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.
It's going to be hilarious when this non-issue dies a well-deserved death. Unfortunately, you wingnuts will have moved on to the next faux outrage, and you won't even realize how foolish you look.
Typical liberal response when they have no other argument, bring out the "wingnut" and "Faux" name calling. Do you have anything to add to this discussion of substance?
Unfortunately for you this is not going away no matter how much you wish it would. I understand though, you've been deceived and hopefully will come to that realization. I'll quote a specific passage from above:
Quote:
It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.
Dominant names involved are ones I have followed throughout my career including, Phil Jones, Benjamin Santer, Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, Jonathan Overpeck, Ken Briffa and Tom Wigley. I have watched climate science hijacked and corrupted by this small group of scientists.
These people controlled the global weather data used by the IPCC through the joint Hadley and CRU and produced the HadCRUT data. They controlled the IPCC, especially crucial chapters and especially preparation of the Summary for PolicyMakers (SPM).
Wow, more first rate crap taken from right wing blogs. Cherry picked sentences, repeated purposefully out of context as to prove they were right all along. How much more shameful can you get? I'm glad you're all patting yourself on the backs for your "discovery". However most of us here understand that it's just one liar confirming another liar's lie, and so on. This has been reported by news outlets, void of the rabid right wing fringe spin, and the scientists have made it clear what was being said. But please, don't let that stop you from more fabrication and your foaming at the mouth.
The bottom line: Nothing has been showcased here, except the right's ability to lie through their teeth as usual. However I predict they will ignore the truth (as usual) and continue the pseudo celebratory festivities until they realize that once again...nothing will come of it. And nothing will come of it, because they had nothing to begin with. What a sad little group of people.
LOL... I guess the term "Denier" has new life.
There are deniers alright. The ones in this thread who are purposely reading things out of context and ignoring the rest of the data that goes along with it. Scientists have confirmed the emails, but also emphatically stated that key data is being excluded from the quotes. I'm quite sure that none of the boneheads in this thread have read these in their entirety, nor do they ever intend to. Besides, who would you believe anyway? A group of established PHDs, or a group of habitual LIARS who spend their life online dreaming up conspiracies and quoting right wing blogs all day? Gee golly, who do I believe? The academics, or the grown up children, with a chronic desire to lie about stupid crap online all day?
Like I said, this has been reported elsewhere by non political spin machines, and what they are saying isn't anything like this. Wonder how that could possibly be? Let us also not forget that not ONE major news source is reporting this in the way they are portraying it. How could that possibly be? Of course they have that base covered too: The liberal media conspiracy theory.
Like I said, NOTHING and I mean NOTHING will come of this, because there is nothing to this. Just like all the hoopla I've watched her for months on end, all the "truth" all the "birthers", all the predictions of "Socialism". NONE OF IT ever happens. Why? Because it's all made up crap, usually spun from things taken out of context.
It's going to be hilarious when this non-issue dies a well-deserved death. Unfortunately, you wingnuts will have moved on to the next faux outrage, and you won't even realize how foolish you look.
See, this is what I don't get. They do this every time: Find some half truth and spin it for weeks on end. It's the pseudo outrage du jour, ripe for the pickin', and everybody piles on. All the blogs, Beck types, and their internet foot soldiers who post this crap ad nauseum until the next one comes along. All anybody has to do is a simple search (going back page by page) and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Now, I can see somebody getting caught up in this once or twice. But how many times must it not pan out before you realize you're being duped? There never seems to be an epiphany with these people. All the claims, endless it seems, that never come to fruition. They just die off, and then are replaced by the next "discovery" or "outrage." Normal people would realize that they are chasing their tail and are being lied to. What is it about these people to keep taking part in this type of insanity?
The only thing I can guess is pride and ego. The inability to admit you have been duped. Much like a Nigerian scam, where the sucker keeps sending in money hoping, even though they know the truth, that their payday will come in one day. Eventually it must pay out right?
Really somebody should start record keeping on this, it would be hilarious. I've thought about it a few times. I'd love to see a record of all the "predictions" from these people, and the outcomes (which would be...nothing.) Compile that list for everybody to read at the end of the year. It would be downright hilarious. Although, even if somebody went to the trouble of doing that, it would not dissuade these types. They would still be sending in their money waiting for that big check from the Prince in Nigeria. Guess they'll always be a chump somewhere.
...But it’s actually the second document (potential-funding.doc) that tells the more compelling tale. In addition to four government sources of potential CRU funding, it lists an equal number of “energy agencies†they might put the bite on. Three -- the Carbon Trust, the Northern Energy Initiative and the Energy Saving Trust -- are UK-based consultancy and funding specialists promoting “new energy†technologies with the goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The fourth -- Renewables North West -- is an American company promoting the expansion of solar, wind and geothermal energy in the Pacific Northwest.
LOL, that would be like someone trying to disprove AGW listing Exxon as a potential source of funding.
Renewable Northwest Project - Home Page (http://www.rnp.org/default.html - broken link)
Scientists have confirmed the emails, but also emphatically stated that key data is being excluded from the quotes. I'm quite sure that none of the boneheads in this thread have read these in their entirety, nor do they ever intend to. .
Well if we're all boneheads taking quotes out of context let me be of service to you as you can look up the entire email at this site:
http://www.anelegantchaos.org/cru/ (broken link)
Here's one that has been making the rounds, the bolded part is usally quoted. Out of context?
From: Phil Jones <p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Michael E. Mann" <mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Date: Thu Jul 8 16:30:16 2004
Mike,
Only have it in the pdf form. FYI ONLY - don't pass on. Relevant paras are the last
2 in section 4 on p13. As I said it is worded carefully due to Adrian knowing Eugenia
for years. He knows the're wrong, but he succumbed to her almost pleading with him
to tone it down as it might affect her proposals in the future !
I didn't say any of this, so be careful how you use it - if at all. Keep quiet also
that you have the pdf.
The attachment is a very good paper - I've been pushing Adrian over the last weeks
to get it submitted to JGR or J. Climate. The main results are great for CRU and also
for ERA-40. The basic message is clear - you have to put enough surface and sonde
obs into a model to produce Reanalyses. The jumps when the data input change stand
out so clearly. NCEP does many odd things also around sea ice and over snow and ice.
The other paper by MM is just garbage - as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also
losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well - frequently as I see
it. I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep
them
out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !
My take on this is they want to keep these papers out of IPCC report at all costs and by the suggestion by corrupting the peer review process if necessary. Sound about right?
Like I said, NOTHING and I mean NOTHING will come of this, because there is nothing to this.
Have you read any of the genuine emails?
Doesn't it bother you that this cabal has deliberately changed data to get the results they wanted, has deleted email under FOI requests, have refused to produce the data on which they have based their conclusions, have engaged in a campaign of controlling and corrupting the process of peer review?
Phil Jones:
..IPCC, me and whoever will get accused of being political, whatever we do. As you
know, I'm not political. If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen,
so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This
isn't being political, it is being selfish....
Selfish? Understatement of the year.
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.
