TopGun Posted 18 November, 2009 Author Share Posted 18 November, 2009 if you think about it....BNP are FAR LEFT Unbelievable... stick to submarines TDD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Do they have all the facts? Their choice of evidence come from highly dubious sources which obviously have their own agendas in publishing that selected information. You seem incapable of accepting other points of view. Not everything is black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bungle Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Perhaps i was wrong to tease our socialist/left wing sheep, but the fact remains that it is this gullible and naive section of society that have been snared hook line and sinker. Or, you could say that right wing morons such as yourself and St Knobface, I mean George, are so arrogant and ignorant that you would cut off your nose to spite your face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Or, you could say that right wing morons such as yourself and St Knobface, I mean George, are so arrogant and ignorant that you would cut off your nose to spite your face. That's a bit rich coming from someone so self opinionated and full of himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Or, you could say that right wing morons such as yourself and St Knobface, I mean George, are so arrogant and ignorant that you would cut off your nose to spite your face. wowzers.. one thing I have noticed this year with the so called left wing liberals... they are all for freedom of speech etc...as long as they agree with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bungle Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 wowzers.. one thing I have noticed this year with the so called left wing liberals... they are all for freedom of speech etc...as long as they agree with it I was countering his ridiculous argument with the opposite equally ridiculous argument. Well, in the case of St George he probably would cut off his nose to spite his face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 I was countering his ridiculous argument with the opposite equally ridiculous argument. Well, in the case of St George he probably would cut off his nose to spite his face. nearly ALL of saint George's posts on here are back up one way or another...alot of the repies to him are people calling him one thing or another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Not at all, it's just when cold hard facts are clear for all to see and people simply put their heads in the ground and fingers in their ears, what else can I label them but ignorant? The "ignorant" are the dim and the gullible who fall for stunts like this.....http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/not-finding-any-gore-airbrushes-in-hurricanes-for-his-new-book/ **** like this has been going on now for decades, ever since the IPCC condoned the airbrushing out of the Medieval Warm period and the Little Ice age and the sheeple keep lapping it up Man made Warming? what warming ? http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14504 Wake up people! and start thinking for yourselves, before its too late! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14504 Wake up people! and start thinking for yourselves, before its too late! From the first quoted article :"We have to explain to the public that greenhouse gases will not cause temperatures to keep rising from one record temperature to the next, but that they are still subject to natural fluctuations,". It continues ; ""Perhaps we suggested too strongly in the past that the development will continue going up along a simple, straight line. In reality, phases of stagnation or even cooling are completely normal," says Latif." Which is exactly what the climate models have been predicting all along. From the same article :"Despite their current findings, scientists agree that temperatures will continue to rise in the long term. " Also "But if the cooling trend is the result of reduced solar activity, things could start getting warmer again much sooner. Based on past experience, solar activity will likely increase again in the next few years." and then there is this "The Hadley Center group expects warming to resume in the coming years. "That resumption could come as a bit of a jolt," says Hadley climatologist Adam Scaife, explaining that natural cyclical warming would then be augmented by the warming effect caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions." Are you coming around and finally seeing the light ? Based on the outcome from your latest GOOGLE search, it would seem so. The second article is written by a confirmed MMCC sceptic, so is bound to be unbiased, isn't it ? And I love your home made PowerPoint in the YouTube video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 The "ignorant" are the dim and the gullible who fall for stunts like this.....http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/not-finding-any-gore-airbrushes-in-hurricanes-for-his-new-book/ **** like this has been going on now for decades, ever since the IPCC condoned the airbrushing out of the Medieval Warm period and the Little Ice age and the sheeple keep lapping it up Man made Warming? what warming ? http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14504 Wake up people! and start thinking for yourselves, before its too late! All the scientists agree that Solar activity, ocean currents and volcanoes etc influence the world's climate - they take all that information into account yet still conclude that there is an trend for warming caused by green house gases. It's not an either/or thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 nearly ALL of saint George's posts on here are back up one way or another. Yet he persists in name calling anybody who dares to suggest he might be slightly misled. He doesn't help his side of the debate by constantly reducing his arguments to puerile playground taunting. I am neither dim, gullible, nor a sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 See here we go, ...Both Badger and