Breaking: CLIMATEGATE II....Here we go again!!!

[skookerasbil]

#1 story on The DRUDGE REPORT right now!!!

More "climate scientists" suppressing data that didn't agree with "their" data!!!


Here is the headline as it looks on DRUDGE right now >>

GLOBAL WARMING SCIENTISTS COVERED UP SCEPTIC'S 'DAMAGING' REVIEW

Talk about bad news for the religion.




From the article >>>>


In an echo of the infamous “Climategate” scandal at the University of East Anglia, one of the world’s top academic journals rejected the work of five experts after a reviewer privately denounced it as “harmful”.


Scientists in cover-up of ?damaging? climate view | The Times




I have been saying it for 20 years.......and the evidence is overwhelming. The climate science, as it is presented to the world........is rigged!!!


Draw your own conclusions!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Also clearly proves that the people who push this shit are indeed a religion!! Religion obsessed you might say!!!

These people are like the people in Iraq who see the face of allah on the head of a muffin!!

 

[skookerasbil]

By the way......this is the headline stamped in big bold letters across the page on DRUDGE >>>


GLOBAL WARMING SCIENTISTS COVERED UP SCEPTIC'S 'DAMAGING' REVIEW


Which by the way.......and I cant stop laughing.......will be seen by close to 30 million people by the end of the day!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There's a religious fanaticism to the AGWCult

 

[IanC]

if someone has a subscription, maybe they could post up some of the article.

 

[skookerasbil]

if someone has a subscription, maybe they could post up some of the article.

It'll come up on other sites like wildfire as the day progresses. Don't worry......I'll post it up......this thread is going to be around for awhile Ian.


To me, the most hysterical thing is this BS about "real scientists" you see AGW crusaders posting up constantly.......such a load of BS. To them scientific statistical error is no longer a valid concept in science......that's why it is called a religion......a breakoff religion. Just throw out what you don't like.

 

[polarbear]

if someone has a subscription, maybe they could post up some of the article.

I don`t have a subscription to the article mentioned by skooker but I suspect it`s about the latest scandal which made headlines in the German newspapers:
Klimaforscher Lennart Bengtsson tritt aus Skeptikerverein GWPF aus - SPIEGEL ONLINE

I initially intended to post this in skook`s 74 000 views post, but after you asked this question I decided to post it here.
Last month, Lennart Bensston, the director of the Max Planck climate research resigned his post after heavily criticizing the IPCC for having exaggerated their published data and predictions.
I published his interviews and public statements in skook`s thread:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/9047246-post3023.html

Well, it only took 2 weeks for the IPCC mob to viciously attack Bensston after that:

Bengtsson war dem Akademischen Beirat der Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) beigetreten. Jetzt macht er seinen Schritt rückgängig. "Ich wurde unter so großen Druck gesetzt, den ich nicht mehr ertragen konnte", erklärt Bengtsson in einer Mitteilung an die GWPF. Kollegen hätten sich abgewendet, manche hätten die Zusammenarbeit beendet. Er hätte sich zudem um seine Gesundheit und Sicherheit gesorgt, weshalb er aus dem GWPF wieder ausgetreten sei. "Wie bei der Kommunistenverfolgung"


Er fühle sich an die Zeit der Kommunistenverfolgung in den USA in den Sechzigerjahren erinnert, erklärt Bengtsson. Er habe es nie für möglich gehalten, dass dergleichen möglich sei in der Meteorologie. Die Wissenschaftlerzunft scheine sich verändert zu haben in den vergangenen Jahren. Die Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) erklärt, man habe den Rücktritt mit großem Bedauern zur Kenntnis genommen. Der Vorgang offenbare einen "schockierenden Grad an Intoleranz in der Gesellschaft und einen Widerspruch zu den Grundprinzipien einer offenen wissenschaftlichen Debatte".

I`ll keep it short and just translate the highlights:
After Bengsston joined the GWPF skeptics he was subjected to massive pressure and harassment by his former IPCC collueagues to the point where it affected his health....and left him with no other choice to leave the GWPF.
Bensston said he never thought it possible that Meteorology would become as intolerant as it is has become in recent years.
"It displays a shocking degree of intolerance towards public debate of the underlying scientific principles"
Bengsston likens the harassment he was subjected to the communist witch hunt of the sixties.

