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 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 11-24-2009, 11:11 AM
 
13,074 posts, read 6,652,812 times
Reputation: 2586
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Gavin and his website, realclimate.com are part of the cabal.

The website was set up by Mann, Jones and others to refute the "skeptics".

What kind of credibility does that leave them?

Alleged CRU Emails - Searchable (http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=622&filename=1139521913.txt - broken link)
That is what boggles me. In the face of this, they still run off to the site to suck up and bow to anything said. What happend to their claims of "credibility" and "verified and validated science"?

They have no problems using highly assumptive and unsubstantiated claims of fraud to discredit those who might disagree, yet when the proof is in the pudding, the evidence clearly laid out for all to see, they act in a manner to which honestly, redefines denial.

I would "sometimes" get a bit irritated by this behavior when it was a contest of the data and what it said, but to see these people sit here and lie through their teeth, misdirect and spin in the fact of such damning evidence, well... its hard not to think them as nothing short of criminals who should be swinging from trees. I know that is an emotional response, but sheesh, can we have a little sanity check please?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-24-2009, 11:14 AM
 
4,090 posts, read 3,123,095 times
Reputation: 1226
Ferd, there are many things we should be planning for. I don't discount that climate is variable. I conserve when I can. We live in a world where more people live in poverty now than 100 years ago. When your roof is leaking you don't spend time painting the walls. If your tires are bald it is foolish to spend limited resources on new floor mats. There are a multitude of programs the liberals could be working on. AGW was about nothing more than a method to tax Americans. I challenge anyone to explain how taxing us and transferring billions to other, poor nations is going to fix the planet or lower temps. It is a money and power grab, and it sickens me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 11:22 AM
 
13,074 posts, read 6,652,812 times
Reputation: 2586
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
The funny thing; he puts up cut and pastes from the very people involved in the hoax, like Gavin from realclimate.com, part of the good old boy netword of unethical scientists.

Revkin tells me the NYT is working tireless on this story and has reported extensively on it......I see one story....his....I'm still waiting for that extensive list of stories.

Maybe this is one reason they are ignoring;



Andy= allegedly Andy Revkin of the NYT.
Yea, Gavin is not a neutral party here, that is merely a spin by those still tapping their heels. In fact, GISS is currently listed in a suit by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) for failure to meet FOI requests since 2007.

As for Revkin, he is being hammered by other reporters out there for his attention to this. He refuses to release his correspondence with them citing "ethical issues" and yet he was the same guy who released extremely sensitive government data among others to the public. The guy is joke and I think their arrogance has clouded their minds as they seem to think the people are too stupid to realize his hypocrisy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 11:27 AM
 
278 posts, read 259,195 times
Reputation: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
Comment on it then? What is it you know? By all means, explain what it is that you know about the science that gives you this insight?

What research are you using? Whose research are you using?

By all means, you claim you "know enough", then please share this knowledge with us?

I will be waiting.

Let us have it please, we need to be shown the ways of our ignorance. You have the podium Mr. Ripley, educate us.
As I said twice already, I'm not a climate scientist, so if it's cold hard facts you're after, you're looking at the wrong person, though given your fondness of copying other people's findings, I doubt it would make a difference anyway. I can tell you from first hand experience that no one (that I know of) who works in the field is taking serious notice of this though, because they know nothing out of the ordinary happened here.

Answer me this, do you honestly think this invalidates global warming?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
19,910 posts, read 8,544,343 times
Reputation: 3631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ripley6174 View Post
As I said twice already, I'm not a climate scientist, so if it's cold hard facts you're after, you're looking at the wrong person, though given your fondness of copying other people's findings, I doubt it would make a difference anyway. I can tell you from first hand experience that no one (that I know of) who works in the field is taking serious notice of this though, because they know nothing out of the ordinary happened here.

Answer me this, do you honestly think this invalidates global warming?
As someone involved in academia, several colleagues are very much dismayed by the recent findings, and even liberals within a few departments have stated they will view future findings in this field with suspicion. Anecdotal? Yes, but it shows that a scientist cannot be swayed by their own personal opinion. At least, no credible scientist can be swayed by it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 12:07 PM
 
22,297 posts, read 16,474,677 times
Reputation: 7263
People keep discussing the emails but IMO although they certainly raise many questions it's the underlying data and code that will ultimately be their downfall if it proves to be what is suspected. It really comes down to what HARRY is eluding too when he makes comments like:

Quote:
OH **** THIS. It's Sunday evening, I've worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done I'm
hitting yet another problem that's based on the hopeless state of our databases. There is no uniform
data integrity, it's just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they're found.
There was pretty good analogy on another site of Harry's problems but I'll put it into my own words, these people understand climatology but I'm sure none of them are professional programmers or understood revision management and database management which would be essential for the integrity of a long term project like this.

It's like Joe Schmoe who has a little side experience building decides he's going to build his own. As he's going along he inevitably is going to make many mistakes but he keeps on building. After ten years he has a nice little house built for himself with some probelms but certainly they can be fixed. Joe SchmoeII comes along and keeps on building. After couple of generations we have a pretty sizable house but it's starting to show some major problems, some floors are crooked, the foundation is sinking in one part and to top it all of we have bunch of undocumneted outlets and plumbing that has been patched together through the years.

Joe SchmoeIII decides it's time to bring in some professional help and hires HARRY to do the job. HARRY realizes this can't be fixed because of all the compounded problems through the years, he's turning off valves but spigots are still running. He's turning off breakers yet outlets still have power. Some of the load bearing walls are poorly built that will need to be completely replaced and we still have major issues with foundation made up of data stone that's been patched and repatched through the years to the point you can no longer tell what is original , new or just for looks.

HARRY of course has to explain to the homeowner this can't be fixed and they need to rip it all down and start over.