Aint are confusing the 'facts' with 'opinion' The 'facts' are that the Earth has been on a cooling trend for the best part of a decade now. That's a fact, that even the alarmist's are finally starting to begrudgingly admit....Let me remind y'all of the hysterical abuse i received on here a few years back when i first pointed it out. In the articles i posted here there is also 'some' 'opinion' that the Earth may well get warmer again at some time in the future....Something the usual suspects have predictably jumped right on as if it were a 'fact' This is where the opinion of the IPCC and the hysterical alarmists have had the Earth's climate heading, compare that with what really happened and you'll get to see a clearer picture of whats going on As we know ...Nothing like that happened or is even likely to happen....The Earths climate has in fact followed Solar activity far closer than 'any' of the alarmist computer models Give it five years and we'll prolly know beyond any shadow of a doubt what the main driver of the Earths climate is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Nice to see some robust challenges to St G's incessant, and usually offensive denial. I'm all for debate but as has been proven many times, his inability to accept any opinion other than his own is somewhat limiting... debates need each side to actually acknowledge the other first! I didn't see you speaking out when i first started posting on the subject, all those years ago and received nothing but hysterical abuse...and peeps like StLandrew who so arrogantly stated "the debate was over" You my friend, are a clasic case of those "tolerant Liberals", the one's that are only tolerant when peeps agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 The Earths climate has in fact followed Solar activity far closer than 'any' of the alarmist computer models Give it five years and we'll prolly know beyond any shadow of a doubt what the main driver of the Earths climate is. There has been no recent increase in solar activity to account for the upward trend - if anything going by solar irradiance there would have been cooling over the last few decades, that's why the solar theory has been debunked. If you look at the graph of mean temperatures they follow a cycle in relation to ocean movement. Agree with you on the last bit, much will be learned after the next major El Nino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 See here we go, ...Both Badger and Aint are confusing the 'facts' with 'opinion' St G, this will become a very predictable tit-for-tat if we start with semantic linguistic arguments. With regard to this debate there are two 'truths'; the first is that the 'facts' can only ever be historical, based on empirical measurement and scientific or statistical analysis, and even then there are any number of 'expert' opinions in that field; you pay your money and you pick which particular donkey you choose to back, we simply choose to differ on which might be right - and to ourselves we both feel that our reasoning is infallible. I respect your right to disagree with me, ( even though you are wrong ). Second, there cannot, by definition, be any 'facts' built into the forward projections, I never present anything in such light, that would be foolish. The visions of the future are projections, extrapolations, the product of scientific theories, interpretations of computer models, messages from a ouija board, pure guesswork, visions from god,- again you pick which one you wish to accept and build your credo upon. Yet again, for the best of reasons we have opted to select and support differing viewpoints. Unfortunately it is likely that neither of us will be alive to know which is ultimately proved to be right, ( PS - it'll be me ! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 As we know ...Nothing like that happened or is even likely to happen....The Earths climate has in fact followed Solar activity far closer than 'any' of the alarmist computer models. This is a fact. The trends follow each other so closely it's logical to say that sun spots are the reason for the temperature changes. I'm now bowing out of this debate. Ignorance is bliss and i'm afraid those who believe in the MMGB myth will never be convinced by facts, rather they'll contnue to believe what they are told to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 (edited) This is a fact. The trends follow each other so closely it's logical to say that sun spots are the reason for the temperature changes. I'm now bowing out of this debate. Ignorance is bliss and i'm afraid those who believe in the MMGB myth will never be convinced by facts, rather they'll contnue to believe what they are told to believe. Maybe not : (http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html#factors) Some uncertainty remains about the role of natural variations in causing climate change. Solar variability certainly plays a minor role, but it looks like only a quarter of the recent variations can be attributed to the Sun. At most. During the initial discovery period of global warming, the magnitude of the influence of increased activity on the Sun was not well determined. Solar irradiance changes have been measured reliably by satellites for only 30 years. These precise observations show changes of a few tenths of a percent that depend on the level of activity in the 11-year solar cycle. Changes over longer periods must be inferred from other sources. Estimates of earlier variations are important for calibrating the climate models. While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The effects of global warming are apparent (see section below) despite the fact that the Sun is once again less bright during the present solar minimum. Since the last solar minimum of 1996, the Sun's brightness has decreased by 0.02% at visible wavelengths, and 6% at extreme UV wavelengths, representing a 12-year low in solar irradiance, according to this NASA news article (April 1, 2009) And from the Beeb;( http://HTTP://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8299079.stm) " Sceptics