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.
No kidding these pseudo intellects spew their garbage until they are called to explain the facts. Then it is quiet and you can hear a pin drop. What hypocrites!
Script kiddie by night? The application would never be submitted to your office in the first place, so there's no opportunity to deny it. I'm more interested in actually contributing to society.
Thank you for the laugh! That was the perfect response especially for the lowly public servant that goes by Sangy.
I thought I would add this for a bit of thought. I see a movie in the future. We could have Sangy play a starring.
"The main statement publicized after the last IPCC Scientific Assessment two years ago was that it was likely that most of the warming since 1957 (a point of anomalous cold) was due to man. This claim was based on the weak argument that the current models used by the IPCC couldn't reproduce the warming from about 1978 to 1998 without some forcing, and that the only forcing that they could think of was man. Even this argument assumes that these models adequately deal with natural internal variability—that is, such naturally occurring cycles as El Nino, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, etc. Yet articles from major modeling centers acknowledged that the failure of these models to anticipate the absence of warming for the past dozen years was due to the failure of these models to account for this natural internal variability. Thus even the basis for the weak IPCC argument for anthropogenic climate change was shown to be false."
I am sure you were offended by the printing of the Pentagon Papers.
The article and site I linked was released in june 09. It has the most recent data and the site points out several changes already happening. Look we all know the earth has cycles. So why and how do you explain the changes happening so much more rapidly than before? Do you honestly think all the extra greenhouse gas emissions emitted since the industrial revolution have no negative effect on the planet and its cycles?
You do not know that unless you have been personally involved with the projects. Temp gauges throughout the world have been placed in areas that generate heat so they would get a higher reading. What else have they done? You can trust anyone until they prove different as we have seen among police, doctors, judges, priests, our parents, our spouses, etc etc etc.
A large percentage of people never fell for this scam and a substancial amount of scientists have disputed or not believed this Global Warming scam because their findings did not support it but they were threatened and harassed if they would not play the game.
I am sure EL Gordo and his cohorts have their people all over the internet trying everything to reel their sheep back in. There is a lot of money to be lost if this scam falls apart completely. You don't need to change the name of some doomsday event if it were the real deal.
"Oh shuckie darn. The people aren't buying this Global Warming con any more. Come on guys we need to rename this package. By Jove, I got it! We will call it Climate Change!" Yea, Climate Change. The people will buy that climate changing is a whole new thing"
No pal. We don't believe no stinking lies any more.
political rhetoric with no info gets not response. I am not gonna do your work for you. So please come up with some actual data to support your opinion. The report I linked was started under the bush administration so don't give the political garbage.
This poster makes an important point: Many of us NEVER fell for this scam, and I'm one of them. For years I have said this is nothing but bloody rot !!
The article and site I linked was released in june 09. It has the most recent data and the site points out several changes already happening. Look we all know the earth has cycles. So why and how do you explain the changes happening so much more rapidly than before? Do you honestly think all the extra greenhouse gas emissions emitted since the industrial revolution have no negative effect on the planet and its cycles?
But is it only greenhouse gas ? Is there another contributing factor ?
Data didn't prove the hypothesis. The data was modified to fit the model; in fact some dispute the data was modified to exagerate the hypothesis (Mann's hockey stick).
Why aren't those involved and accussed out in the public defending their hypothesis, their data and their process ? If they are indeed right where are they ? Why the silence ? Answer to the skeptics that cannot reproduce their findings..tell them what they are doing wrong then.
Dreamer, the emails provide some juicy content but really irrelevant as this will all unravel as time goes by.
That is just one of many similar comments in that file, you can argue all you want about out of context emails or whatever you want but when a programmer uses the term "Hopeless" to describe the integrity of a database it's not a small issue especially when the raw data used to generate it has been trashed. I'll ask you if this was cigarette company and they said "Cirarettes are healthy for you but we deleted all the data and only have our results." would you believe them?
Trying to wave away this scandal like it's insignificant isn't going to happen, this research forms the bedrock for AGW research. You're using the same argument "1000's of scientists..." that we have all heard before and it simply is going to fall on deaf ears anymore. There's 1000's of studies that say the opposite as well.
what can i expect from a coal man??????? Look you all can keep being ignorant and thinking that humans have no effect on the planet but you are blind. Look at pictures of glaciers over 20 years...not natural........rising sea levels.......not natural...but keep up your stubborn politically based argument and see where it gets us all.
