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.
Why would Jones step down if those emails are "made up" ?
Face it these sheep are so embarrassed, you will never get them to even attempt to look at this as anything but a bump in the road. It is full speed ahead, pedal to the metal. Let's not bother ourselves with facts, dishonest science, and political agendas.
In particular, a group of scientists who support the consensus view of climate change have been working together to influence what gets published in science journals.
But the stolen e-mails show that a group of scientists has decided that's not working well enough. So they have resorted to strong tactics — including possible boycotts — to keep any paper they think is dubious from reaching the pages of a journal.
"You do need gates, but when you've spiked the gatekeepers to keep other people out and protect certain insiders, then the gate isn't working," she says.
Yes. I take their word over a pack of lying wingnuts who have been wrong about almost everything they've said for the last 20 years.
It is customary Sir Partisan Hack to provide evidence to a claim of someone lying. Contrary to your popular grammar school play ground talk, simply "claiming" something is not evidence to support the claim.
What you really end up doing is making yourself look irrationally biased in your thinking and sheepishly ignorant.
Face it these sheep are so embarrassed, you will never get them to even attempt to look at this as anything but a bump in the road. It is full speed ahead, pedal to the metal. Let's not bother ourselves with facts, dishonest science, and political agendas.
There is a solution to people like that, you send them to a remote location and serve them Koolaid.
Yes, such a well established and objective response from a scientist don't you think?
And it isn't something new to be honest, these guys have been this way from the start. They absolutely hate McIntyre for his audacity to question their work and the more holes he found in their work, the more nasty they got with him.
What is amusing is that he is there claiming that this is all "character assassination" and then on national TV calls the person questioning him an "ass" "hole". This reminds me of my liberal education, I hope these guys fry.
In particular, a group of scientists who support the consensus view of climate change have been working together to influence what gets published in science journals.
But the stolen e-mails show that a group of scientists has decided that's not working well enough. So they have resorted to strong tactics — including possible boycotts — to keep any paper they think is dubious from reaching the pages of a journal.
"You do need gates, but when you've spiked the gatekeepers to keep other people out and protect certain insiders, then the gate isn't working," she says.
Good article by NPR.
Its worse then that, these same Cliamategate scientists that wrote the latest UN climate assessment report. When Representative James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) and other Republicans recently challenged the Climategate analysis of John Holdren, 0bama's Science Czar responded by repeating that it was just a small group of scientists engaged in some narrow research, and then went on to reference the 2007 UN climate assessment, written by the Climategate crowd.
Quote:
But when asked about some of his own extreme statements and predictions, Holdren replied that scientific research had moved on from the latest UN assessment report in 2007. The most up-to-date scientific research was contained in a report written by some of the world’s leading climate scientists and released last summer. Holdren mentioned and referred to this report, Copenhagen Diagnosis [5], several times during the course of the hearing.
I’m sure it will come as a shock that the two groups largely overlap. The “small group of scientists” up to their necks in Climategate include 12 of the 26 esteemed scientists who wrote the Copenhagen Diagnosis. Who would have ever guessed that forty-six percent of the authors of Copenhagen Diagnosis [6] belong to the Climategate gang? Small world, isn’t it?
Here’s the list of tippity-top scientists who both wrote the authoritative report that Holdren relied on to support his statements and belong to the “small group of scientists” who are now suspected of scientific fraud:
Its worse then that, these same Cliamategate scientists that wrote the latest UN climate assessment report. When Representative James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) and other Republicans recently challenged the Climategate analysis of John Holdren, 0bama's Science Czar responded by repeating that it was just a small group of scientists engaged in some narrow research, and then went on to reference the 2007 UN climate assessment, written by the Climategate crowd.
Wapasha, you bring up a very important point.
Al Gore and those trying to sell us the bill of goods that ALL these Scientists have come to consensus are also trying to say that there are tens of thousands of scientists in this group.
The reality is, that there are just a handfull of scientists who are really involved. There arent thousands that are really involved at that highest level. there are just a small group of about a hundred people, and of that small group, you find the Climategate crowd are even the most important.
Al Gore and those trying to sell us the bill of goods that ALL these Scientists have come to consensus are also trying to say that there are tens of thousands of scientists in this group.
The reality is, that there are just a handfull of scientists who are really involved. There arent thousands that are really involved at that highest level. there are just a small group of about a hundred people, and of that small group, you find the Climategate crowd are even the most important.
Yep, even the 2000+ the IPCC claims as strong supporters of AGW turns out only to be around a handful.
But hey, politics is about looking right, not being right.
Tagged in yellow chalk on a wall outside of the Hammond Building, the scrawled words question the reputation of one Penn State professor as a university inquiry into his research ethics continues.
"Climategate: Don't hide the decline," the wall reads.
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.
