Global Warming...a manipulated result of altered data

[cnm]

I would except that you are using the same definition of manipulated. [..]

As expected you squeal about one but not the other.

 

[Kosh]

 

[asaratis]

No. I said what I said.

Yes.

Thousands of scientists can be duped into concurrence with a false conclusion based on manipulation of historical records used to reach the conclusion---especially when the measurements cannot be repeated.
​

Self contradictory. If the original data still exists why does it matter that the measurements cannot be repeated? And all historical data is 'manipulated' to turn it into information.

You must try to catch up.

1 Historical data records decades of global temperatures.
2 This data is archived. (Stored forever.)
3 Bimbos come along and present a concocted temperature curve that includes some altered numbers from the archived records. (Altered meaning they used the archived numbers but changed them slightly to suit their intended outcome.)

It is patently obvious that one cannot measure a temperature that occurred yesterday...or ten years ago. Had the bimbos used the true archived records, their claim of global warming could not be made. So they altered the archived records.

What is so hard to understand about that?

 

[SSDD]

The hockey stick was never debunked. The only issue of note from the release of stolen emails was that Phil Jones wasn't happy with the practice of harassment by FOIA requests. The reason we have an extremely strong consensus among scientists that global warming is taking place and that human activities are its primary cause is because that is the conclusion that an overwhelming amount of evidence and the science applied to that evidence support.

-- Another Navy vet

Thousands of scientists can be duped into concurrence with a false conclusion based on manipulation of historical records used to reach the conclusion---especially when the measurements cannot be repeated.

The discrepancies between the archived public records and the adjusted records presented by the doomsday squad reveal the dishonesty of the politically motivated 'scientists'.

It is called an error cascade...bad science gets published and other scientists use the bad conclusions and data in their own work assuming it to be valid....it doesn't take long before the entire field is polluted and corrupted with the bad data....then add the fact that funding is easy if you are playing the AGW game...and very difficult if you aren't....

 

[Crick]

Are they using bad info by mistake or because they want that grant money to keep pouring in, paying for their ferraris and mansions and yachts and destroying the world's economies because we all know the exceptionally strong correlation between an interest in climate science and pure evil...RIGHT SID?

 

[SSDD]

Does it matter what they were thinking? That suggestion stinks of thought police...and that is a liberal idea...never would occur to me..You guys are the ones who believe in the thought police....changing punishment based on what the perpetrator was thinking at the time...reference hate crime laws...you can't simply punish the perpetrator for what he did, you believe that he needs different punishment based on what was going on in his mind....you people are mad for power and control over people.

 

[Crick]

What matters here is what YOU are thinking SID. You're the one with the paranoia. You'e the one with the psychotic understanding of basic physics.

 

[SSDD]

What matters here is what YOU are thinking SID. You're the one with the paranoia. You'e the one with the psychotic understanding of basic physics.

And yet...my predictions jibe with observation...pity you aren't smart enough to even wonder about that.

 

[Muhammed]

The hockey stick was never debunked.

It was debunked a long time ago. You are just too uninformed to know it.

Visit a library once and a while. Educate yourself.