Climategate: Totally <bleeping> Awesome!

[manifold]

IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

 

[Article 15]

IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

 

[Oddball]

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

Problem being that these "scientists" (to use the term loosely) were amongst the inner circle of the IPCC. Much of the information that other honest scientists (who are doubtlessly in the majority) have based their further studies on, are either based upon or intertwined with the suspect data.

Typhoid Mary wasn't involved in a conspiracy either.

 

[Claudette]

Totally agree Manifold.

The fact that these scientist cooked the books to back up what they are proposing speaks volumes to me. They also purged the real data to back up their findings. They want everyone to believe that we humans are the sole cause for "Global Warming.".This is something they apparantly can't prove without fudgiing their findings. Guess they don't look into the history of the planet to often either.

 

[WillowTree]

so who cares if Manifools thinks somebody is a hacK? The truth is it was a global effort to impose a cap and trade tax and redistribute wealth. You did notice the article I posted yesterday about Australia tabling their cap and trade until the US of KKKA passed theirs?

 

[Ravi]

I'd agree with you except I'm not convinced they cooked the books. There is a lot of disagreement in scientific circles of how to present the data and this group didn't necessarily do something unethical (though of course that possibility exists).

I'm going to reserve judgment until something convincing comes out.

 

[Claudette]

I noticed and good for the Aussies. The rest of the world should follow suit.

The crap and trade bill will cost the average American big time. Its takes energy to produce everything. Prices will go up on everything. Big change to our whole economy. Oh yeah. OL'BO should tell those in Copenhagen to stuff it. When India, China and Russia and the rest of the third world cleans up their act, then MAYBY we'll go along. But not till then. CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN.

 

[Diuretic]

IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

So what do we know for sure about the release of the emails? That they were released? That's about it I think. Maybe it would be wise to wait for the result of the inquiry and then have a dispassionate look at the results and any impact on the state of knowledge of the issue.

It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other

Are you sure? Or does this go part way to affirming your scepticism?

 

[Diuretic]

so who cares if Manifools thinks somebody is a hacK? The truth is it was a global effort to impose a cap and trade tax and redistribute wealth. You did notice the article I posted yesterday about Australia tabling their cap and trade until the US of KKKA passed theirs?

I missed it. I don't know how much info was in the article but the Senate refused to pass the bill passed by the lower house. This followed an internal upheaval in the Opposition (the Greens were against the bill because it wasn't tough enough) where the Leader was booted out (by one vote) because he was allegedly too far ahead of his party on the issue. It would be nice to say the bill wasn't passed because of policy but that wasn't the case, it wasn't passed because of politics.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Um, noooooooo.

Actually the Scientists who are not Warmers first have been saying that there may not be a link between manmande CO2 and "Global Warming"

All we know now is that irrespective of deminimus changes in the atmospheric trace molecule CO2 Earth has not warmed since 1996.

 

[saveliberty]

UAE scientists admitted they have no access to their original data. For the last ten years the only data people have used to study global warming over a long period of time has been the manipulated data.

The "hockey stick" was fraud, although apparently some of the conclusions are okay.

This is already information available to us. 0-2 is not a good start for UAE.

El Nino has had a great impact on the US. Ocean currents seem to dwarf any supposed CO2 impact by people.

Yesterday, the global warmers started the adapt or die chant. We are all going to drown. Time out there. ANY ice currently sitting on the ocean or any other bdoy of water is already displacing water. There will be no rise in ocean levels from that ice. Ice melting from areas covered by land can runoff into the water and that would increase ocean levels. Of course, that would not have near the impact of any ice melting whether on land or water. Why not tell us that up front?

It would be unfortunate if this gets politicized to the point further research on man's impact on climate is ignored. Unfortunately we tend to strongly penalize things in situations like this.

 

[code1211]

I'd agree with you except I'm not convinced they cooked the books. There is a lot of disagreement in scientific circles of how to present the data and this group didn't necessarily do something unethical (though of course that possibility exists).

I'm going to reserve judgment until something convincing comes out.

