Creator of Infamous Hockey Stick Graph Refuses to Turn Over Data to Court

[RealDave]

So, this officially ends the "Global Warming" debate. First, Climategate where they got caught lying and now this: they have no evidence at all.

It's settled, AGW is total BS

Yet another dumbass who does not know that Climategate was debunked.

And, there were more really ignorant people that thought your stupid post was a winner.

The only dumbass is you who posts up stupid lies in a vain attempt to deflect from what the non braindead figured out long ago. CLIMATEGATE was never "debunked" you silly person.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

"Some of the kerfuffle rests on a misreading of the e-mails' wording. For example, the word "trick" in one message, which has been cited as evidence that a conspiracy is afoot, is actually being used to describe a mathematical approach to reconciling observed temperatures with stand-in data inferred from tree ring measurements."

"As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy."

Scientists Respond to "Climategate" E-Mail Controversy

So, remain an ignorant fool as those that agreed with your post. This is how we got Trtuimp,. I buchj of idiots who only listewn to the Limbaughs, Becks, Infowars & Fox News.

Get informed & you can actually quit looking like a fool here on this board.

 

[RealDave]

I've read the reports & studies & I have read the denier crap. I decided to go with science. You can stick with the limbaughs, infowars, Glenn Beck, and Fox News.

Really? You decided to go with science? Science is all about observation, measurement, and quantification of data and using that to support a claim. Can you show me a single piece of observed, measured, quantified data that supports the AGW claim over natural variability? Just a single piece?

Any number of research papers by a number of climatologists. Where the fuck have you been? What have you read?

Fuck that.

Common sense.

You are soda king stupid that you think man can spew crap into the atmosphere for decades with zero effects.

My God, just how fucking stupid can you get.

More CO2 => More greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

All proven .

None proven. Show us empirical evidence. Not computer models, DATA! GO!

I posted a link to an experiment that high school kids can do that proves it

The greenhouse effect is PROVEN science.

Proving how little actual, real science you know is all you did with that link. That experiment demonstrates the IDEAL GAS LAWS. Not global warming. Were you not a complete scientific cripple you would KNOW that.

So, you agree that more C)2 => more greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

But in your infinite wisdom, this has nothing to do with Climate Change.

Wow

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, this officially ends the "Global Warming" debate. First, Climategate where they got caught lying and now this: they have no evidence at all.

It's settled, AGW is total BS

Yet another dumbass who does not know that Climategate was debunked.

And, there were more really ignorant people that thought your stupid post was a winner.

The only dumbass is you who posts up stupid lies in a vain attempt to deflect from what the non braindead figured out long ago. CLIMATEGATE was never "debunked" you silly person.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

"Some of the kerfuffle rests on a misreading of the e-mails' wording. For example, the word "trick" in one message, which has been cited as evidence that a conspiracy is afoot, is actually being used to describe a mathematical approach to reconciling observed temperatures with stand-in data inferred from tree ring measurements."

"As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy."

Scientists Respond to "Climategate" E-Mail Controversy

So, remain an ignorant fool as those that agreed with your post. This is how we got Trtuimp,. I buchj of idiots who only listewn to the Limbaughs, Becks, Infowars & Fox News.

Get informed & you can actually quit looking like a fool here on this board.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

Sure, why would liars be deterred when their lies and cheating are exposed?

 

[westwall]

So, this officially ends the "Global Warming" debate. First, Climategate where they got caught lying and now this: they have no evidence at all.

It's settled, AGW is total BS

Yet another dumbass who does not know that Climategate was debunked.

And, there were more really ignorant people that thought your stupid post was a winner.

The only dumbass is you who posts up stupid lies in a vain attempt to deflect from what the non braindead figured out long ago. CLIMATEGATE was never "debunked" you silly person.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

"Some of the kerfuffle rests on a misreading of the e-mails' wording. For example, the word "trick" in one message, which has been cited as evidence that a conspiracy is afoot, is actually being used to describe a mathematical approach to reconciling observed temperatures with stand-in data inferred from tree ring measurements."

