A little real talk about "climate gate" (Merry Christmas, party, election)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two examples of how they doctored the data on which most of the AGW community has based their work. The Hockey Stick and Briffa reconstruction using selective tree ring data, basically ONE tree caused the spike. Steve McIntyre took them to task on both of these assertions.
Down to citing Christopher Booker, are we now? Previous "science" articles wriiten by the one-time TV critic and comedy show writer have included a defense of creation science, a claim that there is no actual evidence that links second-hand smoke to cancer, and the reassuring notion that asbestos in fact poses no risk to human health at all. Can Lord Monckton be far behind at this point?
As for McIntyre the erstwhile mining engineer and his maundering over the Yamal tree-ring data, here is some not so flattering commentary from real, actual scientists. Note the shape of all those curves that don't include any Yamal or even tree-ring data at all. Who'd have thought?
So, given that your accomplishments here are coming up so consistently short of your ambitions, let me recommend this fine 13-volume video introduction to climate science for non-specialists. It might help get you up to speed and save a good deal of future embarassment...
jesus christ. I fing started the thread with a list of info which not one single reply on here has directly challenged.
You do exactly what I said you would to start with it is quite predictable and as always those who disagree with you are stupid . Well then I guees I call you the pot or the kettle.
You have failed to respond to the reporst posted at the beginning of this thread. You already post on every other GW thread on here the same sh^^ you do here. You have nohing new to add, you didn't even read the reports nor did anyone else. Now who is stupid? And you know what gets to me arrogant stupid people who thinkg they know everything about some hacked emails which they don't even have all the facts on yet... Way to jump on a wagon.
I a done responding your ignorant crap that I already said from post one you would post.
Look at your links, look at the research citation. There are several links which use the IPCC, Santer, Mann, etc... as support for their claims.
Seriously, you need to pay attention to why this is an issue. Anything that uses information gathered from those sources is corrupted.
This is what you do not get and your continued ignorance to the reason why the CRU issue is important is why you are still pushing political garbage and not assessing the merit of the links you provide.
I don't care what "administrations" have to say about a topic that they cheery pick a bunch of research to make their claims. They are the problem and idiots parroting off their agenda are as well. Educate yourself please!
I have nothing you have proof. So much proof that everyone around the world is listening to crap spewed by people like you. Oh wait no they aren't copenhagen is still happening. get a life and stop generalizing people to make yourself feel better.
The fact that Copenhagen may still be happening is not evidence that people aren't listening, rather it may be evidence that the organizations to which you worship do not care what people think or what the facts hold because they will dictate truth as they see fit.
You haven't responded to anything posted about CRU, you simply parrot off a bunch of administrative summaries to which cite research that is in question due to the recent information found concerning the CRU as well as other research institutes that also show problems with their research.
You operate at a surface level and that is exactly how this travesty of science was allowed to continue on so long. Because you appeal to authority and self interest, you accept anything stated that falls in line with that ideal.
It makes you a pawn, ignorant of the facts. It is the arrogance you display in the face of facts to promote your ignorance and devotion to self interest and authority to which establishes a position which appears stupid. /shrug
Overwhelmingly the scientific community agrees on global warming and its causes being greenhouse gases.
At various times in history, the scientific community agreed that Mars orbits the Earth. There was overwhelming evidence that it did, by reference to hundreds of years of observations of Mars at various points in the sky, and the evidence was overwhelming.
Except for one unexplained problem. Every so often, Mars would reverse course and start moving backwards for a bit, then it would move forward again and resume its usual path. 90% of the time, Mars behaved according to the current theory, and the scientists of the day put in some fudge factors in the data to compensate for the other 10%
When the ClimateGate team also had a problem with using tree rings to measure temperature over the last thousand years, they also put in some fudge factors to compensate for inconvenient data. It turns out that their tree ring samples did not predict temperature correctly since 1980, and in some cases since 1960. So they had code in their computer programs to "correct" those last few years. This is what they meant by "hiding the decline". That was the "trick". Sort of like manually correcting the orbit of Mars.