The problem here is that they "enhanced" data and based research on it, then destroyed the original data.

Try doing this on your tax return and see if it stands up under audit.

The Peer Review process needs to have access to the original data or the results of the research are irrelavent.

Example: Code tells Ravi that Code's 1992 Pontiac Bonneville just set the world land speed record, but Code destroyed all of the original data and presents only the "enhanced" data. Enhanced data in this case is a film of Code smiling and saying, "Wow! That was really, really fast! I bet it was the land speed record!"

Should Ravi believe Code or question the results of the enhanced data?

The simple fact that they don't know how to present the data tells me that they don't understand the data and are trying to find a way to support a pre drawn conclusion. If the data is to tell the story and lead them to a conclusion, the data should be presented in an understandable, transparent way.

If the data is to support a pre drawn conclusion it will need to be changed, enhanced, and fit to a path that leads to the conclusion that they already have reached themselves without aid of the data.

By the by, my Bonneville is a great car and it's for sale.

 

[Ravi]

From what I understand that isn't what they did but I know nothing I can say will change your mind. Scientists disagree on methods to distill data all the time.

We'll wait and see what happens. I personally think that this is much ado about nada.

 

[Jay Canuck]

"This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other." - so really the "scandal" is a non-story for you?

 

[manifold]

"This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other." - so really the "scandal" is a non-story for you?

nope.

I think it's worth investigating.

 

[Jay Canuck]

but it won't alter your contention one way or another......

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Global Warming Livessssssss!!!!!

 

[manifold]

but it won't alter your contention one way or another......

It could. Just hasn't yet.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

IMO, this whole climate-gate thing is totally friggin awesome because it's one of those issues/events that exposes the partisan frauds on both sides that litter this messageboard.

The truth is it is NOT trivial. The "scientists" involved are some of the most prominant forces that have shaped opinions and conclusions about global warming and it turns out they were cooking the books. That's kind of a big deal.

So when somebody dismisses this as a "non-story," they expose themselves as partisan frauds.

And likewise...

The truth also is that these scientists do not comprise the entire global scientific community studying climate change, nor does it prove that there was any kind of global conspiracy involved. It was a handful of unscrupulous douchebags manipulating data to deliver their predetermined conclusion. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE any work that has been done outside their sphere of influence and IT DOES NOT prove that global warming has been a hoax all along.

So when somebody claims that this DOES prove global warming was a hoax all along they expose themselves as partisan frauds.


It has always been my contention that conclusions about man's influence on climate change are premature and unprovable at this time. This scandal has done nothing to alter my contention one way or the other.

sounds like a post I made the other day, but a little more written out

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/96672-what-does-climategate-really-mean.html

good OP Manifold. my opinion on climategate

• It doesn't mean global warming has been debunked.
• It tells us that some of the scientists who claim global warming is caused by man are akin to those scientists who said Tobacco was safe.
• It does mean the scientists who have been pushing forward with the man-made global warming theories have been dishonest in their practices.
• It means that before we pass any legislation, never mind multi-trillion dollar cap and trade legislation, we should re-examine any data that wasn't destroyed or altered.
• It means several scientists should lose their credentials, respect, and jobs
• It means the peer reveiw process is not currently credible as emails have shown it was altered to not allow dissenting scientific studies.
• It means those that were skeptical of the science behind global warming have received some validation of their skepticism
• It does not mean we should stop trying to reduce pollution and the consumption of foreign oil

 

[PoliticalChic]

so who cares if Manifools thinks somebody is a hacK? The truth is it was a global effort to impose a cap and trade tax and redistribute wealth. You did notice the article I posted yesterday about Australia tabling their cap and trade until the US of KKKA passed theirs?

You are correct as to the real meaning of this fraud.

Politics: rather than the promotion of new sources of energy, the movement has been hijacked by those whose main motivation is the devolution of America, or to accomplish government ownership and control of our energy supply.

Sometimes called the “Watermelon Effect,” it is made up of the ‘green’ pro-environment policies on the outside, hiding the red Marxist redistributive policies on the inside.