U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-21-2013, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Austin
29,546 posts, read 16,481,629 times
Reputation: 8087

Advertisements

If scientific facts are on your side, why lie? Why fake the data and the charts?

If I'm trying to prove to you that water turns to vapor when heated, I don't have to fake the data and I don't have to lie and I don't have to cover up my experiments.

But if I'm trying to prove to you that the earth is flat, I would have to lie and fake the data?

That's exactly what Michael Mann did. He faked the data to try to show that the 1990s was the warmest decade in history. He lied and tried to eliminate from the climate record the well-documented medieval warming from 700 to 1300 AD, when temperatures were actually much warmer than now.

The temperature curve from 1000 to 1900 AD in Mann's chart is flat and then spikes up at current years. This is his famous hockey stick chart. The intent of the fakery was to demonstrate that human industrial activity caused the purported increase. The fakery was exposed by two Canadian scientists, McIntyre and McKitrick. McKitrick actually showed that Mann's computer program generated hockey-stick curves even when random data were inserted.

So why tell lies if you have accurate data?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-21-2013, 03:27 PM
 
39,458 posts, read 40,770,461 times
Reputation: 16263

Climategate 'hide the decline' explained by Berkeley professor Richard A. Muller - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 03:27 PM
 
12,887 posts, read 15,427,107 times
Reputation: 14853
Either for money, or to placate the masses who prefer blinders on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 05:04 PM
 
Location: WA
4,246 posts, read 7,838,984 times
Reputation: 2364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
If scientific facts are on your side, why lie? Why fake the data and the charts?

If I'm trying to prove to you that water turns to vapor when heated, I don't have to fake the data and I don't have to lie and I don't have to cover up my experiments.

But if I'm trying to prove to you that the earth is flat, I would have to lie and fake the data?

That's exactly what Michael Mann did. He faked the data to try to show that the 1990s was the warmest decade in history. He lied and tried to eliminate from the climate record the well-documented medieval warming from 700 to 1300 AD, when temperatures were actually much warmer than now.

The temperature curve from 1000 to 1900 AD in Mann's chart is flat and then spikes up at current years. This is his famous hockey stick chart. The intent of the fakery was to demonstrate that human industrial activity caused the purported increase. The fakery was exposed by two Canadian scientists, McIntyre and McKitrick. McKitrick actually showed that Mann's computer program generated hockey-stick curves even when random data were inserted.

So why tell lies if you have accurate data?
Nice copy-paste
Is Global Warming a Hoax? Five Facts that Say it Is - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

The hockey stick has been verified again and again by hundreds of other climatologists: The Hockey Stick: The Most Controversial Chart in Science, Explained - Chris Mooney - The Atlantic



Climategate was soooo 4 years ago. Got anything current you'd like to talk about? Or perhaps you'd like to share some actual original thoughts or opinions? It's super-boring arguing with copy-paste robots.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 06:50 PM
 
17,768 posts, read 19,796,610 times
Reputation: 7431
No science requires lies... Global warming requires lies... Think about it...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 08:38 PM
 
Location: Austin
29,546 posts, read 16,481,629 times
Reputation: 8087
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlenextyear View Post
Climategate was soooo 4 years ago. Got anything current you'd like to talk about? Or perhaps you'd like to share some actual original thoughts or opinions? It's super-boring arguing with copy-paste robots.
Can't handle the truth? Typical.

The hockey stick hoax is alive and well.

Typical AGW alarmist... attack the post when you cannot refute the facts.

Climategate is also alive and well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 08:39 PM
 
Location: Austin
29,546 posts, read 16,481,629 times
Reputation: 8087
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
No science requires lies... Global warming requires lies... Think about it...
Correct. When you have real science, you don't need to lie and change the data.

The hockey stick is all lies and altered data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2013, 02:09 PM
 
17,853 posts, read 12,219,988 times
Reputation: 4113
Ooops... Posting that old video wasn't very smart of you....

Muller is also not a climate scientist, he's a physicist, but he should have known better and I bet he wishes he had never done that video. Luckily, not long later, he organised the BEST group to do their own study and found:

Uh oh..... a 'hockey stick'. Confirming Mann's reconstruction. (as have about 20 or so reconstructions since Mann's 1998 paper) Which seems to have been ignored by the right-wing media.

Muller says:
When we began our study, we felt that skeptics had raised legitimate issues, and we didn't know what we'd find. Our results turned out to be close to those published by prior groups. We think that means that those groups had truly been very careful in their work, despite their inability to convince some skeptics of that. They managed to avoid bias in their data selection, homogenization and other corrections.
After Pushing "Climategate," Fox Ignores Study Confirming Temp. Record | Blog | Media Matters for America




Richard Muller now says:

"CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.
Our results show that the average temperature of the earth’s land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases."

High-profile former climate skeptic: "Humans are almost entirely the cause" | Science and the Media - Physics Today
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2013, 02:21 PM
 
17,853 posts, read 12,219,988 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Correct. When you have real science, you don't need to lie and change the data.

The hockey stick is all lies and altered data.
When you have real science you don't need to lie and change the data to try to trash the reputation of scientists and promote the agenda of Exxon Mobile and the Koch brothers.

The hockey stick conspiracy is all lies, misrepresented data and ad hominem attacks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2013, 04:40 PM
 
39,458 posts, read 40,770,461 times
Reputation: 16263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax View Post
Ooops... Posting that old video wasn't very smart of you....

Muller is also not a climate scientist, he's a physicist, but he should have known better and I bet he wishes he had never done that video. Luckily, not long later, he organised the BEST group to do their own study and found:
This has nothing to do with the BEST study, it has to do with the deceptive practices used to construct Mann's version. There is two sets of data spliced together presented as one, you're trying to justify lying to people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top