argue that the warming we observed was down to the energy from the Sun increasing. After all 98% of the Earth's warmth comes from the Sun. But research conducted two years ago, and published by the Royal Society, seemed to rule out solar influences. The scientists' main approach was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature. And the results were clear. "Warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity," said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)." Edited 19 November, 2009 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mao Cap Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 wowzers.. one thing I have noticed this year with the so called left wing liberals... they are all for freedom of speech etc...as long as they agree with it *violins* Any examples of where freedom of speech have been denied on this board to people on the right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 *violins* Any examples of where freedom of speech have been denied on this board to people on the right? EDL thread for a start Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Don't be a berk DD. You know why it was locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 You my friend, are a clasic case of those "tolerant Liberals", the one's that are only tolerant when peeps agree with you. George, look back at all my comments on these threads and previous. Initially I argued for a precautionary principle, because despite all the science, no one can accurately predict what will happen. But you continued to denounce that, and have never had any respect for anyone who dares disagree with you. I said then, and I say now, you might be right... Maybe man made climate change is non-existant or minimal, but we cannot know for certain, so surely that, combined with the continuing depletion of natural resources and reduction of animal species due to changing habitats and climates, should lead any supposedly intelligent race to moderate their impact on the planet that supports them, to maximise it's ability to do so for future generations. As I say, I might be wrong and I am more than willing to accept that. How can you be so arrogantly certain that you aren't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 George, look back at all my comments on these threads and previous. Initially I argued for a precautionary principle, because despite all the science, no one can accurately predict what will happen. But you continued to denounce that, and have never had any respect for anyone who dares disagree with you. I said then, and I say now, you might be right... Maybe man made climate change is non-existant or minimal, but we cannot know for certain, so surely that, combined with the continuing depletion of natural resources and reduction of animal species due to changing habitats and climates, should lead any supposedly intelligent race to moderate their impact on the planet that supports them, to maximise it's ability to do so for future generations. As I say, I might be wrong and I am more than willing to accept that. How can you be so arrogantly certain that you aren't? Sums up my opinion perfectly. Well said Minty. And no, I'm NOT rejoining the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 19 November, 2009 Share Posted 19 November, 2009 Saint George won't respond to you Minty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mao Cap Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 EDL thread for a start The one that had some good debate for five pages, went round and round in circles for ten, and was eventually locked for being boring? With the original link still intact for anyone who wanted to look it up? Oh yes, quite the act of Stalinist repression there. Give us another one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 The one that had some good debate for five pages, went round and round in circles for ten, and was eventually locked for being boring? With the original link still intact for anyone who wanted to look it up? Oh yes, quite the act of Stalinist repression there. Give us another one. Why are you going on about this place. My point in general that leftie do gooders are all for freedom of speech. As long as they agree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Why are you going on about this place. My point in general that leftie do gooders are all for freedom of speech. As long as they agree with it. Bullsh*t, but you have a right to your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Global warming and cooling is a natural. Man made global warming is a myth. And smoking doesn't kill and alcohol is good for you.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Why are you going on about this place. My point in general that leftie do gooders are all for freedom of speech. As long as they agree with it. And right wingers like yourself, Johnny, Mosley, Powell, Franco, Griffin and Hitler are all for live and let live and freedom of speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintfully Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 See here we go, ...Both Badger and Aint are confusing the 'facts' with 'opinion' The 'facts' are that the Earth has been on a cooling trend for the best part of a decade now. That's a fact, that even the alarmist's are finally starting to begrudgingly admit....Let me remind y'all of the hysterical abuse i received on here a few years back when i first pointed it out. In the articles i posted here there is also 'some' 'opinion' that the Earth may well get warmer again at some time in the future....Something the usual suspects have predictably jumped right on as if it were a 'fact' This is where the opinion of the IPCC and the hysterical alarmists have had the Earth's climate heading, compare that with what really happened and you'll get to see a clearer picture of whats going on As we know ...Nothing like that happened or is even likely to happen....The Earths climate has in fact followed Solar activity far closer than 'any' of the alarmist computer models Give it five years and we'll prolly know beyond any shadow of a doubt what the main driver of the Earths climate is. C'mon George you can do better than that.... .... all the graph shows is that over the last few years there has been cooling - dosn't mean its going to continue. Science is based on accumulating evidence, not the last sample that just conveniently fits your point of view. Lets wait and see what happens in the future before we dismiss the accumulated evidence for MMCC on the back of (By the way, Im all for free speech, but your americanisms -ie. y'all/prolly -really are tedious and guaranteed to distract from your argument.