If the article that you were after is not about the latest developments concerning Bengsston...it should be.
I`m not at all surprised that nothing of that has been published by the mainstream media on this side of the Atlantic.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The pause is far more damaging....

 

[skookerasbil]

On word: LOSE

 

[mamooth]

Yes, Skook the kook is now proclaiming total victory over ... a Drudge headline.

Pickings are clearly mighty slim the denialist camp, if they're resorting to scraping the bottom of that barrel.

 

[skookerasbil]

Yes, Skook the kook is now proclaiming total victory over ... a Drudge headline.

Pickings are clearly mighty slim the denialist camp, if they're resorting to scraping the bottom of that barrel.

Facts are facts s0n.....but not to the climate k00ks. To climate k00ks, facts are simply the data points that fit with their world view.


Does that ghey cat wear a tin foil hat too s0n?

 

[skookerasbil]

More poop from the emerging story >>>

Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a research fellow at the University of Reading and one of five authors of the study, said he suspected that intolerance of dissenting views on climate science was preventing his paper from being published.

‘The problem we now have in the climate community is that some scientists are mixing up their scientific role with that of a climate activist,’ he told the Times.

Prof Bengtsson’s paper suggests that the Earth’s environment might be much less sensitive to greenhouse gases than previously thought.


Read more: Study suggesting global warming is exaggerated was rejected for publication in respected journal because it was 'less than helpful' to the climate cause, claims professor | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook



So the question is twofold?


1) Is this climate change science real science or fraud science?


2) If the "climate science" view is so overwhelmingly correct, why worry about some
fringe view? Why are alternative finding/views allowed to be published?



How about I tell you why?



Because publishing alternative findings fucks the political narrative and these frauds just wont let that happen



Like Ive been saying for 20 years......global warming is a hoax, plain and simple.

 

[william the wie]

Is this another move of the great right wing conspiracy? Tune into HuffPuff's for the fact free rebuttal coming soon in a link from someone who knows that tin does not stop the mind control transmissions but rather the use of aluminum foil that does the trick.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I wish this fucking pause would end!

 

[Howey]

#1 story on The DRUDGE REPORT right now!!!

More "climate scientists" suppressing data that didn't agree with "their" data!!!


Here is the headline as it looks on DRUDGE right now >>

GLOBAL WARMING SCIENTISTS COVERED UP SCEPTIC'S 'DAMAGING' REVIEW

Talk about bad news for the religion.




From the article >>>>


In an echo of the infamous “Climategate” scandal at the University of East Anglia, one of the world’s top academic journals rejected the work of five experts after a reviewer privately denounced it as “harmful”.


Scientists in cover-up of ?damaging? climate view | The Times




I have been saying it for 20 years.......and the evidence is overwhelming. The climate science, as it is presented to the world........is rigged!!!


Draw your own conclusions!!!

My conclusion? How do I know what lies he's telling when I have to pay to see them?

 

[initforme]

I am a skeptic of GW. The climate is changing where I live but I have a hard time blaming it on man made causes. That being said, the theory poses no threat to the economy as many idiots will cry about. They are also not to be believed.

 

[flacaltenn]

Patience Howey.. Journals are businesses also.. It will come out.

 

[ScienceRocks]

All this pain over a pause. lol!

 

[Rambunctious]

Well Old Rocks...what do ya say now? aaaaahahahahahahahahaha

 

[Impenitent]

All this pain over a pause. lol!

The real scientists among the skeptics know "the pause" is only temporary:

Patrick Michaels is a well-known global warming 'skeptic'. In a recent talk, he said about the 'no warming since 1998' argument

"make an argument that you can get killed on, and you will kill us all....if you lose credibility on this issue, you lose the issue"

"what's happened - and this is why this [global cooling] argument is so very very dangerous - is that solar activity and the El Niño or La Niña we're in now have conspired to add up to produce very very little temperature change in the last couple of years...and so what's going to happen, one of these years, that's going to turn around. And if you make that argument now, you're going to have a very difficult time defending the future."

"global warming is real and the second warming of the 20th century - people have something to do with it, alright? Now get over it."