RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication

RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Moonhead -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/14/2009 4:30:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brain I suppose suspended talks doesn’t mean very much if that story about the sun is true. I guess I’m going to wait and see until people like Al Gore or David Suzuki or others agree with this new hypothesis about the influence of the sun. Copenhagen talks suspended The Copenhagen climate-change conference, now beginning its second week, is now abruptly suspended after a coalition of developing-nation delegations, including the Chinese and Indian delegations, refused to discuss carbon mitigation any further until the developed nations agreed to more stringent emissions mitigation of their own. In other words, they want the Kyoto Protocol and won't be satisfied with anything less. Well, the only way they've managed to get Obama to show his face in the first place is by promising that they won't make any demands about reducing emissions on the 'States, isn't it?

pahunkboy -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/14/2009 4:49:02 PM)
exhaustive review. LMAO that is funny. (I read them myself)

Mercnbeth -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/14/2009 5:05:41 PM)
~ Fast Warning ~ Dateline: Copenhagen - "The Global Warming Conference" Can Noah please come to the podium.... Mr Gore, speaking at the Copenhagen climate change summit, stated the latest research showed that the Arctic could be completely ice-free in five years.In his speech, Mr Gore told the conference: "These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years. REALLY - FIVE YEARS! The "latest research"! OMG - I better rethink my position on ever buying a boat again. I better go watch 'Waterworld' and try not to fall asleep to see how it turns out this time! Whoops - NOT SO FAST.... However, the climatologist whose work Mr Gore was relying upon dropped the former Vice-President in the water with an icy blast. "It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at," Dr Maslowski said. "I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this." Perhaps Mr Gore had felt the need to gild the lily to buttress resolve. But his speech was roundly criticised by members of the climate science community. “This is an exaggeration that opens the science up to criticism from sceptics,” Professor Jim Overland, a leading oceanographer at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said. World leaders — with Gordon Brown arriving tonight in the vanguard — are facing the humiliating prospect of having little of substance to sign on Friday, when they are supposed to be clinching an historic deal. Richard Lindzen, a climate scientist at the Massachusets Institute of Technology who does not believe that global warming is largely caused by man, said: “He’s just extrapolated from 2007, when there was a big retreat, and got zero.” 'ya know - why don't these guys just all go home and try to come up with some other religion? I mean, if L. Ron Hubbard could do it - all these 'great' minds should be able to come up with something that will get people just as hysterical on just as little foundation of fact. Don't you think?

popeye1250 -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/14/2009 5:12:17 PM)
Yeah but you "ain't shit" until.....GOOD HOUSEKEEPING certifies your ass.

Kirata -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/14/2009 7:42:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brain I guess I’m going to wait and see until people like Al Gore or David Suzuki or others agree with this [sm=pigsfly.gif] K.

FirmhandKY -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/14/2009 7:57:28 PM)
FR: * Review: E-mails show pettiness, not fraud Climate experts, AP reporters go through 1,000 exchanges By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter updated 12:18 p.m. ET, Sat., Dec . 12, 2009 LONDON - E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press. * Some interesting facts about the first bylined "reporter" by the name of Seth Borenstien: AP's Seth Borenstein is just too damn cozy with the people he covers - time for AP to do something about it Basically, this Borenstien is a cozy buddy with the very scientist that are involved in the fudging of all the data at the East Angelica CRU. Also, I thought this was pretty funny: * Going Rogue 11, ClimateGate 5 SUNDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2009 That's ten "AP writers" plus Calvin Woodward, the AP writer whose twinkling pen honed the above contributions into the turgid sludge of the actual report. That's eleven writers for a 695-word report. What on? Obamacare? The Iranian nuke program? The upcoming trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? No, the Associated Press assigned eleven writers to "fact-check" Sarah Palin's new book Now we have this. From the AP's article covering (up) ClimateGate: The AP studied all the e-mails for context, with five reporters reading and rereading them—about 1 million words in total. That's less than half the reporters they assigned to "fact-check" Sarah Palin's book. * Damn, at least we know where their priorities are: bashing Sarah Palin. The destruction of the world can just wait, I guess. Firm

popeye1250 -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/14/2009 11:23:14 PM)
"Hey Granny, Uncle Jed, if'n Mr Drysdale's a lookin for me tell him I'm out by the cee-ment pond cypherin them global warmin' figures."

