Climategate

[afc wimbledon]

I don't need to see my kid die of cholera to know taking a crap on the kitchen floor is a bad idea, I could care less about climate change, polluting the crap out of everything in order that we can be unhealthy fat gits that die of cancer and heart disease while chugging down 8 litres of coke and day while most of the world starves is stupid and, if you believe in the dead guy on a stick, a sin.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

Save the Earth ... or else

Like every self-appointed messiah before them, these militant environmentalists view with chill contempt those others who cannot see their truth, who won't bow to their self-assigned imperatives. It's not just that they won't abide those who differ from them. They want them actively punished.

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-p...tml?id=2917986

I like ol' Rex, but that is just a terrible column.

He's taking an anonymous posting on a public Greenpeace message board and saying "look! this is what the environmentalists are like".

It's like taking a post from Ku Klux Klan website and saying "this is what white people are all about".

[FlamingStuffedTiger]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

This is a dream, you aren't going to solve global warming (climate change). It is happening anyways regardless of our contribution to it. Climate change is a fact of life, it is a driving force behind evolution, it is one of the reasons humanity flourished....some were down the line we are F'd no matter..earth is not an accomodating place for settling species.

When I speak of "solving the global warming problem" I do not mean to solve the global warming phenomenon. Surely, this is impossible as you say. It is the human contribution that is in question. Its the belief that our contribution to global warming is significant. Sure, warming happens regardless of whether or not we contribute to it or not, and at some point, it may very well be our doom as you say. But, I don't think that should justify our helping it along either if we can help it.

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

Save the Earth ... or else

Like every self-appointed messiah before them, these militant environmentalists view with chill contempt those others who cannot see their truth, who won't bow to their self-assigned imperatives. It's not just that they won't abide those who differ from them. They want them actively punished.

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-p...tml?id=2917986

I work for Greenpeace, and Rex is an idiot. An eco-corporation? Lol, really? Taking an anonymous post from an internet message board and making an entire article out of it and acting as if it's representative of all environmentalists? Seriously? Greenpeace member or not, pretending that represents everyone else that wants to protect the environment is so stupid I won't bother explaining why to you, because even if I did, you'd likely still eat up everything a guy like Rex Murphy says, anyway.

Imagine taking a post by moon and quoting it to a large audience with no method of recourse and pretending that represents all of Flames Nation.

Yeah, no thanks.

[Pastiche]

Bewildering delusions.

Rex Murphy now matters? Rex freaking Murphy? Are you friggin kidding me?

[zuluking]

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/05/27...ver-climate-st

Interesting fact: NASA's GISS does NOT have an independent and therefore correlating independent climate data set. They only model off of a pre-existing data set...provided by CRU of Climategate fame!

GISS was one of those shining stars which, due to its data reflecting the same results as the CRU data, proved that Climategate was much ado about nothing. Now we know why.

One bad apple, I think not.

[troutman]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_637622.html

An independent report into the leak of hundreds of e-mails from one of the world's leading climate research centers on Wednesday largely vindicated the scientists involved, saying they acted honestly and that their research was reliable.

But the panel of inquiry, led by former U.K. civil servant Muir Russell, did chide scientists at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit for failing to share their data with critics.

"We find that their rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt," Russell said. "But we do find that there has been a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness."

http://www.cce-review.org/pdf/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

[photon]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_a...t/10538198.stm

Critics have alleged that the unit's scientists withheld temperature data from weather stations and also kept secret the computer algorithms needed to process the data into a record of global temperature.
The review concludes these allegations are unfounded.
"We find that CRU was not in a position to withhold access to such data or tamper with it," it says.
"We demonstrated that any independent researcher can download station data directly from primary sources and undertake their own temperature trend analysis".
Writing computer code to process the data "took less than two days and produced results similar to other independent analyses. No information from CRU was needed to do this".
Sir Muir commented: "So we conclude that the argument that CRU has something to hide does not stand up".


...


The inquiry found no evidence that CRU researchers distorted the peer review process employed by scientific journals, or unduly influenced IPCC reports by ignoring research papers that contradicted their own findings.

Of course the people who howled about this won't apologize or acknowledge the effect of a mountain of vexatious FOI requests and the harassment against these guys.
And in the time honoured tradition of conspiracy theorists they'll say "of course that's what they found, they're in on it too.