"As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy."

Scientists Respond to "Climategate" E-Mail Controversy

So, remain an ignorant fool as those that agreed with your post. This is how we got Trtuimp,. I buchj of idiots who only listewn to the Limbaughs, Becks, Infowars & Fox News.

Get informed & you can actually quit looking like a fool here on this board.

I hate to break it to you but that is not exactly a compelling statement they made. They basically are preaching to the morons, namely you, that you can ignore the revelations made in CLIMATEGATE because we don't want you to think for yourselves. That's all that statement means. They are basically telling you to remain fat, stupid, and in the dark.

 

[RealDave]

So, this officially ends the "Global Warming" debate. First, Climategate where they got caught lying and now this: they have no evidence at all.

It's settled, AGW is total BS

Yet another dumbass who does not know that Climategate was debunked.

And, there were more really ignorant people that thought your stupid post was a winner.

The only dumbass is you who posts up stupid lies in a vain attempt to deflect from what the non braindead figured out long ago. CLIMATEGATE was never "debunked" you silly person.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

"Some of the kerfuffle rests on a misreading of the e-mails' wording. For example, the word "trick" in one message, which has been cited as evidence that a conspiracy is afoot, is actually being used to describe a mathematical approach to reconciling observed temperatures with stand-in data inferred from tree ring measurements."

"As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy."

Scientists Respond to "Climategate" E-Mail Controversy

So, remain an ignorant fool as those that agreed with your post. This is how we got Trtuimp,. I buchj of idiots who only listewn to the Limbaughs, Becks, Infowars & Fox News.

Get informed & you can actually quit looking like a fool here on this board.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

Sure, why would liars be deterred when their lies and cheating are exposed?

"Everyone one is lying but me" Great argument.

 

[westwall]

Really? You decided to go with science? Science is all about observation, measurement, and quantification of data and using that to support a claim. Can you show me a single piece of observed, measured, quantified data that supports the AGW claim over natural variability? Just a single piece?

Any number of research papers by a number of climatologists. Where the fuck have you been? What have you read?

Fuck that.

Common sense.

You are soda king stupid that you think man can spew crap into the atmosphere for decades with zero effects.

My God, just how fucking stupid can you get.

More CO2 => More greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

All proven .

None proven. Show us empirical evidence. Not computer models, DATA! GO!

I posted a link to an experiment that high school kids can do that proves it

The greenhouse effect is PROVEN science.

Proving how little actual, real science you know is all you did with that link. That experiment demonstrates the IDEAL GAS LAWS. Not global warming. Were you not a complete scientific cripple you would KNOW that.

So, you agree that more C)2 => more greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

But in your infinite wisdom, this has nothing to do with Climate Change.

Wow

No. I don't. I do agree that CO2 is a GHG. That is not in doubt. What is in doubt is it's power to do so. What that crappy little experiment did is show that when you put a dense gas into a closed receptacle, and remove the less dense gas that was originally there, the temp go's up. But it's not due to the GHG aspect of the CO2, it is due to the DENSITY of that gas.

Might I suggest you take a physics class so you don't look like a complete moron next time?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, this officially ends the "Global Warming" debate. First, Climategate where they got caught lying and now this: they have no evidence at all.

It's settled, AGW is total BS

Yet another dumbass who does not know that Climategate was debunked.

And, there were more really ignorant people that thought your stupid post was a winner.

The only dumbass is you who posts up stupid lies in a vain attempt to deflect from what the non braindead figured out long ago. CLIMATEGATE was never "debunked" you silly person.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

"Some of the kerfuffle rests on a misreading of the e-mails' wording. For example, the word "trick" in one message, which has been cited as evidence that a conspiracy is afoot, is actually being used to describe a mathematical approach to reconciling observed temperatures with stand-in data inferred from tree ring measurements."

"As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy."