Ignore the environment and it will go away. Actually we will because the planet will kick us off.
I read the entire thread and it appears that you are the one that has issues. You refuse to see any of the communications as affecting the global warming, climate change research. Like all the others you have closed your mind to any critical thinking and have gone along with the herd mentality.
For the last damn time you talk of herd mentality. The was boat you were all waiting for so you could jump on it. Ever think the timing is awful coincidental isn't it? Talk about herd mentality. Look in the mirror. The links i post have shown you stats, data, examples, current happening but you keep talking about emails. "Like all the others" yeah very open minded yourself
You nor anyone else has read the entire thing because I have not seen one post that actually talks about the research just emails from a few people. Not 50 years of research by thousands of scientist who support it. Not the over ten thousand individual projects that support it. Open your eyes...it is right in front of you. Less snowfall, bigger deserts, raising global temperatures (nasa data)
what is it are you blind???? do you just not care about the future for your family? Don't want to stop driving the SUV? Gotta be something?
It's become a religion. To many have invested to much of their hearts, souls, beings, money and their time to back off now. it's sad really, imagine being 30 years old and only then finding out something you believed in your entire cognitive life is all based on deceit, fraud and lies.
Most depressing is to visit nearly any of our nations colleges and universities because you will find two dominate posters plastered. You have the Obama love posters extolling the virtues of Dear Leader and should you voice any dissent with Dear Leader's policies you run the risk of being hounded off campus. This group think is even filtering down to high and elementary schools.
The other poster features Al Gore, global warming and how only Al Gore and Dear Leader can save the planet with Cap and Trade. At one college I frequent the life sciences building had posters of Al Gore plastered on nearly every empty wall in the building. I didn't count them, wish I would have, but I would estimate there were at least 100 posters plastered on the public portion of this three story building.
For a student to call fraud, to suggest global warming was the fraud that it is, would mean failure of a course and probably failure in school. We have become the Red China of the 1960's during the cultural revolution.
Al Gore led everyone into the jungle and fed them cool aid.
You see a lot about this fraud in the foreign press, it is big in Europe, but the only place you see it here is on the internet or Fox News. Why? Because the so called main stream press has bought into the idea of global warming to the point their are so religiously indoctrinated and invested they can not back down.
When skeptics would voice their opinion they were labeled "deniars" and "shrills for big oil" in order to silence them. Never mind the biggest shrills got their money from "big government".
I do not know of a single person whose mind has been changed with the leaked emails. It is religion.
And hacked. This wasn't hacked by some hacker someone filled with disgust by what he saw going on, deep inside the organization, blew the whistle.
Religion? Fraud? The thing that really puzzles me about the whole climate change debate is how truly desperate some people are to disprove it all.
There's a good article in today's Washington Post about Climate-gate (it cracks me up that every scandalous event must be given a name that harkens back to Watergate).
Leaked just before international climate talks begin in Copenhagen -- the culmination of years of work by scientists to raise alarms about greenhouse-gas emissions -- the e-mails have cast those scientists in a political light and given new energy to others who think the issue of climate change is all overblown.
The e-mails don't say that: They don't provide proof that human-caused climate change is a lie or a swindle.
That's probably worth repeating. There's nothing in the emails that proves that Man is not a major contributor to climate change.
But they do raise hard questions. In an effort to control what the public hears, did prominent scientists who link climate change to human behavior try to squelch a back-and-forth that is central to the scientific method? Is the science of global warming messier than they have admitted?
Good questions, and I think it's fairly obvious that the answer is yes. Some scientists have attempted to marginalize any research and/or scientific opinion that does not match their own views on climate change. I can't and won't defend that. They were flat-out wrong to do so.
And yes, the science of climate change -- much like other sciences -- is a messy science. In any group of scientists, the same data can be studied and different conclusions can legitimately be drawn. No conclusions should be disregarded solely because they don't fit in with other conclusions.
Did the emails reveal some scientists acting badly? Absolutely.
Did the emails reveal that climate change caused by Man is a lie or a fraud? Absolutely not.
Well said. But they won't listen. They just want to ignore and cry foul. You should realize by now these people against it are not interested in actual information or science.
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.
The application would never be submitted to your office in the first place, so there's no opportunity to deny it. I'm more interested in actually contributing to society.