[Pinner]

It was interesting how the tide changed so fast. I think the public was sick of hearing about how driving their car was causing the ice caps to melt and the polar bears to become extinct. You can only cram so much BS down "Joe" public's mouth before you get puked on.

I'm not denying global warming, but it started long before the industrial age.

Oh, and the polar bear population has been increasing for decades.

Climate change on Earth and other planets follow the Sun's cycles, go figure.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Pinner

It was interesting how the tide changed so fast.

I think the tide will go back the other way now. More and more, deniers will be indistinguishable from flat-earthers.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Pinner

It was interesting how the tide changed so fast. I think the public was sick of hearing about how driving their car was causing the ice caps to melt and the polar bears to become extinct. You can only cram so much BS down "Joe" public's mouth before you get puked on.

I guess we should stop doing science then, if some people don't like the answers.

Originally Posted by Pinner

I'm not denying global warming, but it started long before the industrial age.

It did? Evidence?

Originally Posted by Pinner

Oh, and the polar bear population has been increasing for decades.

It has?

Originally Posted by Pinner

Climate change on Earth and other planets follow the Sun's cycles, go figure.

It does?

[Pinner]

Quit being an intellectual bully or I'll punch you in the nose

[Pinner]

The retreat of glaciers since 1850

The Little Ice Age was a period from about 1550 to 1850 when the world experienced relatively cooler temperatures compared to the present. Subsequently, until about 1940, glaciers around the world retreated as the climate warmed substantially. Glacial retreat slowed and even reversed temporarily, in many cases, between 1950 and 1980 as a slight global cooling occurred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat...ers_since_1850

Warnings about the future of the polar bear are often contrasted with the fact that worldwide population estimates have increased over the past 50 years and are relatively stable today.[124][125] Some estimates of the global population are around 5,000–10,000 in the early 1970s;[126] other estimates were 20,000–40,000 during the 1980s.[29][41] Current estimates put the global population at between 20,000 and 25,000.[24]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear

[Wiggum_PI]

This is definitely what is causing "global warming"

[icarus]

Originally Posted by photon

Of course the people who howled about this won't apologize or acknowledge the effect of a mountain of vexatious FOI requests and the harassment against these guys.

Here are samples of some of those e-mails the climate change scientists at CRU received before and after the 'Climategate' scandal emerged: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...sceptics-abuse

As for Pinner above, you responded to photon's request for evidence of climate change starting long before the industrial age by posting a Wikipedia article stating "The Little Ice Age was a period from about 1550 to 1850 when the world experienced relatively cooler temperatures compared to the present. Subsequently, until about 1940, glaciers around the world retreated as the climate warmed substantially." I'm not sure how you intend that to support your argument..?

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by icarus

As for Pinner above, you responded to photon's request for evidence of climate change starting long before the industrial age by posting a Wikipedia article stating "The Little Ice Age was a period from about 1550 to 1850 when the world experienced relatively cooler temperatures compared to the present. Subsequently, until about 1940, glaciers around the world retreated as the climate warmed substantially." I'm not sure how you intend that to support your argument..?

Well there's this: http://www.livescience.com/history/a...de-100701.html

But it's still human-caused climate change. I've also seen reports of deforestation by early agriculture being associated with climate change (don't have a link offhand). We've been affecting climate since before the industrial age; we're just better at it now.

[Pinner]

Originally Posted by icarus

I'm not sure how you intend that to support your argument..?

The article I quoted clearly stated the glacial retreat was active in 1850. Obviously not from greenhouse gases.

The early explorers like Captain Vancouver and Captain Cook documented the glacial retreat a couple hundred years ago.

I just get frustrated at how much money, time, effort and politics are thrown at the unstoppable.

The same efforts would be far more productive if used to fix something actually obtainable, like making clean drinking water available to the people of the world. It would make you sick to see what some people have to drink.

A good film, a very good site for documentarys.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/flow-for-love-of-water/

[Thor]

That documentary is excellent, highly recommended.

[Pinner]

Well I guess we will just have to depopulate Earth then, the only solution.

If an animal alters the earth/climate do we eliminate the species? Where do we draw the line? This is so ridiculous...

Most researchers peg the beginning of human-caused climate change to about 8,000 years ago, when mankind discovered agriculture.

[Pastiche]

The same efforts would be far more productive if used to fix something actually obtainable, like making clean drinking water available to the people of the world. It would make you sick to see what some people have to drink.

You think climate change and potable water issues are unrelated?