Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?

[billvon 3,072]

>How many of those are taken from NIST data?

All of them. They all quote the report. One of them also takes data from the ASCE report, which was the other official report.

>Must suck when you can't refute the data.

Must suck when you stick your foot in your mouth by not even reading the post. (Of course, you've been doing that with climate data for going on 5 years now.)

>I guess the UK Met must be truthers, too . . . .

Nope. Only truthers and deniers refuse to re-evaluate their own conclusions.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Those who are now known to be frauds

So name them.

CRU and Mann for starters

Try again, this time paying attention (They were NOT in the list I posted.)

Fuck your list
they were in the source list I posted

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>"Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than combating
>climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear."

Yep. For 99.99% of the scientists out there, that statement is true. Glad our president listens to such people rather than deniers/truthers/conspiracy theorists.

Yet another lie
Nice billvon, nice

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>How many of those are taken from NIST data?

All of them. They all quote the report. One of them also takes data from the ASCE report, which was the other official report.

Sorry I couldn't verify - the truther sites come up blocked.

Quote

>Must suck when you can't refute the data.

Must suck when you stick your foot in your mouth by not even reading the post. (Of course, you've been doing that with climate data for going on 5 years now.)

Judging from recent events, looking more like it's YOU with the hoof-n-mouth disease every day.

And you're STILL not refuting the data.

Quote

>I guess the UK Met must be truthers, too . . . .

Nope. Only truthers and deniers refuse to re-evaluate their own conclusions.

Pretty harsh on Mann/Jones et al, aren't you?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,072]

>Yet another lie

Kinda says it all:
==============
Elevation increases in moth assemblages over 42 years on a tropical mountain

1. I-Ching Chena,
2. Hau-Jie Shiub,
3. Suzan Benedickc,
4. Jeremy D. Hollowayd,
5. Vun Khen Cheye,
6. Henry S. Barlowf,
7. Jane K. Hilla and
8. Chris D. Thomasa,1


Edited by David L. Denlinger, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, and approved December 15, 2008 (received for review September 17, 2008)

Abstract

Physiological research suggests that tropical insects are particularly sensitive to temperature, but information on their responses to climate change has been lacking—even though the majority of all terrestrial species are insects and their diversity is concentrated in the tropics. Here, we provide evidence that tropical insect species have already undertaken altitude increases, confirming the global reach of climate change impacts on biodiversity. In 2007, we repeated a historical altitudinal transect, originally carried out in 1965 on Mount Kinabalu in Borneo, sampling 6 moth assemblages between 1,885 and 3,675 m elevation. We estimate that the average altitudes of individuals of 102 montane moth species, in the family Geometridae, increased by a mean of 67 m over the 42 years. Our findings indicate that tropical species are likely to be as sensitive as temperate species to climate warming, and we urge ecologists to seek other historic tropical samples to carry out similar repeat surveys. These observed changes, in combination with the high diversity and thermal sensitivity of insects, suggest that large numbers of tropical insect species could be affected by climate warming. As the highest mountain in one of the most biodiverse regions of the world, Mount Kinabalu is a globally important refuge for terrestrial species that become restricted to high altitudes by climate warming.

==============
From The Times
December 10, 2009
Sarah Palin decries 'hoax' of climate change data
Tim Reid in Washington

Sarah Palin: The running mate; Moose-hunter, fisherwoman and beauty queen. (Brian Adams/Getty Images for Wall Street Journal)

Sarah Palin all but declared global warming a hoax yesterday when she urged President Obama to boycott the Copenhagen climate change conference and to stand up to the “radical environment movement”.
===============

Which one is the more credible when it comes to science? (That was a rhetorical question; I know you worship Palin.)

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Those who are now known to be frauds

So name them.

CRU and Mann for starters

Try again, this time paying attention (They were NOT in the list I posted.)

Fuck your list
they were in the source list I posted

Resorting to profane language is a strong indication that you have nothing worthwhile to contribute.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Those who are now known to be frauds

So name them.

CRU and Mann for starters

Try again, this time paying attention (They were NOT in the list I posted.)

Fuck your list
they were in the source list I posted

Resorting to profane language is a strong indication that you have nothing worthwhile to contribute.

As it dragging discussion off topic. Which you have not done twice.

We all look forward to your third attempt

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Only in your small world sir.