Scientists Respond to "Climategate" E-Mail Controversy

So, remain an ignorant fool as those that agreed with your post. This is how we got Trtuimp,. I buchj of idiots who only listewn to the Limbaughs, Becks, Infowars & Fox News.

Get informed & you can actually quit looking like a fool here on this board.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

Sure, why would liars be deterred when their lies and cheating are exposed?

"Everyone one is lying but me" Great argument.

The warmers weren't lying.....they said they were hiding the decline.

 

[RealDave]

Any number of research papers by a number of climatologists. Where the fuck have you been? What have you read?

Fuck that.

Common sense.

You are soda king stupid that you think man can spew crap into the atmosphere for decades with zero effects.

My God, just how fucking stupid can you get.

More CO2 => More greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

All proven .

None proven. Show us empirical evidence. Not computer models, DATA! GO!

I posted a link to an experiment that high school kids can do that proves it

The greenhouse effect is PROVEN science.

Proving how little actual, real science you know is all you did with that link. That experiment demonstrates the IDEAL GAS LAWS. Not global warming. Were you not a complete scientific cripple you would KNOW that.

So, you agree that more C)2 => more greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

But in your infinite wisdom, this has nothing to do with Climate Change.

Wow

No. I don't. I do agree that CO2 is a GHG. That is not in doubt. What is in doubt is it's power to do so. What that crappy little experiment did is show that when you put a dense gas into a closed receptacle, and remove the less dense gas that was originally there, the temp go's up. But it's not due to the GHG aspect of the CO2, it is due to the DENSITY of that gas.

Might I suggest you take a physics class so you don't look like a complete moron next time?

The experiment had two containers. One got more CO2.


Man has changed the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

 

[westwall]

None proven. Show us empirical evidence. Not computer models, DATA! GO!

I posted a link to an experiment that high school kids can do that proves it

The greenhouse effect is PROVEN science.

Proving how little actual, real science you know is all you did with that link. That experiment demonstrates the IDEAL GAS LAWS. Not global warming. Were you not a complete scientific cripple you would KNOW that.

So, you agree that more C)2 => more greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

But in your infinite wisdom, this has nothing to do with Climate Change.

Wow

No. I don't. I do agree that CO2 is a GHG. That is not in doubt. What is in doubt is it's power to do so. What that crappy little experiment did is show that when you put a dense gas into a closed receptacle, and remove the less dense gas that was originally there, the temp go's up. But it's not due to the GHG aspect of the CO2, it is due to the DENSITY of that gas.

Might I suggest you take a physics class so you don't look like a complete moron next time?

The experiment had two containers. One got more CO2.


Man has changed the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Duh. IT'S CALLED DENSITY! Look it up! My gosh but your scientific knowledge is ZERO! Here, theis is high school grade chemistry. Maybe this can educate you a smidgen. Read it and learn something! Sheesh!

The density is determined by utilizing a variation of the ideal gas law where density and molar mass replace moles and volume.

The original ideal gas law uses the formula PV = nRT, the density version of the ideal gas law is PM = dRT, where P is pressure measured in atmospheres (atm), T is temperature measured in kelvin (K), R is the ideal gas law constant 0.0821 atm(L)mol(K)just as in the original formula, but M is now the molar mass (gmol) and d is the density (gL).

By rearranging the formula to PMRT=d the units of atm, mol and K will cancel and the value will be left with the gL units for density.


How do you find density in the ideal gas law? | Socratic

 

[SSDD]

I posted a link to an experiment that high school kids can do that proves it

The greenhouse effect is PROVEN science.

Proving how little actual, real science you know is all you did with that link. That experiment demonstrates the IDEAL GAS LAWS. Not global warming. Were you not a complete scientific cripple you would KNOW that.

So, you agree that more C)2 => more greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

But in your infinite wisdom, this has nothing to do with Climate Change.

