Bombshell study concludes there is no evidence for anthropogenic climate change...

[alang1216]

I took a class in Astrophysics ... I could once derive Stefen-Boltzmann Equation from Planck's Radiation Equation ... but not anymore and I don't care to relearn it ...

Are you educated enough to discuss how SB is used in climate modeling? ... factor-by-factor ... because if this is already over your head, your not going to understand the scientific objection that is being made ...

I'll pass thanks. I doubt I could learn enough to second guess climate scientists and I'm not sure it matters enough to me. It's enough for me that glaciers and ice sheets are melting and sea level is rising.

 

[alang1216]

Thanks for the video.
How many new nuclear reactors does he think we should build?

Not a clue but I have no problem with them, if we can solve the political problem of the waste. Harry Reid is gone so we might have a chance.

 

[alang1216]

Every above normal wind or rain incident is destructive! You don’t get it

Well I don't get your point if that is what you mean.

 

[alang1216]

Summary​

In late November 2009, more than 1,000 e-mails between scientists at the Climate Research Unit of the U.K.’s University of East Anglia were stolen and made public by an as-yet-unnamed hacker. Climate skeptics are claiming that they show scientific misconduct that amounts to the complete fabrication of man-made global warming. We find that to be unfounded:

• The messages, which span 13 years, show a few scientists in a bad light, being rude or dismissive. An investigation is underway, but there’s still plenty of evidence that the earth is getting warmer and that humans are largely responsible.
• Some critics say the e-mails negate the conclusions of a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but the IPCC report relied on data from a large number of sources, of which CRU was only one.
• E-mails being cited as “smoking guns” have been misrepresented. For instance, one e-mail that refers to “hiding the decline” isn’t talking about a decline in actual temperatures as measured at weather stations. These have continued to rise, and 2009 may turn out to be the fifth warmest year ever recorded. The “decline” actually refers to a problem with recent data from tree rings.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

E-mails being cited as “smoking guns” have been misrepresented. For instance, one e-mail that refers to “hiding the decline” isn’t talking about a decline in actual temperatures as measured at weather stations.

What decline is it hiding?

 

[alang1216]

What decline is it hiding?

The “decline” actually refers to a problem with recent data from tree rings. That's all I know.

 

[westwall]

The “decline” actually refers to a problem with recent data from tree rings. That's all I know.

LIAR, liar, pants on fire!

 

[jc456]

Well I don't get your point if that is what you mean.

all storms are destructive.

 

[jc456]

still plenty of evidence that the earth is getting warmer and that humans are largely responsible.

if there is plenty of evidence, why can't you post any?

 

[jc456]

E-mails being cited as “smoking guns” have been misrepresented.

it's evidence of fraud. From the people you choose to use as data experts, and they just admitted they were faking it. That's a smoking gun in all forms.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The “decline” actually refers to a problem with recent data from tree rings. That's all I know.

So the "good" scientists dishonestly tried to hide the problem?

Doesn't sound like something you need to do when the science is on your side.

 

[alang1216]

all storms are destructive.

All storms are not equally destructive.

 

[alang1216]

if there is plenty of evidence, why can't you post any?

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

 

[alang1216]

it's evidence of fraud. From the people you choose to use as data experts, and they just admitted they were faking it. That's a smoking gun in all forms.

Not according to the article. It was arrogant, lazy, dishonest, and stupid but it was not fraud.

 

[alang1216]

So the "good" scientists dishonestly tried to hide the problem?

Doesn't sound like something you need to do when the science is on your side.

Don't expect me to defend them but he article says their conclusions were legit.

 

[westwall]

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

Ahhhh, if only they could produce some.

They can't, they trot out computer models as those are actually worth something.

They aren't.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

Unprecedented? Post the math.

 

[westwall]

Unprecedented? Post the math.

Get ready for a long wait......
..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Don't expect me to defend them but he article says their conclusions were legit.

Of course, conclusions are usually legit when you have to use a "trick" to hide
a problem with your data. I'll bet his friends all said it was groovy.

 

[westwall]

Of course, conclusions are usually legit when you have to use a "trick" to hide
a problem with your data. I'll bet his friends all said it was groovy.

Yeah, funny how doing something like that in the banking world gets you tossed in prison, but in alang land it is not fraud.