Global Warming

[Gog]

Nero, David Koresh had data coming out of his ears! He also had some deaf and dumb ears to sing to.

The data I believe in is not presented to me by a phucktard in a right wing skirt. The politics and the religion are shite, in light of the tragic, looming and undeniable developments....and sad man. We have had enough failed right wingism haven't we?

The data? It's overwhelming, we're in deep, dark doo doo.

People who provide us with real, confirmed unpolitical facts are too busy to play 'hang the Muslim' or speak for 'special' business interests. They're busy trying to prevent a disaster that looks to make Katrina look like a ripple on a puddle. Leave it to a right winger and it'll only get worse,, you're living proof.
Isolated and segregated in body and soul. WHy is it that we seee soooo many RW failures to even comprehend circumstances, facts, history, science and plain, old reality? hmmm dunno, hmmm caring less everyday!
Have a nice one BTW!

[RockyMt]

And in reply, all I can say is EVERY day when I awake, I say a silent prayer of thanks that al gore wasn't elected President of the United States....

Semper Fi!

-Rocky-

[Area 51]

Al Bore was on 30 Rock last night. Good sense of humour. Gore's kind of a wing-nut but we'd be in a much better place now if Shrub hadn't been selected. x1,000,000

[RockyMt]

Only if "a better place" to you means dead............ I can see it now, al, tipper ,n billary singing Kum-Ba-Ya with bin laden.

-Rocky-

[Old Fart]

Gee 51, the truth sometimes hurts ya.

Now the rest of us will sit back and watch you stutter and drool while trying to discredit the article, sources and science behind it.



Hackers broke into the servers at a prominent British climate research center and leaked years worth of e-mail messages onto the Web, including one with a mysterious reference to a plan to "hide the decline" in data about temperatures.
The Internet is abuzz about the leaked data from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (commonly called Hadley CRU), which has acknowledged the leak of 61MB of confidential data.
Climate change skeptics describe the leaked data as a "smoking gun," evidence of collusion among climatologists and manipulation of data to support the widely held view that climate change is caused by the actions of mankind. The files were reportedly released on a Russian file-serve by an anonymous poster calling himself "FOIA."
In an exclusive interview in Investigate magazine's TGIF Edition, Phil Jones, the head of the Hadley CRU, confirmed that the leaked data is real.
"It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago," he told the magazine, noting that the center has yet to contact the police about the data breach.


TGIF Edition asked Jones about the controversial "hide the decline" comment from an e-mail he wrote in 1999. He told the magazine that there was no intention to mislead, but he had "no idea" what he meant by those words.

[RockyMt]

CLINK!
Semper Fi!

-Rocky-

[G8RDuc]

Here's the whole article...good stuff

Hackers broke into the servers at a prominent British climate research center and leaked years worth of e-mail messages onto the Web, including one with a mysterious reference to a plan to "hide the decline" in data about temperatures.

The Internet is abuzz about the leaked data from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (commonly called Hadley CRU), which has acknowledged the leak of 61MB of confidential data.

Climate change skeptics describe the leaked data as a "smoking gun," evidence of collusion among climatologists and manipulation of data to support the widely held view that climate change is caused by the actions of mankind. The files were reportedly released on a Russian file-serve by an anonymous poster calling himself "FOIA."

In an exclusive interview in Investigate magazine's TGIF Edition, Phil Jones, the head of the Hadley CRU, confirmed that the leaked data is real.

"It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago," he told the magazine, noting that the center has yet to contact the police about the data breach.


TGIF Edition asked Jones about the controversial "hide the decline" comment from an e-mail he wrote in 1999. He told the magazine that there was no intention to mislead, but he had "no idea" what he meant by those words.

"That was an e-mail from ten years ago. Can you remember the exact context of what you wrote ten years ago?" he said.

The Telegraph has posted some of the more scathing excerpts from these emails, which the newspaper suggests points to manipulation of evidence and private doubts about the reality of global warming, though the much of the scientific language in the e-mails is esoteric and hard to interpret.

Others suggest the comments are simply "scientists talking about science." In an interview with Wired, Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, points out that "if you read all of these e-mails, you will be surprised at the integrity of these scientists."

RELATED STORIES
Rust Belt Residents Uneasy Over Climate Change Bill
U.N. 'Climate Change' Plan Would Likely Shift Trillions to Form New World Economy
Still, one notable e-mail from the hacked files clearly describes how to squeeze dissenting scientists from the peer review process:

"I think we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the

Originally Posted by Old Fart

Gee 51, the truth sometimes hurts ya.

Now the rest of us will sit back and watch you stutter and drool while trying to discredit the article, sources and science behind it.