FirmhandKY -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 6:13:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 "Hey Granny, Uncle Jed, if'n Mr Drysdale's a lookin for me tell him I'm out by the cee-ment pond cypherin them global warmin' figures." Damn, popeye, you are frigging hilarious. If I've not said before, you seem to hit the heart of the matter almost every time, in a coffee spewing way .... Keep up the good work. Firm

kdsub -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 7:08:11 AM)
Yes ...I believe it is a great idea to base National Policy on stolen emails...Yep you anti climate change guys got us now...no doubt about that proof by God. Butch

popeye1250 -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 12:53:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 "Hey Granny, Uncle Jed, if'n Mr Drysdale's a lookin for me tell him I'm out by the cee-ment pond cypherin them global warmin' figures." Damn, popeye, you are frigging hilarious. If I've not said before, you seem to hit the heart of the matter almost every time, in a coffee spewing way .... Keep up the good work. Firm Well thankyou Firm, glad I gave you a chuckle! "Global warming" or is it "climate change" now is a "target rich" environment!

FirmhandKY -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 3:07:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Yes ...I believe it is a great idea to base National Policy on stolen emails...Yep you anti climate change guys got us now...no doubt about that proof by God. Butch Butch, If the "stolen emails" reveal truth, then it's damn straight that policy should be based on them. If you believe that man has caused global warming is a "fact" proved by "science" then you need to establish this in a scientific manner i.e. with data and methodologies that are open to "opponents" and any who wish to check your work, and your processes. You must then be able to explain and defend your data, your processes and your conclusion. That's the very core of the scientific method. The emails have revealed a systemic attempt to suppress the data, hid the processes and subvert any attempt to reveal countervailing data, processes and opinions. That is not science. So ... when it's revealed that the IPCC's reports are based on "not science", and that there has been a group of individuals (who claimed to be scientists) using their "color of authority" to push a non-fact, non-scientific based belief .... damn straight you use the revealing emails to form policy. To do otherwise, you are committing the exact "sin" that you claim the "anti-climate guys" are committing: basing your actions on unsupported beliefs, because they fit your world view, not because they are fact based. Firm

mnottertail -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 3:13:37 PM)
that is a cogent argument Firm, and would hold true if one were to substitute doctored and ignored intelligence by the bush administration, rather than stolen emails.... Am I correct that the general case also becomes suspect in the case of other government policies, and that you will be aiming a gun on the firing line in crawford and several other cities?

FirmhandKY -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 3:23:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail that is a cogent argument Firm, and would hold true if one were to substitute doctored and ignored intelligence by the bush administration, rather than stolen emails.... Am I correct that the general case also becomes suspect in the case of other government policies, and that you will be aiming a gun on the firing line in crawford and several other cities? Good try Ron. The multitude of people who have been of the belief that substantial science supports AGW are not villains in my book. People have a tendency to support "the experts" because of the fact that they are suppose to be "experts" (look up the click-whirr reflex). These people hold the beliefs that AGW exists, even though it's clear now that the science doesn't support it. The case you posit about "doctored and ignored intelligence by the bush administration" is an interesting comparison, I'll admit. However, I'm not sure what it says about your belief about the emails, and the belief of AGW. If you wish to start (yet another) thread about the Iraq War and it's legitimacy or illegitimacy, I suggest another thread. Firm

mnottertail -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 3:31:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY The multitude of people who have been of the belief that substantial science supports AGW are not villains in my book. People have a tendency to support "the experts" because of the fact that they are suppose to be "experts" (look up the click-whirr reflex). Well, I don't care about the click-whirr, nor do I consider this an illegetimate appeal to authority. I see nothing untoward about believing people who have done great amounts of studies and research on the issue. These people hold the beliefs that AGW exists, even though it's clear now that the science doesn't support it. it is far from unclear that the scienc does not support it. Ron, and Im too lazy to move and clip for all the quotes, apologies in advance.