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 I've done some research on the temperature between June and November 2009 and it has dropped alarmingly, the hard facts suggest that by 2020 it will be minus 750. If someone could produce figures and trends for the last million years we might be able to make predictions with some accuracy, but all we have are figures covering a tiny passage of time in the earth's development, not enough to work from. I'm still open on this one, I can see how we could do damage by detonating nuclear warheads all over the show but I do think it's a little presumptious and arrogant for man to believe he can influence the universe to such a degree as is being claimed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 You seem incapable of accepting other points of view. Not everything is black and white. Perhaps not, but I do and will continue to, have a problem with information that originates from unvarified/highly dubious sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 I'm still open on this one, I can see how we could do damage by detonating nuclear warheads all over the show but I do think it's a little presumptious and arrogant for man to believe he can influence the universe to such a degree as is being claimed. I actually feel the opposite. I think we would be arrogant if mankind presumed that his actions had *no* consequences, and therefore thought we could do what we liked. Which course of action is more likely to cause damage? And Delldays... you probably think think I'm a lefty do-gooder... so perhaps you would care to read my post above (and most posts I've ever written on the subject) where I accept that my opinion may be wrong and I fully respect others' opinions where they are stated with equal respect for my position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 I actually feel the opposite. I think we would be arrogant if mankind presumed that his actions had *no* consequences, and therefore thought we could do what we liked. Which course of action is more likely to cause damage? And Delldays... you probably think think I'm a lefty do-gooder... so perhaps you would care to read my post above (and most posts I've ever written on the subject) where I accept that my opinion may be wrong and I fully respect others' opinions where they are stated with equal respect for my position. no mate, you are pretty reasonable... just so many a laughable when they have a pop at saint george for what he believes despite nearly everytime he posts he backs it up one way or another..more so than anyone else on this subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 no mate, you are pretty reasonable... just so many a laughable when they have a pop at saint george for what he believes despite nearly everytime he posts he backs it up one way or another..more so than anyone else on this subject So if I supplied evidence from websites that the 9/11 attacks were actually done by the US government to justify a war you'd accept that as fact and therefore it must be true? No, thought not. I'd leave the thinking to others if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyNorthernSaints Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 St George is a compete loon but i find his posts funny and entertaining unlike Dulldays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 See here we go, ...Both Badger and Aint are confusing the 'facts' with 'opinion'. The 'facts' are that the Earth has been on a cooling trend for the best part of a decade now. That's a fact, that even the alarmist's are finally starting to begrudgingly admit....Let me remind y'all of the hysterical abuse i received on here a few years back when i first pointed it out. St George, the 'cooling trend' "FACT" that you've made up, serves to highlight your misunderstanding of the data. Indeed, if you misinterpret the data, and start with the hottest year ever recorded (1998 ), then it stands to reason that the subsequent decade can't be anything but relatively cooler. However, take the same data, remove your political agenda, and a far more accurate picture is painted: Since the hottest year on record (1998 ) we have witnessed: The 12th hottest (1999) The 14th hottest (2000) The 8th hottest (2001) The 4th hottest (2002) The 3rd hottest (2003) The 5th hottest (2004) The 2nd hottest (2005) The 6th hottest (2006) The 7th hottest (2007) and the 10th hottest (2008 ) So since 1998 we've seen 8 of the 10 warmest years on record. 2007 & 2008 were indeed cooler than 2005 or 1998, but anyone who attempts to argue for a 'cooling trend' on the basis of the seventh and tenth hottest years ever recorded is either a lost case (or pursuing their own political agenda). Remove the politics, and engage your brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 So if I supplied evidence from websites that the 9/11 attacks were actually done by the US government to justify a war you'd accept that as fact and therefore it must be true? No, thought not. I'd leave the thinking to others if I were you. well, that is me told Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 well, that is me told It just goes to show you can't be too careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Well, well, well, well Would ya believe it, the UEA's Hadley Climate Research Centre was either hacked last night, or an insider with a concience had had enough..... 