/dev/null Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Wonder if somebody will nail these to the door of Al Gore's mansion http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8370282.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Wonder if somebody will nail these to the door of Al Gore's mansion http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8370282.stm E-mails reportedly from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU), including personal exchanges, appeared on the internet on Thursday. That might be interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Wonder if somebody will nail these to the door of Al Gore's mansion http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8370282.stm That's actually pretty much how research happens. You create a data set, discuss with others what data is "good" and what is "bad", mock the people who disagree with you, then publish the "good" data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Wonder if somebody will nail these to the door of Al Gore's mansion http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8370282.stm Is it me?...or is this entire article a lame attempt at damage control by saying: 1. Because there is so many emails on the server, let's spread some FUD about the authenticity of anything that comes out. 2. This was by people whose only intent was to discredit Global Warming 3. Nothing about the actual story: these emails raise doubts at least, and are flat out incriminating at worst, about whether these scientists are doing their jobs properly. IF you were a reporter, wouldn't you want to get your hands on what the emails actually said? Isn't that the story? IF your editor was interested in selling papers/air time, wouldn't he be printing/showing those emails as sensationally as possible? It has been reported that the hacker's initial intent had nothing to do with global warming. Why nothing about that? Somebody want to take a stab at telling me why this whole article shouldn't be looked at as damage control? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 That's actually pretty much how research happens. You create a data set, discuss with others what data is "good" and what is "bad", mock the people who disagree with you, then publish the "good" data. What utter BULL. DATA is DATA. These "scientists" were deliberately manipulating data for their fraudulent cause. The attempt to "do away with" the warm early 1940s is all about creating a chart that shows "warming," because a warm 1941 would show the 1998 "peak" to be a bump, not a mountain. This is the signature "Toto event," where Toto pulls back the curtain and reveals the "wizard" to be a FRAUD. Science is NOT 1. fitting data to a pre-determined conclusion 2. lying about data 3. withholding data 4. switching data to create charts for political events 5. demonizing those who disagree with you This is a giant treasonous fraud, and everyone involved is a seriously anti-American criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 What utter BULL. DATA is DATA. These "scientists" were deliberately manipulating data for their fraudulent cause. The attempt to "do away with" the warm early 1940s is all about creating a chart that shows "warming," because a warm 1941 would show the 1998 "peak" to be a bump, not a mountain. This is the signature "Toto event," where Toto pulls back the curtain and reveals the "wizard" to be a FRAUD. Science is NOT 1. fitting data to a pre-determined conclusion 2. lying about data 3. withholding data 4. switching data to create charts for political events 5. demonizing those who disagree with you This is a giant treasonous fraud, and everyone involved is a seriously anti-American criminal. First off, you over-stating the emails. Second, the emails accurately represent how science is typically done. Third, shut the !@#$ up, moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 First off, you over-stating the emails.Second, the emails accurately represent how science is typically done. Third, shut the !@#$ up, moron. It is quite telling that your refusal to debate the substance of these emails is... drumroll... identical to how the taxpayer funded "top scientists" deal with requests for the ACTUAL DATA they fudge all the time. They lie. They Lie again. And then they insult. If the "science" was truly "sound," there would be no reason to hide the truth of the ACTUAL DATA... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 It is quite telling that your refusal to debate the substance of these emails is... drumroll... identical to how the taxpayer funded "top scientists" deal with requests for the ACTUAL DATA they fudge all the time. They lie. They Lie again. And then they insult. If the "science" was truly "sound," there would be no reason to hide the truth of the ACTUAL DATA... What, exactly, am I supposed to "debate" about those emails, fool? In any scientific endeavor, those types of communication are NORMAL. They mean nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 What, exactly, am I supposed to "debate" about those emails, fool? In any scientific endeavor, those types of communication are NORMAL. They mean nothing. They would be "NORMAL" for Enron and Andrew Fastow. Science is not about slanting, fudging, and withholding data, psycho. These emails expose plenty. They expose 1. a desire to fudge the 1941 "warm" year out of SURFACE GROUND to show a smoother "warming" up to 1998. 