Climate Gate Debunked

[skookerasbil]

The so called Climate Gate e-mail scandal is easily debunked nonsense, complete horse shit, a manufactured scandal tailor made for a FOX News audience.

[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/laugh_1.jpg.html'][/URL]








Evidently not debunked s0n!!! But you keep telling yourself that!!!


Big part of nobody caring about global warming!!! But maybe you'll change peoples minds from this nether-region of the internet!!




[URL='http://[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/pew-report-climate-change.jpg.html][IMG]http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/pew-report-climate-change.jpg[/IMG][/URL]'][URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/pew-report-climate-change.jpg.html][/URL][/URL]

 

[cnm]

Every single climate "scientist" is a lobbyist, or haven't you figured that one out yet.

Hilarious. If that is the case then every scientist in every field is a lobbyist. But we know it's not the case, you're just trying to deflect from your giving a lawyer's opinion in a science matter. A lawyer from Heartland in fact.

 

[cnm]

Could have just as easily used "wattsupwithat"...

That would have been fun, Watts, the guy who insisted US temperature data was not valid, while you insist it's the best in the world.

 

[Crick]

The so called Climate Gate e-mail scandal is easily debunked nonsense, complete horse shit, a manufactured scandal tailor made for a FOX News audience.

By a COMEDIAN!!!

You do understand that COMEDIANS aren't subjected to ETHICAL SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS RIGHT? Conservatives don't have to be paid by cable networks to make fools of you, because you provide the entertainment for free and you still buy the products advertised on the stupid programs you watch

And you, posting here, ARE subject to ETHICAL SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS? And where would we find these ETHICAL SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS spelled out? In print? Codified? Certified? Made law? I just wanted to make certain you were following them at all times. For instance, I was curious what your last sentence - the ACCUSATION that poster Liminal was apparently ethically and intellectually incompetent because he purchases items advertised on TV. Do you NOT purchase items advertised on TV? How is that not a completely irrelevant, unrelated, completely manufactured ad hominem attack? And how would such behavior fall under ETHICAL SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS?

The only thing demonstrated here is that poster Pete7469 is an ass.

 

[Crick]

Sure thing. Funnily enough the facts don't support your propaganda. But that IS the nature of propaganda, tell a lie loud enough and long enough and people will believe you. Only, they don't anymore thanks to the internet which doesn't allow the AGW cultists to control the information any longer.

"A new batch of 5,000 emails among scientists central to the assertion that humans are causing a global warming crisis were anonymously released to the public yesterday, igniting a new firestorm of controversy nearly two years to the day after similar emails ignited the Climategate scandal.

Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data."

Climategate 2.0 New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate - Forbes

That would be F-oxNews-orbes? Got it. We'll keep our eyes peeled for the rest of the world's climate scientists to raise their voices in alarm and bail out of the AGW bandwagon. When was that James Taylor, F-oxNews-orbes article? November of 2011? Hmm... that flood of unhappy climate scientists... what happened to them? Surveys of scientists views have shown only growth in their support of AGW. How could that be if what you say James Taylor says is true?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

 

[Liminal]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

 

[skookerasbil]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

meh


The damage is done s0n.........about 170 people are going to see that ghey vid!!! Nothing to refute...........its moot!!

Graphs on last page make it crystal clear!!


You're like a guy who's team is down 55-0 and your team scores a touchdown and you're jumping around the pub like you just won the game.

Nobody cares.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

What is there to refute? Their own WRITTEN WORDS CONDEMN THEM. Its a matter of public record as all government work should be.

 

[Liminal]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

meh


The damage is done s0n.........about 170 people are going to see that ghey vid!!! Nothing to refute...........its moot!!

Graphs on last page make it crystal clear!!


You're like a guy who's team is down 55-0 and your team scores a touchdown and you're jumping around the pub like you just won the game.

Nobody cares.

No one cares about what you don't care about.

 

[IanC]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

I couldn't be bothered rehashing all this again but I think you linked up to an op-ed that pissed me off with its biased spin.

I'll make one rebuttal. Mann was investigated by Penn State. They asked him two major questions. Did you delete the emails and were you involved with getting anyone else to delete emails. Mann answered no to each question and that was the extent of the inquiry on those two questions. There were one or two more questions but I don't remember then at the present.

No search of the server was done to insure the emails were there, or to see if they had been deleted and returned.

Wahl freely admitted that he had deleted the emails upon receiving Mann's forwarding of Jones request. When someone finally asked him in one of the last inquiries, NOAA general inspector I think.

All of the inquests failed to make any significant investigation into the charges. Jones was never asked. Briffa was never questioned about why he took his emails home on his laptop for 'safekeeping'.

Whitewash. Softball questions carefully designed to keep out of dangerous areas and misdirecting answers to take them even farther afield.

 

[Liminal]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

I couldn't be bothered rehashing all this again but I think you linked up to an op-ed that pissed me off with its biased spin.

I'll make one rebuttal. Mann was investigated by Penn State. They asked him two major questions. Did you delete the emails and were you involved with getting anyone else to delete emails. Mann answered no to each question and that was the extent of the inquiry on those two questions. There were one or two more questions but I don't remember then at the present.

No search of the server was done to insure the emails were there, or to see if they had been deleted and returned.

Wahl freely admitted that he had deleted the emails upon receiving Mann's forwarding of Jones request. When someone finally asked him in one of the last inquiries, NOAA general inspector I think.

All of the inquests failed to make any significant investigation into the charges. Jones was never asked. Briffa was never questioned about why he took his emails home on his laptop for 'safekeeping'.

Whitewash. Softball questions carefully designed to keep out of dangerous areas and misdirecting answers to take them even farther afield.

Let's try adding some context.

