U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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)
 
Old 11-22-2009, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Michaux State Forest
1,276 posts, read 3,138,330 times
Reputation: 1429

Advertisements

WooHoo, GW is fake! Let's roll out some more Hummers, bring back leaded gasoline, burn coal day and nite, let industry dump more pollutants into our rivers and lakes, and use up all our fosil fuels. Hey, the end is near anyway, right?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-22-2009, 07:13 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,313 posts, read 41,418,556 times
Reputation: 7108
What's wrong? Unhappy that trillions in wealth distribution based on a hoax has been exposed?

Aren't you the least bit upset you've been duped?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2009, 09:24 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,003 posts, read 16,640,664 times
Reputation: 3784
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilred0005 View Post
WooHoo, GW is fake! Let's roll out some more Hummers, bring back leaded gasoline, burn coal day and nite, let industry dump more pollutants into our rivers and lakes, and use up all our fosil fuels. Hey, the end is near anyway, right?
Strawmen rejoice!
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2009, 09:54 PM
 
Location: Over There
5,124 posts, read 5,010,090 times
Reputation: 1205
Even The Brits do not trust Gore because HE LIES!!!!

New Documentary Challenges Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' on Global Warming - FOXNews.com

Quote:
In 2007, a British High Court judge ruled that Al Gore's global warming film contained nine significant errors and should no longer be screened in schools unless accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2009, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,313 posts, read 41,418,556 times
Reputation: 7108
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a...ategate_latest

Quote:
The emails show the astonishing funds behind warmist scientists - with nearly $25 million going to Professor Phil Jones alone. The American Thinker points out the hypcrisy of warming preachers for then denouncing sceptical scientists such as Richard Lindzen as Big Oil shills for having charged, in his case, just $10,000 to appear as an expert witness 20 years ago.
So...it seem Dr. Jones has really made a killing all these years...around $25 Million.

What was that I remember those GW fanatics screeching about "deniers" and the big oil money behind them? All these years, they've been droning on and on about the false claim that "deniers" are contradicted, when in fact it has been the "believers" all along.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle6927598.ece

Quote:
Astonishingly, what appears, at least at first blush, to have emerged is that (a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend; (b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data; (c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and (d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals.
Are these the actions of ethical scientists willing to have their results reproduced?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2009, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,313 posts, read 41,418,556 times
Reputation: 7108
Dr. Jones;

Quote:
Bottom line - their is no way the MWP (whenever it was) was as warm globally as the last 20 years. There is also no way a whole decade in the LIA period was more than 1 deg C on a global basis cooler than the 1961-90 mean. This is all gut feeling, no science, but years of experience of dealing with global scales and varaibility.
Of course, then we make sure the science fits the gut feeling. Having your mind already made up kind of defeats the purpose of objective research.....just keep fudging the numbers until you get the result you're gut feeling is expecting.

What a sham....and isn't this the most wonderful thing you've seen in a while?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2009, 10:25 PM
 
48,508 posts, read 88,655,852 times
Reputation: 18188
Follow the research money ;scientiast are adicted to it.They go after it just like politcans go after campign funding;without it their colleges get rid of them.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2009, 11:48 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,313 posts, read 41,418,556 times
Reputation: 7108
This is a nice one;

Quote:
Yeah, it wasn’t so much 1998 and all that that I was concerned about, used

to dealing with that, but the possibility that we might be going through a

longer – 10 year – period of relatively stable temperatures beyond what you

might expect from La Nina etc.

Speculation, but if I see this as a possibility then others might also.

Anyway, I’ll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I

give the talk again as that’s trending down as a result of the end effects

and the recent cold-ish years.
Yeah, just shave a few points off so no one might notice the cooling trend.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 12:30 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,313 posts, read 41,418,556 times
Reputation: 7108
The HARRY_READ_ME.txt file could be the most disturbing of all the documents on that zip file. The underlying data files are apparently a friggin mess.

"Global Warming" SCAM - Hack/Leak FLASH [Ticker] - MarketTicker Forums
“a very disturbing HARRY_READ_ME.txt file” « Climate Audit – mirror site
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 05:30 AM
 
41,823 posts, read 44,909,646 times
Reputation: 17745
From HARRY_READ_ME.txt

Quote:
Here, the expected 1990-2003 period is MISSING - so the correlations aren't so hot! Yet
the WMO codes and station names /locations are identical (or close). What the hell is
supposed to happen here? Oh yeah - there is no 'supposed', I can make it up. So I have :-)

If an update station matches a 'master' station by WMO code, but the data is unpalatably
inconsistent, the operator is given three choices:

<BEGIN QUOTE>
You have failed a match despite the WMO codes matching.
This must be resolved!! Please choose one:

1. Match them after all.
2. Leave the existing station alone, and discard the update.
3. Give existing station a false code, and make the update the new WMO station.

Enter 1,2 or 3:
<END QUOTE>

You can't imagine what this has cost me - to actually allow the operator to assign false
WMO codes!! But what else is there in such situations? Especially when dealing with a 'Master'
database of dubious provenance (which, er, they all are and always will be).


False codes will be obtained by multiplying the legitimate code (5 digits) by 100, then adding
1 at a time until a number is found with no matches in the database. THIS IS NOT PERFECT but as
there is no central repository for WMO codes - especially made-up ones - we'll have to chance
duplicating one that's present in one of the other databases. In any case, anyone comparing WMO
codes between databases - something I've studiously avoided doing except for tmin/tmax where I
had to - will be treating the false codes with suspicion anyway. Hopefully.

Of course, option 3 cannot be offered for CLIMAT bulletins, there being no metadata with which
to form a new station.

This still meant an awful lot of encounters with naughty Master stations, when really I suspect
nobody else gives a hoot about. So with a somewhat cynical shrug, I added the nuclear option -
to match every WMO possible, and turn the rest into new stations (er, CLIMAT excepted). In other
words, what CRU usually do. It will allow bad databases to pass unnoticed, and good databases to
become bad, but I really don't think people care enough to fix 'em, and it's the main reason the
project is nearly a year late.

And there are STILL WMO code problems!!! Let's try again with the issue. Let's look at the first
station in most of the databases, JAN MAYEN. Here it is in various recent databases:
Rate this post positively 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.


 
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top