Wow

No. I don't. I do agree that CO2 is a GHG. That is not in doubt. What is in doubt is it's power to do so. What that crappy little experiment did is show that when you put a dense gas into a closed receptacle, and remove the less dense gas that was originally there, the temp go's up. But it's not due to the GHG aspect of the CO2, it is due to the DENSITY of that gas.

Might I suggest you take a physics class so you don't look like a complete moron next time?

The experiment had two containers. One got more CO2.


Man has changed the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Duh. IT'S CALLED DENSITY! Look it up! My gosh but your scientific knowledge is ZERO! Here, theis is high school grade chemistry. Maybe this can educate you a smidgen. Read it and learn something! Sheesh!

The density is determined by utilizing a variation of the ideal gas law where density and molar mass replace moles and volume.

The original ideal gas law uses the formula PV = nRT, the density version of the ideal gas law is PM = dRT, where P is pressure measured in atmospheres (atm), T is temperature measured in kelvin (K), R is the ideal gas law constant 0.0821 atm(L)mol(K)just as in the original formula, but M is now the molar mass (gmol) and d is the density (gL).

By rearranging the formula to PMRT=d the units of atm, mol and K will cancel and the value will be left with the gL units for density.


How do you find density in the ideal gas law? | Socratic

Maybe you could dumb it down for him a bit and try to explain the phenomenon known as "heat of compression"...that is what is being demonstrated in the jar full of CO2 experiment.

there used to be a pretty good video demonstrating the phenomenon and how the experiment claiming a greenhouse effect was a hoax...the video is gone, but the script of the video is still available...it describes the experiment with and without a vent for the increased pressure due to the greater density of the CO2...equalize the pressure between the two jars, and both have the same temperature regardless of the content of the jars.

Der CO2-Treibhauseffekt - Internet-Vademecum - A. Brandenberger

 

[Billy_Bob]

As the sun go's so do the planets which receive its energy. Dr Hathaway at the solar observatory has been tracking solar cycles for decades. Even his latest predictions and the observed background solar observed evidence suggests that our next cycle will be just 50% of our current one, We are repeating cycles 3,4,5,6 and possibly 7, solar cycles which caused the Little Ice Age and a drop of 2 deg C globally. We are currently at the beginning of cycle 3 in the series with our current cycle 25.

As with cycle 3 there was a spike in solar output for a few years before it went cold. The planets will respond as their atmospheric compositions allow the heat to be released over time. Mars has already begun to cool rapidly and we will soon follow.

Yes it will. Which means it isn't fossil fuels.
What about Jupiter's red spot?

Energy loss from the sun means that planets weather will be affected. I would guess that a loss in temperature differential would cause the storm energy to decrease just like it does on earth..

So that means something else is also happening and we need all of the data not just graphs and the blindness of just fossil fuels which I have never seen since the doctored graphs of the 70's ,which the guy admitted were never correct.

You just said it's the sun ,but political scientists say it's fossil fuels only.
They dismiss adding in sun, deeper ocean studies, earths axis change and the magnetic fluctuations.

"They dismiss adding in sun, deeper ocean studies, earths axis change and the magnetic fluctuations."

We are just now learning how the ENSO works in our oceans. IT directly affects the charge/discharge rate of heat into our atmosphere. We have now dropped below the base line of the start of the previous El Niño. No global step increase in temperature has been observed as we have in previous events. And once again that oscillation is going very cold.

Even the northern polar jet is bigger in size and dropping deeply to the 55 deg latitude levels during summer. This is indicative of a cooling atmosphere. We are seeing the temperature spikes, as Mars did, just before it began to cool rapidly, our ocean buffers have slowed the cooling response but that heat buffer is now depleted. Its taken a full 16 years to deplete. There is a lot of heat that can be stored in our oceans.

If they are just now learning more ,then they should not have blamed it on fossil fuels way back in the 70's and kept it up for 40 something odd years.
That tells us it's purely politically motivated.

When you look at the facts, the whole AGW scam is just a scam to deprive us of our freedoms, independence, and sovereignty. AGW had no other purpose.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

So, this officially ends the "Global Warming" debate. First, Climategate where they got caught lying and now this: they have no evidence at all.

It's settled, AGW is total BS

Yet another dumbass who does not know that Climategate was debunked.

And, there were more really ignorant people that thought your stupid post was a winner.

The only dumbass is you who posts up stupid lies in a vain attempt to deflect from what the non braindead figured out long ago. CLIMATEGATE was never "debunked" you silly person.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

"Some of the kerfuffle rests on a misreading of the e-mails' wording. For example, the word "trick" in one message, which has been cited as evidence that a conspiracy is afoot, is actually being used to describe a mathematical approach to reconciling observed temperatures with stand-in data inferred from tree ring measurements."

"As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy."

Scientists Respond to "Climategate" E-Mail Controversy

So, remain an ignorant fool as those that agreed with your post. This is how we got Trtuimp,. I buchj of idiots who only listewn to the Limbaughs, Becks, Infowars & Fox News.

Get informed & you can actually quit looking like a fool here on this board.

In 50 years, I suspect the AGW debate will not be ongoing since the planet will still be here and change will occur, but information and technology will further our understanding.

 

[RealDave]

Yes it will. Which means it isn't fossil fuels.
What about Jupiter's red spot?

Energy loss from the sun means that planets weather will be affected. I would guess that a loss in temperature differential would cause the storm energy to decrease just like it does on earth..

So that means something else is also happening and we need all of the data not just graphs and the blindness of just fossil fuels which I have never seen since the doctored graphs of the 70's ,which the guy admitted were never correct.

You just said it's the sun ,but political scientists say it's fossil fuels only.
They dismiss adding in sun, deeper ocean studies, earths axis change and the magnetic fluctuations.

"They dismiss adding in sun, deeper ocean studies, earths axis change and the magnetic fluctuations."

We are just now learning how the ENSO works in our oceans. IT directly affects the charge/discharge rate of heat into our atmosphere. We have now dropped below the base line of the start of the previous El Niño. No global step increase in temperature has been observed as we have in previous events. And once again that oscillation is going very cold.

Even the northern polar jet is bigger in size and dropping deeply to the 55 deg latitude levels during summer. This is indicative of a cooling atmosphere. We are seeing the temperature spikes, as Mars did, just before it began to cool rapidly, our ocean buffers have slowed the cooling response but that heat buffer is now depleted. Its taken a full 16 years to deplete. There is a lot of heat that can be stored in our oceans.

If they are just now learning more ,then they should not have blamed it on fossil fuels way back in the 70's and kept it up for 40 something odd years.
That tells us it's purely politically motivated.

When you look at the facts, the whole AGW scam is just a scam to deprive us of our freedoms, independence, and sovereignty. AGW had no other purpose.

PRAISE THE LORD!!! The freedom to pollute!!!!! The freedom to throw your children into a more difficult life@!!!!

My God you people are sofa king ridiculous.

 

[RealDave]

Proving how little actual, real science you know is all you did with that link. That experiment demonstrates the IDEAL GAS LAWS. Not global warming. Were you not a complete scientific cripple you would KNOW that.

So, you agree that more C)2 => more greenhouse effect => warmer temperatures.

But in your infinite wisdom, this has nothing to do with Climate Change.

Wow

No. I don't. I do agree that CO2 is a GHG. That is not in doubt. What is in doubt is it's power to do so. What that crappy little experiment did is show that when you put a dense gas into a closed receptacle, and remove the less dense gas that was originally there, the temp go's up. But it's not due to the GHG aspect of the CO2, it is due to the DENSITY of that gas.

Might I suggest you take a physics class so you don't look like a complete moron next time?

The experiment had two containers. One got more CO2.


Man has changed the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Duh. IT'S CALLED DENSITY! Look it up! My gosh but your scientific knowledge is ZERO! Here, theis is high school grade chemistry. Maybe this can educate you a smidgen. Read it and learn something! Sheesh!

The density is determined by utilizing a variation of the ideal gas law where density and molar mass replace moles and volume.

