Climate scientists accused of 'manipulating global warming data'

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Not everyone thought the world was flat - the arab, indian and oriental scholars had all worked it out for themselves. But nevertheless, I believe anything gained through illegal activities such as hacking is automatically going to be less than trustworthy, so I am not convinced that a criminal's word is reliable evidence to accuse everyone of being in a big, scary conspiracy.

Mankysteve

Cardew wrote: »

As of course is the research to prove that human causes are the reason for Global warming.

The problem is that any body of scientists can be 'bought'. Their funding, and thus their salaries, depend these days on stating what their backers want to hear.

I have absolutely no idea who is correct on how much Homo sapiens contributes to global warming, and indeed how to quantify the dangers; and neither have any of you lot!!

I hope that being half way though I a degree in environmental planning and management and being fairly well up on statistics and read up in things I can have at least a stab at analysing peoples studies. OK If none of Joe public have can have a idea about who telling the truth and who isn't does that mean we should allow ourself to be run by dictators from Mensa they should be brigh bunch

thescouselander

Yes, the climate is very complicated as is the science behind predicting what its going to do. This does not mean we have to let the climate change scientists tell us what to do. The climate scientists need to do the science and then explain to the rest of us whats going on in terms we understand - given that legislation such as the clime change bill is going to cost the UK tax payer £18 billion per year this explanation needs to be completely water tight. The scientists doing the work need to be beyond reproach. I don't think they hit the mark on either count at the moment.

RHYSDAD

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/22/bishop-hills-compendium-of-cru-email-issues/#comments

A collation of the emails for easier scrutiny...

Mankysteve

well I'll feel a toad so coming on in the next 50years

fatbelly

Cardew wrote: »

I think it is essential when examining this data to ensure the angular valving is achieved by counterroticipational polarity on a reverse lateral base minimizing outward torsional thrust, while anticipating compound peripheral extrusion, and avoiding the counterintuitive occurrence of socassic resonance, while enhancing articulated, forced, dynamic struts with altagyrometric, balance-articulated, solid unobtanium and parameter enhancers.

My thoughts exactly!

timmmers

Mankysteve wrote: »

The fact of the matter is that yes the earth may be warming naturally but we've never been in situation before where so much know greenhouse gasses are being pumped into the atmosphere on top of that and i think its foolish to play "God" with a system we dont fully understand.

We can't do a thing it's way past our control and nature is producing far more greenhouse gas than we ever could ... http://www.planetextinction.com/planet_extinction_permafrost.htm ...is an example.

Only this week the scientists said that burning trees was a good idea ...odd since it wasn't a year ago and still isn't as far as Brazil is concerned....companies claim to pay for trees to be planted to offset carbon...but they simply don't do it much if at all.

Global dimming is another element caused in the main by air traffic ...some say it is counteracted by global warming luckily as a drop in temerature would arise if not.

The sun changes over time, activity is in cycles and we really don't much at all about that except that it can have large effects on us ...and coincidentally we don't know much at all about weather patterns to compare the current situation with 200, 300 or farther back because no-one had the gear or reason to measure them accurately...so how can anyone measure global warming and say it's not a normal and natural cycle over a long period?

One thing is sure....it's a great excuse to tax the hell out of everyone, and a way for the energy companies to make money when natural resources are almost gone. These same energy companies curently own patents for hundreds if not thousands of green technologies that could have threatened their business if they had gone into production. The comustion engine is ancient and inefficient tachnology, but that suits the people selling fuel for it, and the guys collecting tax on that fuel.

Global warming is whatever they say that you will swallow. You can't measure it and they can't prove it. It takes too long for that. But hey..they may as well make some money out of it if they can.

There is an interesting movie called zeitgeist addendum http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gKX9TWRyfs which has interviews and figures on this subject as part of its content. True or not, it rings too many bells for me to ignore it.

t

[/QUOTE]

mech_2

RHYSDAD wrote: »

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/22/bishop-hills-compendium-of-cru-email-issues/#comments

A collation of the emails for easier scrutiny...

Well I've wasted lots of my time reading through a selection of this stuff... can someone please point out a smoking gun? I'm seeing nothing interesting at all. Surely there's some basis for all this fuss, or am I overestimating the tinfoil hat brigade?

inspace

Cardew wrote: »

I think it is essential when examining this data to ensure the angular valving is achieved by counterroticipational polarity on a reverse lateral base minimizing outward torsional thrust, while anticipating compound peripheral extrusion, and avoiding the counterintuitive occurrence of socassic resonance, while enhancing articulated, forced, dynamic struts with altagyrometric, balance-articulated, solid unobtanium and parameter enhancers.

Wow Cardew do you mind if I use that for my signature

Cardew

inspace wrote: »

Wow Cardew do you mind if I use that for my signature

Only if it makes more sense to you than myself! - I thought it sounded impressive though!
If you do it will be the plagiariser plagiarised;)