Hackers broke into the servers at a prominent British climate research center and leaked years worth of e-mail messages onto the Web, including one with a mysterious reference to a plan to "hide the decline" in data about temperatures.
The Internet is abuzz about the leaked data from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (commonly called Hadley CRU), which has acknowledged the leak of 61MB of confidential data.
Climate change skeptics describe the leaked data as a "smoking gun," evidence of collusion among climatologists and manipulation of data to support the widely held view that climate change is caused by the actions of mankind. The files were reportedly released on a Russian file-serve by an anonymous poster calling himself "FOIA."
In an exclusive interview in Investigate magazine's TGIF Edition, Phil Jones, the head of the Hadley CRU, confirmed that the leaked data is real.
"It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago," he told the magazine, noting that the center has yet to contact the police about the data breach.


TGIF Edition asked Jones about the controversial "hide the decline" comment from an e-mail he wrote in 1999. He told the magazine that there was no intention to mislead, but he had "no idea" what he meant by those words.

[Old Fart]

Oops, forgot the link, sorry.

I'll have a double

[nero]

Wow. Wow, that is some strong evidence of this "scientific" farce.
It seems incredulous that so many people (scientific community) worldwide could be involved in supporting a theory based upon such a shaky foundation. When one reads some of those emails it's clearly not science involved here. Rather, this is pure political agenda and theatre of the mind.
AGW is dead. The Sun killed it. Or, more precisely, the lack of sunspots for 10 years killed it.
Hackers rock !

[nero]

Originally Posted by Gog

Nero..The data? It's overwhelming, we're in deep, dark doo doo....

Whaddya mean WE bright eyes ? Gotta mouse in your pocket ?

[Gog]

I seem to remember you slipping in a little comment that GWB is retarded idiot so lets move on. Air brakes!... All the pride and arrogance of those Bush years reduced to a little comment and an lifeboat sneak away performance piece. Same for MMGW. You guys are the 'cigarettes are not linked to cancer' crowd.

The difference? This time there is no walk away(Katrina style) or blunder away(Iraq style). Assuming we're all around in the next decade we'll see Nero. and Co., slip a comment in just like his casual, detached Bush comment. "Oh we were the ones telling you that is was a dangerous environmental predicament"...

The intelligent design of misinformation brought to you by the people with the worst concepts, worst ideology and way worst track record. I have the feeling you go door to door trying to sell a myth of the soul and jump on your pulpit to deny the earth and air around you... nice!
People having been doing that for thousands of years. It's all good until you factor in population (10 billion in a few years)and the physical/chemical changes being made at a rate NEVER seen before. Great time to dismiss concerns, "The fundamentals of the ecology are strong"...lol

Expect the same "results" from right wingers that they've already proved they're capable of..!

[Area 51]

Gee, I wonder if hacked data could be manipulated? Do you think that might be possible?

But I'm open-minded. If the data shows we're not warming so be it - no skin off my back. Because I believe in the truth. So far, you clowns have been denying the truth as it has been presented to us. So your opinions now and forever more are meaningless, whatever the real truth turns out to be. It's like saying we won't be hit by an asteroid. And then when an asteroid shows up and misses us by a sliver you think you were right. It's just idiotic luck. So far you guys are 50% right. You've got the idiotic part down pat.

[Area 51]

The football game hadn't started yet so I came back in my cave to read the link. Here's the 1999 (ten friggin years ago) mail in question:

"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd [sic] from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

Decline in what? Adding temps to what? Each series of what? 1961?

There is no way to know what they hell they are talking about. And this is supposed to mean global warming is a hoax? You fellas are desperately laughable at best.

And I suppose NASA is in cahoots with your imagined conspiracy? Remember this...again?




If that's stuttering and delusional then you must be on acid.
(clink)

[Old Fart]

Looks like the clown king algore is stuttering and drooling. Now our zilla king of LSD induced delusion, our esteemed Mr.51 can expound discredit and dispel, especially as I snagged this from Fox.

Drum roll and 3..2..1, now hit it Mr.51. You know, for our amusement.

Updated November 21, 2009
New Documentary Challenges Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' on Global Warming

by
FOXNews.com

In 2007, a British High Court judge ruled that Al Gore's global warming film contained nine significant errors and should no longer be screened in schools unless accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views.



