a total crock of shit!!!! these same morons now want me to go to them for my healthcare now that is scary!!! nothing the government runs is profitable or secure, just full of theift, corruption and incompetancy!!!

 

[Ame®icano]

From the piece:



Good thing the NYT doesn't give editorial spin on any of this and just reports the facts!

What editorial spin is there in that? The vast majority of researchers in the field do accept the basic idea that humans are driving the increases in temperature.

Don't interupt their delusion, please, it's too entertaining.

Who is denier now?

 

[Ame®icano]

Uhm... global warming?

 

[Ravi]

It's official, WND says global warming has been debunked so it must be true. hahahaha

And Wired says it was a hacker, btw.

Hacked E-Mails Fuel Global Warming Debate | Threat Level | Wired.com

 

[mdn2000]

Breaking story from the UK, emails stolen show scientist perpetrated a hoax on entire world.

I am cherry picking the stories to post what is relevant and interesting, there is much damage control at the major media outlets, especially at the Wall Street Journal yet even in the WSJ they have to print a bit of the truth

Climate Emails Stoke Debate - WSJ.com

The emails include discussions of apparent efforts to make sure that reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that monitors climate science, include their own views and exclude others. In addition, emails show that climate scientists declined to make their data available to scientists whose views they disagreed with.

The IPCC couldn't be reached for comment Sunday.

In one email, Benjamin Santer from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif., wrote to the director of the climate-study center that he was "tempted to beat" up Mr. Michaels. Mr. Santer couldn't be reached for comment Sunday.

In another, Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics' research was unwelcome: We "will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday.

 

[mdn2000]

I am a little slow, seems you guys already new about this story.

 

[jodylee]

The press are reporting it but trying to dumb it down especially as many media outlets are involved in the emails. Every body needs to see this. its the smoking gun.

 

[tigerbob]

This story broke a few days ago.

Merge?

 

[concept]

It's official, WND says global warming has been debunked so it must be true. hahahaha

And Wired says it was a hacker, btw.

Hacked E-Mails Fuel Global Warming Debate | Threat Level | Wired.com

Hacked or not, the AGW debate has been thrown down to the ground and is getting ready to tap out.



All of the fear-mongering libs like Gore can squirm and plead and explain to us just wtf he is talking about.

There isn't enough crow in the world to serve at the table.

 

[IanC]

yep I read that part... and that makes man made climate change a hoax?

wow! haven't you read any of the pertinent released emails yet? it is down in black and white how many of the figures were faked to show something that wasn't there.

this is a very serious, if not fatal, blow to the AGW crowd

 

[Ravi]

I can't wait to find out who the hackers are.

 

[Old Rocks]

yep I read that part... and that makes man made climate change a hoax?

wow! haven't you read any of the pertinent released emails yet? it is down in black and white how many of the figures were faked to show something that wasn't there.

this is a very serious, if not fatal, blow to the AGW crowd

If this were the only group studying the current warming, you might have a point. But it is not, and the other groups, NASA, NOAA, and RSS, all confirm the Hadly scientists figures.

 

[concept]

yep I read that part... and that makes man made climate change a hoax?

wow! haven't you read any of the pertinent released emails yet? it is down in black and white how many of the figures were faked to show something that wasn't there.

this is a very serious, if not fatal, blow to the AGW crowd

If this were the only group studying the current warming, you might have a point. But it is not, and the other groups, NASA, NOAA, and RSS, all confirm the Hadly scientists figures.

How can that be possible wen cru was using ficticious numbers? Are you saying that all of them are fudging the numbers?

Because cru was most certainly making shit up. The hockey stick graph is a good example of that.

Heads are going to roll on this one. Sorry lib.

 

[jodylee]

yep I read that part... and that makes man made climate change a hoax?

Some of the people involed are major contributers to the IPCC climate reports 3 &4 thats why its so significant. oh and evedence of collusion by the met office as well

 

[Sinatra]

yep I read that part... and that makes man made climate change a hoax?

wow! haven't you read any of the pertinent released emails yet? it is down in black and white how many of the figures were faked to show something that wasn't there.

this is a very serious, if not fatal, blow to the AGW crowd

If this were the only group studying the current warming, you might have a point. But it is not, and the other groups, NASA, NOAA, and RSS, all confirm the Hadly scientists figures.

The emails show figures from within those very organizations in collusion with repeating the falsified data.