But if you say it enough times even you may believe it sometime

But then, you can prove your 99.99% stat cant you....

But then, you and the teach kallend have this drag posts off topic and mislead tactic down to a "science" ( but I am not sure you understand science anymore) dont you....

Now, I await your data (and it hard to believe you understand that term either anymore) to back that number up

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Those who are now known to be frauds

So name them.

CRU and Mann for starters

Try again, this time paying attention (They were NOT in the list I posted.)

Fuck your list
they were in the source list I posted

Resorting to profane language is a strong indication that you have nothing worthwhile to contribute.

As it dragging discussion off topic. Which you have not done twice.

We all look forward to your third attempt

I've not done it twice so you look forward to a third time?????

Do you ever read what you post? (We already know you don't read the stuff you cite, that has been proven over and over again).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,072]

>( but I am not sure you understand science anymore)

Exactly. People with my background just don't understand the science, whereas you have it down cold. I am sure your inability to spell the terms used in the science have nothing to do with your ability to comprehend radiative physics and atmospheric chemistry.

In a similar vein, people like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michael and Senator Inhofe are the ones you should worship look to when it comes to climactic and atmospheric research. People like Naomi Oreskes, Richard Somerville and Konrad Steffen should be ignored for the popular, overpaid attention-hungry talking heads they are.

And in terms of organizations? Be sure to read peer-reviewed scientific journals like FOX News and Michael Crichton books, instead of popular, attention-hungry media outlets like the journal Science, NCAR-Boulder and the Scripps Oceanographic Institute.

Stick with such wise choices and you need never question your accurate, thoughtful and carefully constructed worldview.

[SkyChimp 0]

Earlier we were discussing that scientists signed on to global warming due to "truth" for their career and not funding or pressure. Read this link and this scientist's statement.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/12/09/pressure-defend-climate-gate-scientists/

What say you?

Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?!

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Earlier we were discussing that scientists signed on to global warming due to "truth" for their career and not funding or pressure. Read this link and this scientist's statement.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/12/09/pressure-defend-climate-gate-scientists/

What say you?

"More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the "professional integrity" of global warming research"

"One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work"

Hmmm one in 1,700, or 0.06%. Sounds like typical FAUX NEWS spin.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

Quote

Earlier we were discussing that scientists signed on to global warming due to "truth" for their career and not funding or pressure. Read this link and this scientist's statement.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/12/09/pressure-defend-climate-gate-scientists/

What say you?

"More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the "professional integrity" of global warming research"

"One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work"

Hmmm one in 1,700, or 0.06%. Sounds like typical FAUX NEWS spin.

And

Quote

One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work. The Met Office admitted that many of the signatories did not work on climate change.

Sorry, I had to add this because I'm sure made a genuine mistake by not including it.

[rushmc 23]

Well it seems the UN doesnt know and admits that now

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579956,00.html

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>( but I am not sure you understand science anymore)

Exactly. People with my background just don't understand the science, whereas you have it down cold. I am sure your inability to spell the terms used in the science have nothing to do with your ability to comprehend radiative physics and atmospheric chemistry.

In a similar vein, people like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michael and Senator Inhofe are the ones you should worship look to when it comes to climactic and atmospheric research. People like Naomi Oreskes, Richard Somerville and Konrad Steffen should be ignored for the popular, overpaid attention-hungry talking heads they are.

And in terms of organizations? Be sure to read peer-reviewed scientific journals like FOX News and Michael Crichton books, instead of popular, attention-hungry media outlets like the journal Science, NCAR-Boulder and the Scripps Oceanographic Institute.

Stick with such wise choices and you need never question your accurate, thoughtful and carefully constructed worldview.

Hmm, touched a nerve huh.

Well, I am sure you understand the terms but, you have blinded yourself to science it appears. But that is what happens when you funtion on faith

Again, I am OK if I am proven wrong. How would you feel if your are proven to be supporting fraud?

In the end, this is where it is now

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

>( but I am not sure you understand science anymore)

Exactly. People with my background just don't understand the science, whereas you have it down cold. I am sure your inability to spell the terms used in the science have nothing to do with your ability to comprehend radiative physics and atmospheric chemistry.