Filmmakers Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney challenged Al Gore's claims about global warming in a new documentary, Nov. 20, 2009. (FNC)

Al Gore's award-winning global warming film "An Inconvenient Truth," socked two years ago by a British court ruling that found several errors, is facing additional scrutiny with the release of a new documentary that seeks to rebut many of Gore's claims.
In Gore's film, directed by Davis Guggenheim and released in 2006, the former vice president argues that humans are causing climate change, a problem he says is the biggest moral challenge facing the globe.
If humans don't act to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases, Gore contends, the deaths caused by climate change will double in 25 years to 300,000 people a year, and more than a million species worldwide could be driven to extinction in half a century.
The film went on to win Academy Awards for Gore and Guggenheim and to re-energize the environmental movement.
But in 2007, a British High Court judge ruled that Gore's film contained nine significant errors and should no longer be screened in schools unless accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views.
The film's "apocalyptic vision" was not an impartial analysis of climate change, High Court Judge Michael Burton said, adding that the film is "substantially founded up scientific research and fact" but that the errors were made in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration."
Buoyed by the ruling, two Irish journalists -- Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney -- released a documentary in which they gather evidence outlining the damage of global warming hysteria. In "Not Evil Just Wrong," they challenge the claims made in Gore's film and conclude that the film is not worth screening in schools because it is shown there as "an article of science, not faith."
Last month, McAleer publicly confronted Gore in an contentious exchange at an environmental journalist conference, where Gore was the keynote speaker and took questions from the audience.
When asked by McAleer whether he would do anything to correct the errors found by the British court, Gore said he wouldn't go through each of the errors but added that the ruling was in favor of screening the film in schools.
"There's been such a long discussion of each one of those specific things," he said. "One of them for example was that polar bears…really aren't endangered. Well polar bears didn't get that word." The audience laughed.
Phelim countered that the number of polar bears has increased and is increasing.
"You don't think they're endangered?" Gore asked.
"The number has increased," McAleer repeated, prompting the same question from Gore. "If the number of polar bears has increased, surely they're not in danger."
Before McAleer could say anything else, he was interrupted by environmental journalists who said it wasn't a debate and shut off his microphone.
Click here to watch the exchange.
McAleer, who has reported in the past for the Financial Times and the Economist, among other outlets, told Fox News' Sean Hannity on Friday that he believes incident shows that the members of the Society of Environmental Journalists are simply environmentalists, not journalists.
"They see it's their duty to protect the multimillionaire politician/businessman rather than support the journalist asking difficult questions," he said.
McElhinney, McAleer's filmmaking partner, said Gore, while doing research for his newly released book, "Our Choice," asked a scientist to dial back the science to fit his narrative.
"So much for the inconvenient truth," McElhinney said. "He just doesn't like the truth."
McAleer said the British court ruling should have given pause to Gore about his film.
"I wouldn't like our documentary to have nine significant errors and if it did, I certainly wouldn't be showing it to school children across America, and that's the important thing," he said.
McElhinney said it's a flawed argument by environmentalists that there's a consensus that everyone agrees about the causes and consequences of global warming.
"That's not how science works," she said. "It doesn't matter if 99,000 people all agree about something and one person is right. Politics works like that -- a certain number of people vote for something and then it becomes true. But with science, it's the one person who tells the truth."

[Area 51]

Gore isn't a scientist. He made a movie. It's no surprise there are some errors in it. So? Policy isn't made based on movies. This is noise. The only people leadership should be listening to are scientists, not ex-politicians, not radio talk show hosts, not preachers or CEOs, not the people on the street, and certainly not anyone at Speedzilla, including me.

Nice try.

By the way, FUX isn't news. It's opinion disguised as news.

[Area 51]

Originally Posted by nero

When one reads some of those emails...

Yeah, right. Like you read any e-mails. Mr. Bigshot. Stick to Cycle.

Oh, brother.

[Gog]

hehe

[Old Fart]

Originally Posted by Area 51

Gore isn't a scientist. He made a movie. It's no surprise there are some errors in it. So? Policy isn't made based on movies. This is noise. The only people leadership should be listening to are scientists, not ex-politicians, not radio talk show hosts, not preachers or CEOs, not the people on the street, and certainly not anyone at Speedzilla, including me.
Nice try. By the way, FUX isn't news. It's opinion disguised as news.

Aah, wonderful. You sucked into it again revealing the shallow mentality. Please remain steadfast, again for the entertainment value. After all, idealism is your credo and the mantra for libs, as realism is an alien concept and to be avoided at all costs. When you're 21 years old ping me and I'll set you straight. No kidding... you smoke dope? Psychotropics? Way cool man, can ya dig it? I had a tie die shirt once.

[Area 51]

Originally Posted by Old Fart

I had a tie die shirt once.

I still have one stored away somewhere but it doesn't fit anymore. I'm fifty, dip, short hair, clean-shaven, middle class, two kids, payed a ton of taxes and never collected a dime, etc. Sounds like you have the mistaken impression that people who enjoy pot are a narrow segment of society. You couldn't be more wrong. In fact you are wrong in just about everything.

Why don't you hobble back to the cycle threads if you've run out of substantive things to say.

[Old Fart]

I like fishing. You're easy to hook. Self employed huh?