61mb of emails and data have been put into the public domain via a Russian web site....They did it because "We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps.....We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents" This is explosive, its massive and its killed the current 'Man Made' Global Warming projections stone dead overnite...This thing involves many of the major "warming" players, we're not talking bit part hobyist's here and the truth is finaly out....The lies, the deception, the plans to indoctrinate UK Citizens...The politics behind the movement, the plans put in place to silence skeptical scientists, the lot...Hell, in one email a prominant "alarmist" admits his departments models are wrong and Steve McIntyre (a leading sceptic) was right, he then goes on to discuss options to 'cover up' the errors! There's even long threads of head scratching and and asking “Where is the warming?” With a lot of peeps "deeplyconcerned" about the lack of observed warming......There's even one that seems to admit they got the Korttajarvi Finnish temperature proxies the wrong way round! Their figures have not been making any sense for years now and now we know why...... I've been telling peeps for years, they're gunna look stupid if they keep falling for the scam and a scam it is, I can now add ..FACT! http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2009/11/hadley-hacked.html There's a document by Hadley's Professor Phil Jones which shows that he was so concerned by Freedom Of Information requests for raw data that he was contemplating ways to remove key information and reconstruct the data to make it fit the preferred conclusions. There's an email from American climate scientist Tom Wigley advising Professor Jones how to manipulate some data to emphasise warming trends. There's an email from Jones telling his colleagues to delete incriminatory emails. There's another from Jones in which he tells a colleague that he's used the same "trick" as Michael Mann (Mr Hockey Stick) "to hide the decline", and in yet another he calls the reported death of a climate sceptic "cheering news". There's an email from Mann himself promising senior Hadley staff that they can use the RealClimate website to post articles and he will ensure the censorship of any comments from sceptics challenging what they've written. There's an email from senior IPCC scientist Kevin Trenberth in which he asks, "Where the heck is global warming?…The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t." There's an email in which Hadley staff promise to blackball scientists from the IPCC report whose work doesn't conform to their alarmist predictions: "keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is ! " http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/breaking-news-story-hadley-cru-has-apparently-been-hacked-hundreds-of-files- released/#more-12937 "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 from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline." http://www.investigatemagazine.com/australia/latestissue.pdf "The Internet is on fire this morning with confirmation computers at one of the world’s leading climate research centres were hacked, and the information released on the internet. A 62 megabyte zip file, containing around 160 megabytes of emails, pdfs and other documents, has been confirmed as genuine by the head of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, Dr Phil Jones." http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/hadley_hacked/ "So the 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving most of the most prominent scientists pushing the man-made warming theory - a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science. I’ve been adding some of the most astonishing in updates below - emails suggesting conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more. If it is as it now seems, never again will “peer review” be used to shout down sceptics. " http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/europe/science/top-climate-change-body-hit-by-hackers-$1341718.htm http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/20/do-hacked-e-mails-show-global-warming-fraud/ "At least eight papers purporting to reconstruct the historical temperature record times may need to be revisited, with significant implications for contemporary climate studies, the basis of the IPCC’s assessments. A number of these involve senior climatologists at the British climate research centre CRU at the University East Anglia. In every case, peer review failed to pick up the errors." http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/11/uea-climate-research-unit-emails-hacked/ Thats just a few links..just google "hadley hacked" or "University of East Anglia hacked" for more...Its like a growing rash all over the Internet Now the Main Stream Media and the politicians will now ...They are going to have to take the other side of the story into account from here on in........This can't be put back in the bottle In the words of Senator Inhofe on the floor of the US Senate on Wednesday..... "I also said in Milan that the science is not settled. That was an unpopular view back then. But today, since Al Gore's science fiction movie, more and more scientists, reporters, and politicians are questioning global warming alarmism. I proudly declare 2009 as the "Year of the Skeptic"-the year in which scientists who question the so-called global warming consensus are being heard." BTW...let me take this opportunity to extended my sincere sympathy to anyone who maybe suffering the horrendous flooding in Northen parts of the UK at the moment....My heart goes out to y'all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 I'm sure there's nothing in this whatsoever, St George, but does the fact that Senator Inhofe has received $2,182,631 from the oil & gas industries since 1998, (according to OpenSecrets.org) have any possible bearing on his views? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 20 November, 2009 Author Share Posted 20 November, 2009 nearly ALL of saint George's posts on here are back up one way or another...alot of the repies to him are people calling him one thing or another It's called the flat earth society where George is concerned. If you believe the scientific nonsense he peddles you have a problem. Each of George's graphs etc come from maverick sources that are not recognised by main stream science. Ask yourself, are all the politicians of the world making decisions on accepted and good science or George's and Dune's mad little tinpot john doe head for the mountains theorists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Some wise words on the UEA hack: "The problem is that the files and emails seem just too good to be true. A number of files seem to be smoking guns — revealing how to resist Freedom of Information Act requests for their data (which would both be scientific misconduct and actually illegal); long-term marketing plans on how to push the climate-change agenda; and discussions of how to pressure peer-reviewed journals to stop accepting papers that disagree with the “accepted” view of global warming. In other words, just what the skeptics have been suggesting for years. It seems just too neat, and we don’t have independent verification of where the files came from. Someone who is willing to hack might also be willing to create fakes. But then, the whole package is very large — 63 megabytes — and seems to be very internally consistent. Several people have already corroborated a number of the emails as being ones they wrote or received. The package also includes substantial data and computer programs, which are being explored as this is being written. The best we can say right now is that we should keep our eyes on this. If these files are eventually corroborated and verified, it is a bombshell indeed — evidence that there has been a literal conspiracy to push the anthropogenic climate change agenda far beyond the science. It will mean the end of some scientific careers, and it might even mean those careers will end in jail." http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/hacker-releases-data-implicating-cru-in-global-warming-fraud/2/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Put's the hack into perspective: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/#more-1853 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Put's the hack into perspective: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/#more-1853 Quite. From that link: "The timing of this particular episode is probably not coincidental. But if cherry-picked out-of-context phrases from stolen personal emails is the only response to the weight of the scientific evidence for the human influence on climate change, then there probably isn’t much to it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 Since St George considers the president of the USA a commie I think that's all we need to know about his perspective on anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 It's called the flat earth society where George is concerned. If you believe the scientific nonsense he peddles you have a problem. Each of George's graphs etc come from maverick sources that are not recognised by main stream science. Ask yourself, are all the politicians of the world making decisions on accepted and good science or George's and Dune's mad little tinpot john doe head for the mountains theorists? What's this - surely not a lie... The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the man made climate change hoax are inextricably linked and by the very fact you are so completely hoodwinked you are a frontline footsoldier for the 10th crusade. This is a war without weapons, but a war none the less. It's a masterstroke by the ruling elite to employ the left winger eco warrior types like they have. Britain ruled India by using the age old ploy of divide and conquer, this latest plan trumps even that for it's ingenuity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 lol....."Climategate"....love it http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/ This thing could end up being as big as Watergate or even bigger....$Billions having been appropriated by Governments around the World on the back of manipulated and dodgy data Going to get real ugly for some. But at least the lefties and liberals can let go of their comfy blankets now they now it was all a nasty scam! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 lol....."Climategate"....love it http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/ This thing could end up being as big as Watergate or even bigger....$Billions having been appropriated by Governments around the World on the back of manipulated and dodgy data Going to get real ugly for some. But at least the lefties and liberals can let go of their comfy blankets now they now it was all a nasty scam! This is brilliant news. The gullible lefties are going to be left with a lot of egg on their faces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 What a load of ******, it's just a few emails from some geeks in East Anglia ****ed off about nobheads like Saint George. Not exactly important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 20 November, 2009 Share Posted 20 November, 2009 What a load of ******, it's just a few emails from some geeks in East Anglia ****ed off about nobheads like Saint George. Not exactly important. LOL So you have no idea who Phil Jones, Keith Briffa, Michael Mann, Malcolm Hughes, Kevin Trenberth, James Hansen, etc are? and the influence these peeps and their institutions have had on the IPCC and certain Governments around the world ? Not to mention being 'go to' places for the likes of the BBC etc And all this time you've tried really hard to give the impression you had some idea of what you were talking about and now you go and let yourself down just as the final death nail has been driven into AGW...You may have fooled some, but i had you sussed from the start. Now you have a little time to go and google them and pretend you knew all along Climategate lol...going to be the end of the world for some Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now