2. an acknowledgment that Urban Heat Sink Effect is warming the Surface Ground series 3. that the "top scientists" know the one and only one temp series showing "warming," the SURFACE GROUND series, has not warmed at all since 1998 4. that the "top scientists" respond to political requests with freshly fudged data and charts that the "top scientists" then do not want "audited." 5. the "top scientists" are very committed to keeping the actual RAW DATA from the public. Any guesses WHY?? LOL... These are the practices your sick left wing treasonous birdbrain accepts as "sound science." I say you are a traitor and deserve the justice we have reserved for traitors. This FRAUD is TREASONOUS because it hurts us financially, environmentally, and it treasonously interferes with our procurement of energy, which is getting our troops killed overseas. HANG ALL OF THE FRAUDULENT TRAITORS BEHIND THIS ABOMINATION!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 They would be "NORMAL" for Enron and Andrew Fastow. Science is not about slanting, fudging, and withholding data, psycho. Yeah, actually, it pretty much is. You really want to pretend you know something about this subject? Want to compare pedigrees, knucklehead? I'll show you my journal articles if you show me yours. These emails expose plenty. They expose 1. a desire to fudge the 1941 "warm" year out of SURFACE GROUND to show a smoother "warming" up to 1998. 2. an acknowledgment that Urban Heat Sink Effect is warming the Surface Ground series 3. that the "top scientists" know the one and only one temp series showing "warming," the SURFACE GROUND series, has not warmed at all since 1998 4. that the "top scientists" respond to political requests with freshly fudged data and charts that the "top scientists" then do not want "audited." 5. the "top scientists" are very committed to keeping the actual RAW DATA from the public. Any guesses WHY?? LOL... Again, that's pretty much how science is done. These are the practices your sick left wing treasonous birdbrain accepts as "sound science." I say you are a traitor and deserve the justice we have reserved for traitors. This FRAUD is TREASONOUS because it hurts us financially, environmentally, and it treasonously interferes with our procurement of energy, which is getting our troops killed overseas. 1) I'm a "sick left wing treasonous birdbrain"? Anyone want to enlighten LaDumbass here on my political leanings? 2) I never said it was "sound science", I said it's how science is done. 3) "Treasonously interferes withour procurement of energy"? You have got to be !@#$ing kidding. I can't even begin to describe how completely !@#$ed up that statement is. Do you have any idea how stupid you sound? HANG ALL OF THE FRAUDULENT TRAITORS BEHIND THIS ABOMINATION!!! No, apparently you don't. Friggin' meth addicts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 "Yeah, actually, it pretty much is. You really want to pretend you know something about this subject? Want to compare pedigrees, knucklehead? I'll show you my journal articles if you show me yours." Clearly, your "debate strategy" here is to never actually discuss the emails or the data, but rather to insult, shout down, and divert. The "why" is pretty obvious now that Toto has pulled back the curtain... "Again, that's pretty much how science is done." LOL!!! That's a pretty sick definition of "science." My "opinion" is that science starts from accurately accumulating RAW DATA and then honestly presenting it for discussion. That is not what is going on in the emails. Rather, the emails depict the "top scientists" doing everything they can to fudge the data to show "warming" and then withhold the data from those who might observe that the data in fact shows NO WARMING and that the only "warming" in the "charts" is from the fudges... ""Treasonously interferes withour procurement of energy"? You have got to be !@#$ing kidding. I can't even begin to describe how completely !@#$ed up that statement is. Do you have any idea how stupid you sound?" Our current energy situation is that we buy foreign oil at a very high price from our enemies. We have coal and natural gas here in the US, but THE FRAUD tells us we cannot use those because they emit CO2. Hence, the coal in Utah is closed off from mining. We have all sorts of bans on various other US based energy supplies, and we are told that we cannot use them because of Global "warming." Hence, while the "green" techs like solar provide 0.01 percent of US energy, we are in the process of "the greatest transfer of wealth in human history" (T Boone) to pay for foreign oil while our high unemployed workforce is not allowed to procure our energy here in the US. The cost and location of oil in the world commits our troops to real danger. You aren't "conservative." If you supported W, that's proof, because nothing W did was truly conservative, not even the tax cuts, because they were not combined with spending cuts and/or freezes. Tax cuts and the biggest spending INCREASES since LBJ combined to form today's W Economy, which will become "Obama's economy" in January... Dumb, treasonous... Zionist? That's my current hypothesis about your ideology... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 "Yeah, actually, it pretty much is. You really want to pretend you know something about this subject? Want to compare pedigrees, knucklehead? I'll show you my journal articles if you show me yours." Clearly, your "debate strategy" here is to never actually discuss the emails or the data, but rather to insult, shout down, and divert. The "why" is pretty obvious now that Toto has pulled back the curtain... "Again, that's pretty much how science is done." LOL!!! That's a pretty sick definition of "science." My "opinion" is that science starts from accurately accumulating RAW DATA and then honestly presenting it for discussion. That is not what is going on in the emails. Rather, the emails depict the "top scientists" doing everything they can to fudge the data to show "warming" and then withhold the data from those who might observe that the data in fact shows NO WARMING and that the only "warming" in the "charts" is from the fudges... ""Treasonously interferes withour procurement of energy"? You have got to be !@#$ing kidding. I can't even begin to describe how completely !@#$ed up that statement is. Do you have any idea how stupid you sound?" Our current energy situation is that we buy foreign oil at a very high price from our enemies. We have coal and natural gas here in the US, but THE FRAUD tells us we cannot use those because they emit CO2. Hence, the coal in Utah is closed off from mining. We have all sorts of bans on various other US based energy supplies, and we are told that we cannot use them because of Global "warming." Hence, while the "green" techs like solar provide 0.01 percent of US energy, we are in the process of "the greatest transfer of wealth in human history" (T Boone) to pay for foreign oil while our high unemployed workforce is not allowed to procure our energy here in the US. The cost and location of oil in the world commits our troops to real danger. You aren't "conservative." If you supported W, that's proof, because nothing W did was truly conservative, not even the tax cuts, because they were not combined with spending cuts and/or freezes. Tax cuts and the biggest spending INCREASES since LBJ combined to form today's W Economy, which will become "Obama's economy" in January... Dumb, treasonous... Zionist? That's my current hypothesis about your ideology... Yes, you're right. I'm avoiding discussing emails (which I've discussed), and denying their veracity emails (that I've already said were accurate) because I'm a Zionist. Good God, shut the !@#$ up already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Yes, you're right. I'm avoiding discussing emails (which I've discussed), and denying their veracity emails (that I've already said were accurate) because I'm a Zionist. Good God, shut the !@#$ up already. May you die a slow and painful death soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I can say with 99% certainty that DC TOM doesn't lean to the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 May you die a slow and painful death soon... Because I'm a Zionist? Or because I'm part of the evil scientist conspiracy to treasonously defraud THE WORLD!!!! BWA-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I can say with 99% certainty that DC TOM doesn't lean to the left. Define "left." If your answer is "pro gay and pro abortion," well, if he supported W, he supported selling out the US to the lobby most in favor of gays and abortions, which might explain why the GOP's own health plan under W paid for abortions for GOP staffers and pols... Left means for big government and big spending, so anyone for W was 100% for leftist ideology. Conservative foreign policy is non-interventionalist, meaning Iraq was THE MOST LIBERAL ACT of US foreign policy in US history, which is why so many libs supported it and why true conservatives opposed it. Supported Iraq Chuck Schumer Joe Lieberman Dianne Feinstein Rahm Emmanuel Ed Koch Judy Miller Opposed Iraq H Norman Schwarzkopf Brent Scowcroft Pat Buchanan Bob Novak Chuck Hagel Notice all the libs for the Iraq Treason were... yeah, ZIONISTS... including "at the time Republican" Arlen Specter... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaDairis Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Because I'm a Zionist? Or because I'm part of the evil scientist conspiracy to treasonously defraud THE WORLD!!!! BWA-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH!!!!! Because if you supported both the War on Exclusively Anti Israel Terror and the FRAUD of Global non-Warming, you are guilty of treason twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Because I'm a Zionist? Or because I'm part of the evil scientist conspiracy to treasonously defraud THE WORLD!!!! BWA-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH!!!!! You mean they aren't one and the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I can say with 99% certainty that DC TOM doesn't lean to the left. Only when his head tilts that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Because if you supported both the War on Exclusively Anti Israel Terror and the FRAUD of Global non-Warming, you are guilty of treason twice. And the "Batshit Crazy" award for Monday, November 23, 2009 goes to... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts