RE: James Hansen ... follow the money?

RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

subapplicant -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/22/2011 3:38:03 PM)
Oh my. Climategate 2.0. New e-mails released today. The new release proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main scientists involved in climate scientists are disinterested observers with absolutely no agenda other than the passionate pursuit of truth no matter where it leads. Yeah. Right. And the alarmists wonder why some people are skeptical.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/22/2011 3:47:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subapplicant Oh my. Climategate 2.0. New e-mails released today. The new release proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main scientists involved in climate scientists are disinterested observers with absolutely no agenda other than the passionate pursuit of truth no matter where it leads. Yeah. Right. And the alarmists wonder why some people are skeptical. To be fair, Im not sure where your quote came from or whether its accurate or not. The claim from East Anglia is that they don't provide any sort of damning evidence. We'll see. That much of the prior evidence was either intentionally obscured, exagerrated or simply lied about is irrefutable, though, and the cultists still wont let themselves believe it.

DomKen -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/22/2011 4:35:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subapplicant I am glad that you agree that transparency is necessary. However, it is not true that all data and methods underlying global warming academic research is readily available. Can you point me to the website that has Mann's hockey stick data AND computer program? You bought into denialists lies about this. Likely it is because you have no idea how science operates. Mann's graph is in this paper http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1999/1999GL900070.shtml The authors tell the sources of their data and, since the sources are public domain, that is all they need to do. If you want the data then you can get the appropriate credentials and go to the same sources and get the raw data. quote: Have you heard about the multiple FOIA requests that have been turned down regarding Jones's urban heat island effect paper? Yes I did. Why should anyone provide data to people who have no idea what to do with it and are only asking for the data to misrepresent it? Notice the FOIA requests have all been found to be invalid. The paper is available and any reputable scientist who needs the raw data and can pay for the copying expenses can get it. quote: This is a matter of important public policy decisions, if the alarmists have their way. Why not make it available to the public? Perhaps you are comfortable relying on the word of priests - sorry, I meant scientists. But in a matter of important public policy, just saying trust the experts is not enough. Open up all of the files associated with the academic research. Post them online. Let the skeptics rip it apart - and then rip the skeptics arguments apart. You have no idea how much raw data you're demanding. I pointed you to a relatively small database of just the terrestrial weather station data used by BEST. Did you go through it? How many billions of records did you examine before you gave up? Basically you're simply accusing the world's scientists of engaging in a massive conspiracy to deceive the rest of the world. Do you understand how ridiculous and paranoid that is? BTW since you bring up Mann and Jones it is clear you basing this argument on the stolen emails. Did you also follow when every single independent examination of the stolen documents found that absolutely nothing had been done wrong or unethically?

outhere69 -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/22/2011 5:15:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy And its been fucking cold in California the last 4 years. Lower air conditioning bills than ever despite the unconscionable increases in electricity rates, at least. That's weather, not climate. So is meteorology. Has there been warming in the past? Sure. Not this freakin' fast though, unless there was a substantial impact event. Besides, there are more GHG gases than carbon dioxide and they are much more potent. Methane and the newer gas used in air conditioning systems (R-134a, I think), for example. Hard to believe that Republicans used to advocate a carbon "tax and trade" system. Guys like Bush 43.

Sanity -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/22/2011 7:37:50 PM)
Heres a link to an article about it. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/22/fresh-hacked-climate-science-emails Every day must be physically painful, for the average hardcore leftist... quote: ORIGINAL: subapplicant Oh my. Climategate 2.0. New e-mails released today. The new release proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main scientists involved in climate scientists are disinterested observers with absolutely no agenda other than the passionate pursuit of truth no matter where it leads. Yeah. Right. And the alarmists wonder why some people are skeptical.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/22/2011 8:46:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: outhere69 . Hard to believe that Republicans used to advocate a carbon "tax and trade" system. Guys like Bush 43. Too bad that lie has already been exposed for what it is.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/22/2011 8:47:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Heres a link to an article about it. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/22/fresh-hacked-climate-science-emails Every day must be physically painful, for the average hardcore leftist... quote: ORIGINAL: subapplicant Oh my. Climategate 2.0. New e-mails released today. The new release proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main scientists involved in climate scientists are disinterested observers with absolutely no agenda other than the passionate pursuit of truth no matter where it leads. Yeah. Right. And the alarmists wonder why some people are skeptical. Its not painful for them, their denial is a powerful analgesic.

subapplicant -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/23/2011 8:01:14 AM)
A nugget from the Climategate 2.0 release: "The science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run". Peter Thorne, climate scientist. And another: "It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion and trillion dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability." Jagadish Shukla, climate scientist, lead IPCC author. Skeptics have a right to be skeptical. Billion and trillion dollar decisions hang in the balance. The e-mails should give everyone pause, including climate alarmists.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: James Hansen ... follow the money? (11/23/2011 9:15:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subapplicant A nugget from the Climategate 2.0 release: "The science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run". Peter Thorne, climate scientist. And another: "It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion and trillion dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability." Jagadish Shukla, climate scientist, lead IPCC author. Skeptics have a right to be skeptical. Billion and trillion dollar decisions hang in the balance. The e-mails should give everyone pause, including climate alarmists. Depending on context the first is pretty damning. The second is just a statement of fact, and doesnt really go to the state of the models at the time or that might be developed, so unless there's more I dont see that one as a smoking gun.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125