The original ideal gas law uses the formula PV = nRT, the density version of the ideal gas law is PM = dRT, where P is pressure measured in atmospheres (atm), T is temperature measured in kelvin (K), R is the ideal gas law constant 0.0821 atm(L)mol(K)just as in the original formula, but M is now the molar mass (gmol) and d is the density (gL).

By rearranging the formula to PMRT=d the units of atm, mol and K will cancel and the value will be left with the gL units for density.


How do you find density in the ideal gas law? | Socratic

Maybe you could dumb it down for him a bit and try to explain the phenomenon known as "heat of compression"...that is what is being demonstrated in the jar full of CO2 experiment.

there used to be a pretty good video demonstrating the phenomenon and how the experiment claiming a greenhouse effect was a hoax...the video is gone, but the script of the video is still available...it describes the experiment with and without a vent for the increased pressure due to the greater density of the CO2...equalize the pressure between the two jars, and both have the same temperature regardless of the content of the jars.

Der CO2-Treibhauseffekt - Internet-Vademecum - A. Brandenberger

So many scientists agree.

But I guess you are smarter than all of them.

This is why your pathetic ramblings are a joke.

 

[IanC]

So, this officially ends the "Global Warming" debate. First, Climategate where they got caught lying and now this: they have no evidence at all.

It's settled, AGW is total BS

Yet another dumbass who does not know that Climategate was debunked.

And, there were more really ignorant people that thought your stupid post was a winner.

The only dumbass is you who posts up stupid lies in a vain attempt to deflect from what the non braindead figured out long ago. CLIMATEGATE was never "debunked" you silly person.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

"Some of the kerfuffle rests on a misreading of the e-mails' wording. For example, the word "trick" in one message, which has been cited as evidence that a conspiracy is afoot, is actually being used to describe a mathematical approach to reconciling observed temperatures with stand-in data inferred from tree ring measurements."

"As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy."

Scientists Respond to "Climategate" E-Mail Controversy

So, remain an ignorant fool as those that agreed with your post. This is how we got Trtuimp,. I buchj of idiots who only listewn to the Limbaughs, Becks, Infowars & Fox News.

Get informed & you can actually quit looking like a fool here on this board.

Scientific American: "In fact, nothing in the stolen e-mails or computer code undermines in any way the scientific consensus—which exists among scientific publications as well as scientists—that climate change is happening and humans are the cause."

Sure, why would liars be deterred when their lies and cheating are exposed?

"Everyone one is lying but me" Great argument.

You should actually read both sides of the story on any particular event covered in the climategate emails, or the subsequent investigations. Then decide which version most accurately describes the facts. Then pick another similar topic, and repeat.

After a handful of these little investigations I doubt that you will be quite as certain of the integrity of the climate science elite. After a few dozen you might just find you have become a skeptic yourself.

 

[Crick]

I strongly suggest you follow your own advice Ian.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I strongly suggest you follow your own advice Ian.

Trying to prevent skeptics from publishing.....doesn't seem right.

If the facts are on your side, why bother? Let them publish, point out their errors.

And who would believe Nobel Prize winner Michael Mann would lie, hide the decline, trick the data?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Anybody who would rely on a mere 1000-2000 years of data to declare major planet climate shift is a fool.

I don't care if any temperature rise can be proven. What happens if CO2 and other GHGs keep rising? The trapped energy has to do something. Logic should tell you that temps will rise.

Uh Oh...left wing logic at it again.

It just has to be that way.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Welcome to climate "science" Data?We don't need no stinking data! we have consensus!

 

[SSDD]

PRAISE THE LORD!!! The freedom to pollute!!!!! The freedom to throw your children into a more difficult life@!!!!

Like so many warmers who don't really have any sort of grasp on the issue, you are conflating pollution with CO2...Pollution is a serious problem...CO2 is not. And nothing is going to be done regarding the very real problem of pollution till the AGW hoax is put in the dustbin of history where it belongs.