kdsub -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 9:29:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Yes ...I believe it is a great idea to base National Policy on stolen emails...Yep you anti climate change guys got us now...no doubt about that proof by God. Butch Butch, If the "stolen emails" reveal truth, then it's damn straight that policy should be based on them. If you believe that man has caused global warming is a "fact" proved by "science" then you need to establish this in a scientific manner i.e. with data and methodologies that are open to "opponents" and any who wish to check your work, and your processes. You must then be able to explain and defend your data, your processes and your conclusion. That's the very core of the scientific method. The emails have revealed a systemic attempt to suppress the data, hid the processes and subvert any attempt to reveal countervailing data, processes and opinions. That is not science. So ... when it's revealed that the IPCC's reports are based on "not science", and that there has been a group of individuals (who claimed to be scientists) using their "color of authority" to push a non-fact, non-scientific based belief .... damn straight you use the revealing emails to form policy. To do otherwise, you are committing the exact "sin" that you claim the "anti-climate guys" are committing: basing your actions on unsupported beliefs, because they fit your world view, not because they are fact based. Firm I do not think you can even be sure the stolen emails were not altered...after all these were crooks...years and years of evidence...beyond these yahoos have shone there is at least reason for further research into mans part in undeniable global warning and if anything can be done. To jump on a bunch of crooks bandwagon is irresponsible and I must say I was surprised that you would support it. I would have thought it below you...a person whom I respected because of the strength of your research during your posts...I'll be less likely to believe you outright in the future. It is truly sad Butch

TheHeretic -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 9:49:15 PM)
If that were the case, Butch, that the emails were altered, why would the authors be claiming they were taken out of context? There doesn't seem to be any suggestion that they are fraudulent. Why would you even raise such an argument when the place the files came from doesn't?

FirmhandKY -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/15/2009 10:01:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Yes ...I believe it is a great idea to base National Policy on stolen emails...Yep you anti climate change guys got us now...no doubt about that proof by God. Butch Butch, If the "stolen emails" reveal truth, then it's damn straight that policy should be based on them. If you believe that man has caused global warming is a "fact" proved by "science" then you need to establish this in a scientific manner i.e. with data and methodologies that are open to "opponents" and any who wish to check your work, and your processes. You must then be able to explain and defend your data, your processes and your conclusion. That's the very core of the scientific method. The emails have revealed a systemic attempt to suppress the data, hid the processes and subvert any attempt to reveal countervailing data, processes and opinions. That is not science. So ... when it's revealed that the IPCC's reports are based on "not science", and that there has been a group of individuals (who claimed to be scientists) using their "color of authority" to push a non-fact, non-scientific based belief .... damn straight you use the revealing emails to form policy. To do otherwise, you are committing the exact "sin" that you claim the "anti-climate guys" are committing: basing your actions on unsupported beliefs, because they fit your world view, not because they are fact based. Firm I do not think you can even be sure the stolen emails were not altered...after all these were crooks...years and years of evidence...beyond these yahoos have shone there is at least reason for further research into mans part in undeniable global warning and if anything can be done. To jump on a bunch of crooks bandwagon is irresponsible and I must say I was surprised that you would support it. I would have thought it below you...a person whom I respected because of the strength of your research during your posts...I'll be less likely to believe you outright in the future. It is truly sad Butch Butch, You seem a little disjointed in your posting, or I'm not understanding exactly all your points. Firm

pahunkboy -> RE: AP Exhaustive Review of Stolen Climate Email Finds No Evidence of Falsification, Fabrication (12/16/2009 12:45:31 AM)
Even still- WHY should we MONETIZE the matter. We have no money. duh

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875