In a similar vein, people like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michael and Senator Inhofe are the ones you should worship look to when it comes to climactic and atmospheric research. People like Naomi Oreskes, Richard Somerville and Konrad Steffen should be ignored for the popular, overpaid attention-hungry talking heads they are.

And in terms of organizations? Be sure to read peer-reviewed scientific journals like FOX News and Michael Crichton books, instead of popular, attention-hungry media outlets like the journal Science, NCAR-Boulder and the Scripps Oceanographic Institute.

Stick with such wise choices and you need never question your accurate, thoughtful and carefully constructed worldview.

Hmm, touched a nerve huh.

Well, I am sure you understand the terms but, you have blinded yourself to science it appears. But that is what happens when you funtion on faith

Again, I am OK if I am proven wrong. How would you feel if your are proven to be supporting fraud?

In the end, this is where it is now

It's not, of course.

How about starting to express yourself in proper AE? When will you stop making a fool of yourself?

Fighting windmills with every of your posts. (You know who did that?)

Man, how ridiculous.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Well it seems the UN doesnt know and admits that now

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579956,00.html

Let's see - first you whine that there's not enough data, and now you whine that they want to collect more.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Well it seems the UN doesnt know and admits that now

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579956,00.html

Let's see - first you whine that there's not enough data, and now you whine that they want to collect more.

Where did you read that?

But of course that is your way of deflecting a topic

but anyway. I have never had a problem with good data and coupled with good science. Something we have yet to see on this topic. (dont get me wrong, I dont trust the UN in any way shape or form)

but is is funny the group you support so fully know says they need more data. You agree?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Dont mis understand teach. I still think that if the data came out refuting the side your support, those in your religious quest to force others to live as you see fit will require you claiming fraud and deception

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Fighting windmills with every of your posts. (You know who did that?)

Ya, the late Senator Kennedy

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyChimp 0]

Quote

Well it seems the UN doesnt know and admits that now

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579956,00.html

Just imagine how bad the scam would be if Kofi Annan was still in charge at the UN.

I never had faith in the copenhagen climate conference. Keep America borrowing money from China to stay afloat but let them pay the bill.

Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?!

[rushmc 23]

Obama could go a long way with his "new" "openness in government" directive and postions by making NASA cough it up, you think?


From Newsmax

Others are printing this too BTW

Quote

NASA Stonewalling Stokes Fears Climategate Will Spread to U.S.

Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:35 PM

By: David A. Patten Article Font Size




Climategate may be just the tip of the global-warming iceberg according to the Washington, D.C.-based Competitive Enterprise Institute, which says the next weather-science scandal may erupt right here in the United States.

For nearly three years CEI, a free-market, public-interest organization, has pursued a series of Freedom of Information Act Requests intended to force NASA's climate-science division to hand over e-mails it says could reflect the same sort of pro-warming bias seen in the recent e-mails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of East Anglia University.

One reason NASA's unresponsiveness is drawing attention: For years, the CRU stonewalled a request filed through the British information-act process, before information was "hacked" and posted on the Internet in November.

"They have resisted and haven't wanted to turn anything over," CEI Energy and Global Warming Policy Director Myron Ebell says of NASA. "… So this looks like climate gate all over again to us."


CEI senior fellow Chris Horner, author of Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed, has lead the fight for the information.

Horner is requesting internal e-mails and other information from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).

That institute, directed by controversial global-warming advocate James Hansen, has played an influential role in stoking concern that massive climate changes endanger the planet.

Horner tells Newsmax that he fully expects the GISS data will echo the U.K.-based CRU e-mails.

"The information is, [based on] all indications from what we can tell from available data and past manipulations and modifications of their claims, likely to be damning on a scale similar to the CRU 'ClimateGate' documents, computer code, and annotations," Horner states.

Before Horner and CEI can prove that cooking the climate books is a transatlantic phenomenon, they have to get their hands on the e-mails. And that apparently won't be easy.

It seems NASA put a man on the moon but apparently has been unable to respond to the CEI FOIA request in a timely fashion.

"We're collecting the information and will respond with all the responsive relevant information to all of [CEI's] requests," Goddard public affairs director Mark Hess told The Washington Times earlier this month. "It's just a process you have to go through where you have to collect data that's responsive."