How does this seriously impeach the Carbon Dioxide Disaster theory? Because they were trying to prove, with their tree rings, that the current rise in temperature was "unprecedented". The mainstream opinion had been that the Middle Ages, 800-1200 AD had been as warm or warmer than our era, and without the benefit of an industrial carbon footprint. The CRU Team were desperate to eliminate this threat to the theory.
Needless to say, if the tree ring methods they used failed to "predict" actual temperatures in 1980 on (or 1960 on) then there was a serious issue with trusting it for the year 1200, or 1100, or any other period.
Are other data centers themselves supporting the CRU team's work? Well, if the CRU team got their answers from the raw data by cheating, the other teams most likely got the same answers by cheating as well. It's like all the members of a fraternity getting the identical answers right and wrong on a final exam in college. The presumption is they were colluding to cheat.
The problem is... there is no raw data to compare their numbers to. The CRU team either lost it entirely (as they claim) or they deliberately destroyed it to protect their fraud. Phil Jones, the head of CRU, was noted on an e-mail that he would rather destroy it than give it to his rival, Steve McIntyre.
Perhaps the reason that Obama favors the Carbon Dioxide Catastrophe theory is the use of the word "unprecedented" when the Alarmists describe the climate.
Obama uses the word as often, and as reliably as he can. When he had his Q/A session with the Chinese students a week ago, he actually thought his experience was also "unprecedented".
Maybe this is no different, on Obama's part, than Dan Quayle trying to spell "potato". Obama may not have the experience to know what the precedents are. Let's hope he learns quick.
In a way the ClimateGate scandal is like the FBI releasing phone taps of a particular Mafia family. The taps show hundreds of conversations suggesting various frauds and crimes, incriminating words like "whacked", that sort of thing. Words like "We gotta take care of that Steve, he's a thorn in our side".
The head of the family tries to claim that the taps were taken out of context. "When I say Whacked, all I mean is just slapping one of my boys on the side of the face with my open hand", he claims. Besides, the other families are making the same money as I am, so my businesses must have been legit. Finally, the other families say that even if there are some "bad apples" in the Mafia, the consensus among them is that their businesses are entirely legitimate and above board, they are serving a useful need in the society, and that the problems with this family certainly doesn't harm the general integrity of their movement.
And that's true... if you look at the numbers, members of the Mafia are in the vast majority. Those illegitimate holdouts who refuse to join are no better than Flat Earthers or Holocaust Deniers.
One mafioso says... "I looked at the FBI taps, and I don't see any major revelations... it's just a tempest in a teapot".
Meanwhile, the big worldwide Mafia conference in Sicily will continue as planned, since the entire world is now on board with the need for "La Cosa Nostra".
In a way the ClimateGate scandal is like the FBI releasing phone taps of a particular Mafia family. The taps show hundreds of conversations about various crimes, incriminating words like "whacked", that sort of thing.
The head of the family tries to claim that the taps were taken out of context. "When I say Whacked, all I mean is just slapping one of my boys on the side of the face with my open hand, he claims. Besides, the other families are making just as much money as I am, so my businesses must have been legit. Finally, the other families say that even if there are some "bad apples" in the Mafia, the consensus among them is that their businesses are entirely legitimate and above board, and that the problems with this family certainly doesn't harm the general integrity of their movement.
One mafioso says... "I looked at the FBI taps, and I don't see any major revelations... it's just a tempest in a teapot".
Meanwhile, the big Mafia conference in Sicily will continue as planned, since the entire world is now on board withthe need for "La Cosa Nostra".
Actually, the Mafia must be a valuable institution, as evidenced by all the little diners and cigar stores that pay them for protection against street hoodlums. Would they be doing it if the Mafia wasn't legit?
Every menu, or cigar price list, has words like "We want to thank the XXXXX family for their benevolent efforts to keep us safe".
So you see, the consensus is that the Mafia is right, and its critics are wrong.
When he was confronted with his e-mail that said "I hear that Agent John Daly died... In a way that's cheerful news", the Mafioso said... That was taken out of context... I meant that it was good he'll meet the Blessed Virgin in Heaven... besides, I think it was actually the Tombosos across town that did it".
The next day, the headlines said "Godfather throws the Tombosos under the bus".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