Maybe HARRY or one of his workers even reports the house to the local code enforcement officer as well for the public good.
-----------------

If this is the case the truly sad part is this:

The Dog Ate Global Warming | Patrick J. Michaels | Cato Institute: Commentary
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 12:08 PM
 
13,074 posts, read 6,652,812 times
Reputation: 2586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ripley6174 View Post
As I said twice already, I'm not a climate scientist, so if it's cold hard facts you're after, you're looking at the wrong person, though given your fondness of copying other people's findings, I doubt it would make a difference anyway.
I am not asking for "cold hard facts", I am asking you to provide some discussion that shows you know more than how to cut and paste while questioning the character of others.

I don't need to defend myself. You can look up numerous posts over the last year or so here of my comments on the topic where I discuss what the research is saying and pose questions to those concerning the science. How many posts do you discuss the science? Please, link them I would enjoy reading them.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ripley6174 View Post
I can tell you from first hand experience that no one (that I know of) who works in the field is taking serious notice of this though, because they know nothing out of the ordinary happened here.
And who would that be? Can you name a few significant people who aren't implicated in the issue? Maybe some of the scientists in the field? Or are we to take "I know this guy who knows a bit about this stuff and he says this ain't no big deal" as your support for your claim? Look at your response, its political, it says nothing, proves nothing, yet claims it is at a conclusion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ripley6174 View Post
Answer me this, do you honestly think this invalidates global warming?
Do you mean GW or AGW? As this was the entire premise of this issue. I don't think it invalidates AGW, it merely shows AGW was never validated in the first place and there was plenty of evidence before this, but then again if you were informed, you might have realized this.

What it does show is that the warming has not met the expectations of their modeling. It shows they had to keep manipulating observed data to get it in line with modeled data. It shows that the process of peer review in the field was fubar'd and it shows that they were desperate to be right in their bias far more than they were interested in being accurate in their work.

It shows that the integrity of the field is in question. It shows that political bias and manipulation drove their work.

I answered your question, now please answer mine.

Do you think the science is settled concerning AGW? If so, by what information do you use to come to this conclusion? Consensus (and it was never consensus in the first place) is not science, appeal to authority is not science, so by what base do you lay claim to the hypothesis of AGW being even remotely true? Surface records? Satellite records? Ice core data? Tree ring data? What?

While you are thinking, keep in mind that much of the research is reliant on each other. For instance, MBH98 and MBH99 was used as a core for a lot of that teams research. They deny as such, but the code kept coming up with that neat HS every time it was analyzed and this data has influenced a lot of research out there. Ever heard of "Garbage in, Garbage out?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 12:15 PM
 
4,090 posts, read 3,123,095 times
Reputation: 1226
Nomander and Sanrene may just have the posts of the day, week, and year in this thread alone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 12:16 PM
 
13,074 posts, read 6,652,812 times
Reputation: 2586
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
People keep discussing the emails but IMO although they certainly raise many questions it's the underlying data and code that will ultimately be their downfall if it proves to be what is suspected. It really comes down to what HARRY is eluding too when he makes comments like:



There was pretty good analogy on another site of Harry's problems but I'll put it into my own words, these people understand climatology but I'm sure none of them are professional programmers or understood revision management and database management which would be essential for the integrity of a long term project like this.

It's like Joe Schmoe who has a little side experience building decides he's going to build his own. As he's going along he inevitably is going to make many mistakes but he keeps on building. After ten years he has a nice little house built for himself with some probelms but certainly they can be fixed. Joe SchmoeII comes along and keeps on building. After couple of generations we have a pretty sizable house but it's starting to show some major problems, some floors are crooked, the foundation is sinking in one part and to top it all of we have bunch of undocumneted outlets and plumbing that has been patched together through the years.

Joe SchmoeIII decides it's time to bring in some professional help and hires HARRY to do the job. HARRY realizes this can't be fixed because of all the compounded problems through the years, he's turning off valves but spigots are still running. He's turning off breakers yet outlets still have power. Some of the load bearing walls are poorly built that will need to be completely replaced and we still have major issues with foundation made up of data stone that's been patched and repatched through the years to the point you can no longer tell what is original , new or just for looks.

HARRY of course has to explain to the homeowner this can't be fixed and they need to rip it all down and start over.

Maybe HARRY or one of his workers even reports the house to the local code enforcement officer as well for the public good.
-----------------

If this is the case the truly sad part is this:

The Dog Ate Global Warming | Patrick J. Michaels | Cato Institute: Commentary
Yes, the data is the key. The e-mails are useful in some ways, but the data is what will solidify the issue. It was always at the heart of the issue anyway, the e-mails just verify what a lot of people were speculating at concerning the practice they had with stonewalling.

You make a good point about focus of expertise, a poorly constructed database can result in those using the data basically using garbage.

Not only that, but they also have problems with their use of statistical practices which is what CA constantly brought up. They don't seem to understand even the basic principals of that either as noted by the continuous issues with their work as noted by Steve. How much is actual incompetence or devious practice remains to be seen, but those claiming "this is not a serious issue" are either ignorant of the topic or trying to downplay it.

Edit:

Here is a telling aspect in that article. I remember reading about this on CA when it happened and even posting about it on this board as well only to have it waved off:

Quote:
Jones's response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, "We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?"
Climate Science at its best.

Last edited by Nomander; 11-24-2009 at 12:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Universal City, Texas
3,115 posts, read 6,068,819 times
Reputation: 1711
Al Gore: "I invented the Internet!!"
"I was elected President in 2000!!"
"I created Global Warming, all by myself!!"
"I got caught with my pants down, not once but three times!!"
"Does that mean I'm out??"
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 $84,000 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. The time now is 09:26 AM.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

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 - Top