 

[IanC]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

I couldn't be bothered rehashing all this again but I think you linked up to an op-ed that pissed me off with its biased spin.

I'll make one rebuttal. Mann was investigated by Penn State. They asked him two major questions. Did you delete the emails and were you involved with getting anyone else to delete emails. Mann answered no to each question and that was the extent of the inquiry on those two questions. There were one or two more questions but I don't remember then at the present.

No search of the server was done to insure the emails were there, or to see if they had been deleted and returned.

Wahl freely admitted that he had deleted the emails upon receiving Mann's forwarding of Jones request. When someone finally asked him in one of the last inquiries, NOAA general inspector I think.

All of the inquests failed to make any significant investigation into the charges. Jones was never asked. Briffa was never questioned about why he took his emails home on his laptop for 'safekeeping'.

Whitewash. Softball questions carefully designed to keep out of dangerous areas and misdirecting answers to take them even farther afield.

Let's try adding some context.

Is this a response to the harry-read-me emails? I don't really care about juryrigged software although it does point to incompetence.

I care about the moral failings exposed by the emails and the lame excuses put up to defend them.

 

[Liminal]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

I couldn't be bothered rehashing all this again but I think you linked up to an op-ed that pissed me off with its biased spin.

I'll make one rebuttal. Mann was investigated by Penn State. They asked him two major questions. Did you delete the emails and were you involved with getting anyone else to delete emails. Mann answered no to each question and that was the extent of the inquiry on those two questions. There were one or two more questions but I don't remember then at the present.

No search of the server was done to insure the emails were there, or to see if they had been deleted and returned.

Wahl freely admitted that he had deleted the emails upon receiving Mann's forwarding of Jones request. When someone finally asked him in one of the last inquiries, NOAA general inspector I think.

All of the inquests failed to make any significant investigation into the charges. Jones was never asked. Briffa was never questioned about why he took his emails home on his laptop for 'safekeeping'.

Whitewash. Softball questions carefully designed to keep out of dangerous areas and misdirecting answers to take them even farther afield.

Let's try adding some context.

Is this a response to the harry-read-me emails? I don't really care about juryrigged software although it does point to incompetence.

I care about the moral failings exposed by the emails and the lame excuses put up to defend them.

Uh huh, because overblown, contrived scandals in isolation point to a global conspiracy of scientists and governments.

 

[cnm]

I care about the moral failings exposed by the emails and the lame excuses put up to defend them.

But not, apparently, about the data itself.

 

[IanC]

Its rather amusing to watch alarmist twist and turn and dance all around in an effort to return some semblance of credibility to a bunch of lying pieces of shit. Their own words condemn them, but some here will drink the cyanide laced Kookaid and dance all around...

And yet you haven't even bothered to try and refute the premise.

I couldn't be bothered rehashing all this again but I think you linked up to an op-ed that pissed me off with its biased spin.

I'll make one rebuttal. Mann was investigated by Penn State. They asked him two major questions. Did you delete the emails and were you involved with getting anyone else to delete emails. Mann answered no to each question and that was the extent of the inquiry on those two questions. There were one or two more questions but I don't remember then at the present.

No search of the server was done to insure the emails were there, or to see if they had been deleted and returned.

Wahl freely admitted that he had deleted the emails upon receiving Mann's forwarding of Jones request. When someone finally asked him in one of the last inquiries, NOAA general inspector I think.

All of the inquests failed to make any significant investigation into the charges. Jones was never asked. Briffa was never questioned about why he took his emails home on his laptop for 'safekeeping'.

Whitewash. Softball questions carefully designed to keep out of dangerous areas and misdirecting answers to take them even farther afield.

Let's try adding some context.

Is this a response to the harry-read-me emails? I don't really care about juryrigged software although it does point to incompetence.

I care about the moral failings exposed by the emails and the lame excuses put up to defend them.

Uh huh, because overblown, contrived scandals in isolation point to a global conspiracy of scientists and governments.

Again, groupthink and incompetence is more than ample to explain the whitewash inquiries and there findings.

 

[westwall]

Every single climate "scientist" is a lobbyist, or haven't you figured that one out yet.

Hilarious. If that is the case then every scientist in every field is a lobbyist. But we know it's not the case, you're just trying to deflect from your giving a lawyer's opinion in a science matter. A lawyer from Heartland in fact.

In point of fact they are. I guess you're not too aware of how academia works. Science is funded by GRANTS. Grants are provided by government, or foundations, or business, to do research that the organization giving the money thinks is worthwhile. So, how do you think they get those grants? Yep, they LOBBY for them.

 

[IanC]

I care about the moral failings exposed by the emails and the lame excuses put up to defend them.

But not, apparently, about the data itself.

Have you actually read any of the email chains?

Some climate scientists are guilty of having substantially different public and private positions.

To me, it is perhaps the everyday climate scientist who refused to speak up and clear out the mistakes and machinations brought forward in the climategate emails who are so disappointing.

 

[Liminal]

Every single climate "scientist" is a lobbyist, or haven't you figured that one out yet.

Hilarious. If that is the case then every scientist in every field is a lobbyist. But we know it's not the case, you're just trying to deflect from your giving a lawyer's opinion in a science matter. A lawyer from Heartland in fact.

In point of fact they are. I guess you're not too aware of how academia works. Science is funded by GRANTS. Grants are provided by government, or foundations, or business, to do research that the organization giving the money thinks is worthwhile. So, how do you think they get those grants? Yep, they LOBBY for them.

Feel free to substantiate your alleged point with some kind of evidence other than idle speculation, ill considered opinion, and generic knee jerk characterizations.

 

[westwall]

I care about the moral failings exposed by the emails and the lame excuses put up to defend them.

But not, apparently, about the data itself.

What "data"? They have no data. They have computer models and fake data.