The Mann hockey stick alone was utilized time and time again by other members of the AGW community.

Time to grow up - you been had....

 

[concept]

wow! haven't you read any of the pertinent released emails yet? it is down in black and white how many of the figures were faked to show something that wasn't there.

this is a very serious, if not fatal, blow to the AGW crowd

If this were the only group studying the current warming, you might have a point. But it is not, and the other groups, NASA, NOAA, and RSS, all confirm the Hadly scientists figures.

The emails show figures from within those very organizations in collusion with repeating the falsified data.

The Mann hockey stick alone was utilized time and time again by other members of the AGW community.

Time to grow up - you been had....

That wonb't happen.

They STILL claim Clinton was busted over a BJ.
They always overlook the perjury part of it.

They are quite simply, pathetic.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's official, WND says global warming has been debunked so it must be true. hahahaha

And Wired says it was a hacker, btw.

Hacked E-Mails Fuel Global Warming Debate | Threat Level | Wired.com

"The files--which can be downloaded here--surely have not been fully plumbed. The ZIP archive weighs in at just under 62 megabytes, or more than 157 MB when uncompressed. But bits that have already been analyzed, as the Washington Post reports, "reveal an intellectual circle that appears to feel very much under attack, and eager to punish its enemies":

In one e-mail, the center's director, Phil Jones, writes Pennsylvania State University's Michael E. Mann and questions whether the work of academics that question the link between human activities and global warming deserve to make it into the prestigious IPCC report, which represents the global consensus view on climate science.
"I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report," Jones writes. "Kevin and I will keep them out somehow--even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
In another, Jones and Mann discuss how they can pressure an academic journal not to accept the work of climate skeptics with whom they disagree. "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal," Mann writes. . . .
Mann, who directs Penn State's Earth System Science Center, said the e-mails reflected the sort of "vigorous debate" researchers engage in before reaching scientific conclusions. "We shouldn't expect the sort of refined statements that scientists make when they're speaking in public," he said.
This is downright Orwellian. What the Post describes is not a vigorous debate but an attempt to suppress debate--to politicize the process of scientific inquiry so that it yields a predetermined result. This does not, in itself, prove the global warmists wrong. But it raises a glaring question: If they have the facts on their side, why do they need to resort to tactics of suppression and intimidation?"

Settled Science? - WSJ.com

 

[Oddball]

yep I read that part... and that makes man made climate change a hoax?

wow! haven't you read any of the pertinent released emails yet? it is down in black and white how many of the figures were faked to show something that wasn't there.

this is a very serious, if not fatal, blow to the AGW crowd

If this were the only group studying the current warming, you might have a point. But it is not, and the other groups, NASA, NOAA, and RSS, all confirm the Hadly scientists figures.

All of them probably have been using at least some of the Hadley figures themselves in the first pace.

I'm certain you'd make this connection if you could bother with just a moment of intellectual honesty, long enough to recognize how politicized and incestuous the whole "peer review" thing is.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I went through some nasty winters, when I was a kid and frankly, I was looking forward to gobal warming. This is truly depressing. We will be over run by Canadians trying to escape the mountains of ice from this coming ice age.

On a serious note, if this is true, the repercussions will be monumental.

I guess I'll need to keep my umbrella open to protect me from all those gullible folks jumping off buildings.

"This is downright Orwellian. What the Post describes is not a vigorous debate but an attempt to suppress debate--to politicize the process of scientific inquiry so that it yields a predetermined result. This does not, in itself, prove the global warmists wrong. But it raises a glaring question: If they have the facts on their side, why do they need to resort to tactics of suppression and intimidation?

It is hard to see how this is anything less than a definitive refutation of the popular press's contention that global warmism is settled science--a contention that both the Times and the Post repeat in their articles on the revelations: "The evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to global warming is so widely accepted that the hacked material is unlikely to erode the overall argument," the Times claims. The Post leads its story by observing that "few U.S. politicians bother to question whether humans are changing the world's climate," and that "nearly three years ago the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded the evidence was unequivocal." (As blogger Tom Maguire notes, this actually overstates even the IPCC's conclusions.)

The press's view on global warming rests on an appeal to authority: the consensus among scientists that it is real, dangerous and man-caused. But the authority of scientists rests on the integrity of the scientific process, and a "consensus" based on the suppression of alternative hypotheses is, quite simply, a fraudulent one."

Settled Science? - WSJ.com