scientists tamper with "global warming" data

Oh that never happens


Feely has reportedly threatened a scientific colleague who wanted to see the real-world data points behind the chart, telling him he would "not last long" in his career if he continues to question the "motives or quality of" Feely and his colleague's science and continues to press for the data.

Mike Wallace, the University of New Mexico hydrologist working on a nanogeosciences doctorate who wants to see the data, told Watts that Feely's response "eclipses even the so-called climategate event."



Read More At Investor's Business Daily: If Climate Change Is Real Why Do Scientists Need To Fudge Data - Investors.com

Australian Meteorologists Caught Fudging Numbers Heartlander Magazine


Climate Change Scientists Told To Fudge Report

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

Global Warming Bombshell MIT Technology Review
 
Last edited:
Yessiree..............Bob...... All them thar pointy headed librul scientists all over the world are in on a massive conspiracy to fool us about the climate and weather. In fact, the gots these machines that can get right into your little mind, so stock up on plenty of aluminum foil for hats, yessirreee Bob!
 
Watch out now, the bed wetters might try and get you arrested under RICO laws. Proving global warming is a bullshit scam should be punished according to criminally insane authoritarian socioaths like senator whitehouse.

beyond_criminally_stupid_shirts-r4b9934d1a79d4df18f14859954c9fa4b_f0yq2_152.jpg




 
Yessiree..............Bob...... All them thar pointy headed librul scientists all over the world are in on a massive conspiracy to fool us about the climate and weather. In fact, the gots these machines that can get right into your little mind, so stock up on plenty of aluminum foil for hats, yessirreee Bob!
yawn..... Been hearing you guys cry wolf now for the past 40 years

Newsweek on the cooling world
In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states
 
Last edited:
Yessiree..............Bob...... All them thar pointy headed librul scientists all over the world are in on a massive conspiracy to fool us about the climate and weather. In fact, the gots these machines that can get right into your little mind, so stock up on plenty of aluminum foil for hats, yessirreee Bob!


101032-malkovich-what-the-fuck-gif-Bu-mb85.gif
 
All them thar pointy headed librul scientists all over the world are in on a massive conspiracy to fool us about the climate and weather.

Dat's rite. Cause of all them billions of dollar they make off the research.........
 
All them thar pointy headed librul scientists all over the world are in on a massive conspiracy to fool us about the climate and weather.

Dat's rite. Cause of all them billions of dollar they make off the research.........
it's funny when you ask scientist an honest question with multiple questions, you get this
The 97 consensus myth busted by a real survey Watts Up With That

The most important question in the AMS survey was done in two parts:

“Is global warming happening? If so, what is its cause?”

Respondent options were:

  • Yes: Mostly human
  • Yes: Equally human and natural
  • Yes: Mostly natural
  • Yes: Insufficient evidence [to determine cause]
  • Yes: Don’t know cause
  • Don’t know if global warming is happening
  • Global warming is not happening
Here’s the kicker:

Just 52 percent of survey respondents answered Yes: Mostly human.

The other 48 percent either questioned whether global warming is happening or would not ascribe human activity as the primary cause.

Here is table 1 from the paper which shows the entire population of respondents (click to enlarge):


Table 1. Meteorologists’ assessment of human-caused global warming by area and level of expertise. Figures are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Numbers in the bottom four rows represent percentage of respondents giving each possible response to the follow-up email question, including non-response to the email (labeled “insufficient evidence – unknown”). These responses together add to the same number as displayed in the insufficient evidence (total) row; some differences occur due to rounding. Similarly, columns total to 100% if all numbers except those in the bottom four rows are added, and differences from 100 are due to rounding. Although 1854 people completed some portion of the survey, this table only displays the results for 1821 respondents, since 33 (less than 2% of the sample) did not answer one or more of the questions on expertise and global warming causation.

Note the difference between those who cite some climate publications and those who don’t. People are often most convinced of their own work, while others looking in from the outside, not so much. As we know, the number of “climate scientists” versus others tends to be a smaller clique.

Dr.. Judith Curry writes:

Look at the views in column 1, then look at the % in the rightmost column: 52% state the the warming since 1850 is mostly anthropogenic. One common categorization would categorize the other 48% as ‘deniers’.
 
Yessiree..............Bob...... All them thar pointy headed librul scientists all over the world are in on a massive conspiracy to fool us about the climate and weather. In fact, the gots these machines that can get right into your little mind, so stock up on plenty of aluminum foil for hats, yessirreee Bob!

So.....????

Eh?

I'm confused. You are an advocate of AGW theory, yes? Do you have an explanation for why the data is altered? Or are you going to simply ignore that it's being altered and rely on personal ad hominem attacks to try to convince people to not look too closely at the details?
 
So.....????

Eh?

I'm confused. You are an advocate of AGW theory, yes? Do you have an explanation for why the data is altered? Or are you going to simply ignore that it's being altered and rely on personal ad hominem attacks to try to convince people to not look too closely at the details?

I suspect the later myself.
 
Damn, they got caught again? Then these gloBULL warming loons wonder why people are skeptical
 
The most important fact here is that scientists can't be trusted. They tamper.

I don't trust anything they say.
 
The most important fact here is that scientists can't be trusted. They tamper.

I don't trust anything they say.

That would be equally broad, and equally flawed, as those who agrandize scientists as infallible. "Scientists" don't lie, people lie. People from all walks of life. There are trustworthy scientists too.

What we need to do is not evaluate based on the fact that some scientists operate with ulterior motives, and instead evaluate based on the logical soundness of the science itself.
 
it's real simple, if you keep your mouth shut and go along with the story, they send you to the Bahamas for a month to dip a thermometer in the water,

if you say you think the story is BS, you find yourself unemployed
 

Forum List

Back
Top