According to Ebell, CEI filed three separate FOIA requests in 2007 with NASA and GISS. CEI is looking into whether a NASA-Goddard employee at GISS has been directing activities at a global-warming advocacy Web site during work hours. Horner says that would be "inappropriate behavior" amounting to "political activism."

CEI also wants to review internal GISS e-mails that would illuminate how the agency has reacted to revelations from Stephen McIntyre, the mathematician and creator of the climateaudit.org blog. McIntyre notified GISS that some of its calculations on warming were in error, and exaggerated its impact.

GISS subsequently corrected the error, but continues to release findings that support aggressive intervention to stave off climate change. That response hasn't allayed the suspicions of global-warming skeptics.

Ebell says CEI hopes to learn "how they responded to Steve McIntire's initial requests and communications to them, whether there was an attempt to… dissemble. We'd like to know what went on internally when this was pointed out to them."

In November, frustrated by the long delay, Horner filed three notices of intent to file suit against NASA and GISS.

Horner says an explanation for the delay has never been offered.

"They've never responded to the requests, or to any on my courtesy reminders that, say, the president issuing an executive order announcing the most transparent administration in history is a good opportunity to bring themselves into compliance with the law," Horner writes to Newsmax in an e-mail. "Just silence."

On late Thursday, Goddard's Hess responded to a Newsmax inquiry with the following e-mail statement: "In response to your questions, we are working on Mr. Horner’s three FOIA requests. We should have been more responsive, and regret that it has taken as long as it has, but we will release the information collected in response to the FOIA requests as soon as possible."

Ebell tells Newsmax he has his own theory about what's behind the foot-dragging. He suspects GISS is trying to avoid a major embarrassment.

"I think that unfortunately some of these scientists have become political promoters foremost. They're putting science in the service of their political agenda," he says. "They're in a hurry. The global-warming alarmist machine, or industry, has been going now since the late 1980s.

"They have spent billions and billions of dollars promoting it to the public, and they don't have much to show for it, and I think they feel time indeed is running out because reality is catching up with them," Ebell says. "We haven't had any global warming over the last decade. The costs of reducing emissions are becoming evident -- and they are enormous.

"So I think they are becoming desperate to get something enacted that will then set a floor, beneath which it will be difficult to undo as the alarmist propaganda effort unravels and is seen not to have much reality behind it."

CEI's FOIA requests and the increased attention they are drawing reflect growing concern over proposals to restrict greenhouse-gas emissions, including carbon dioxide, at a time when many companies are struggling in a difficult economy and unemployment is still at 10 percent.

According to a recent Rasmussen Reports survey, skepticism over global warming is becoming well entrenched in the fabric of American society. Rasmussen says 59 percent of voters now consider it "at least somewhat likely" that some scientists have falsified data in order to support their own global-warming opinions. Thirty-five percent consider it "very likely."

That compares to just 26 percent who say it's not very likely that some data has been distorted.

Despite those findings, the Obama administration continues to insist there is a scientific consensus that dangerous, human-caused global warming is occurring.

"There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, famine, and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades," President Obama said in his Thursday speech upon receiving the Nobel Peace Prize.

In his speech, Obama contended that global warming represents a threat to national and international security.

"For this reason," the president said, "it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action -- it is military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance."




© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,106]

Time flies when your glacier is warming.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Time flies when your glacier is warming.

And it goes slow when two of the most oft quoted (your most oft quoted ) institutions are being acused of fraud and data manipulation, then they have the likes of Algore lie about the age of the emails.

I should ask you, would you rather be asscociated as being someone who supported a fraud or would you rather just be wrong.

Of course one way you get both now dont you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Time flies when your glacier is warming.

And it goes slow when two of the most oft quoted (your most oft quoted ) institutions are being acused of fraud and data manipulation, then they have the likes of Algore lie about the age of the emails.

I should ask you, would you rather be asscociated as being someone who supported a fraud or would you rather just be wrong.

Of course one way you get both now dont you

Flies have no political axe to grind. Either they are on Mt. Everest or they are not. As it happens, now they are for the first time in memory.

Malaria mosquitos are now being found on Mt. Kenya. Mosquitos don't care about politics.

The snows have melted on Kilimanjaro. Snow has no political axe to grind. abcnews.go.com/Technology/JustOneThing/wireStory?id=8977294 Snow doesn't need to be calibrated, it knows just when to melt.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.