| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do hacked e-mails show global-warming fraud? |
| Yes |
|
43% |
[ 19 ] |
| No |
|
56% |
[ 25 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 44 |
|
| Author |
Message |
hellbringer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:27 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| richk449 wrote: | | hellbringer wrote: | | richk449 wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | why is it that it's only americans who argue against scientifically proven global warming? |
To generalize, we Americans have a proud history of questioning authority. |
You also have a proud history of questioning intelligence. |
It is tough to have one without the other. I would rather have a skeptical society that thinks for itself than a servile society that believes what the "elites" say. |
Scientists are hardly "elite" you know.
_________________
There is a lot of novelty and truth in what you say, but that which is true is not novel and that which is novel is not true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Recent reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have concluded that:
* "Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations."[2]; It is extremely unlikely (<5%) that the global pattern of warming during the past half century can be explained without external forcing (i.e., it is inconsistent with being the result of internal variability), and very unlikely that it is due to known natural external causes alone. The warming occurred in both the ocean and the atmosphere and took place at a time when natural external forcing factors would likely have produced cooling. [1]
* "From new estimates of the combined anthropogenic forcing due to greenhouse gases, aerosols, and land surface changes, it is extremely likely that human activities have exerted a substantial net warming influence on climate since 1750."[1]
* "It is virtually certain that anthropogenic aerosols produce a net negative radiative forcing (cooling influence) with a greater magnitude in the Northern Hemisphere than in the Southern Hemisphere.[1]
The panel, which represents consensus in the scientific community, defines "very likely," "extremely likely," and "virtually certain" as indicating probabilities greater than 90%, 95%, and 99%, respectively.[1] |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_of_recent_climate_change
Last edited by cokehabit on Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shash, being that these leaked emails show collusion with a fraudulent hypothesis, I'm now even more skeptical than before when looking at any of this data. You're going to see a lot more skepticism in the world because of this, and that's a good thing.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shash
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 220
Location: India
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | stop confusing them with facts, try to give them something off fox news |
Or manipulated findings that intentionally omitted data to push an agenda driven thesis. Exmaple A. |
The "trick" misquote again? I thought we dealt with this on page 1!
Anyway, here's the whole thing again:
| Quote: | | The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998) Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction, and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to a “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. |
Yeah, as we all do all the time, I guess... Colloquial language is now evidence of fraud?
| Quote: | | As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem”–see e.g. the recent discussion in this paper) and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post 1960 part of their reconstruction, and so while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens. |
I got this from the top article on RC, discussing this whole incident. I linked to it earlier, I think.
_________________
The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | stop confusing them with facts, try to give them something off fox news |
Or manipulated findings that intentionally omitted data to push an agenda driven thesis. Exmaple A. |
have a look at what I quoted previously. You say "it's all natural", well no scientist has EVER said that we are not in a warming cycle. What they say is that we have increased it above the levl it should b at by $number% or by $degrees Celsius |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shash
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 220
Location: India
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | Shash, being that these leaked emails show collusion with a fraudulent hypothesis, I'm now even more skeptical than before when looking at any of this data. |
Cherry-picked quotes "show collusion with a fraudulent hypothesis". Read the whole mail (and discussion) in context and they become more clear.
Besides, the data I mentioned is raw, and without interpretation. You're surely not claiming that multiple agencies from multiple countries are fraudulently modifying the data they release, are you?
| Quote: | | You're going to see a lot more skepticism in the world because of this, and that's a good thing. |
Skepticism should be informed skepticism. Economists being "skeptical" of climate research is not skepticism. Climate scientists being skeptical of climate research is skepticism.
_________________
The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellbringer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | hellbringer wrote: | | richk449 wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | why is it that it's only americans who argue against scientifically proven global warming? |
To generalize, we Americans have a proud history of questioning authority. |
You also have a proud history of questioning intelligence. |
Like the Dark Ages? Yeah, really an American phenomena. |
Actually barring the blatant differences in deaths, censorhip, et. al. yes. From what I have gathered from discussions there is total disregard between many americans for research, science and any form of, let's say, "academic thinking". And this permeates to your media and your culture. That's why hollywood scientist's are usually evil, dumb or selfish, that's why your sitcoms are always mocking the "nerds" and "geeks" and portraying them as loosers and that is why people would rather beleive the bible than acknowledge evolution.
_________________
There is a lot of novelty and truth in what you say, but that which is true is not novel and that which is novel is not true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drizek
n00b
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Believe in America
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You people never fail to amaze.
"The evidence for Global Warning is fabricated"
How do you know?
"I just know"
There is no evidence of any global conspiracy
"The evidence will come later, but for now I'm going to tell you my opinion"
_________________
Stand With Mittens
Last edited by drizek on Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shash wrote: | | Climate scientists being skeptical of climate research is skepticism. |
Of which there are many who were intentionally excluded from the IPCC.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drizek wrote: |
You people never fail to amaze. |
You mean rational skeptics? Sorry that I don't go down on my knees and swallow this junk.
Inconclusive data should make one not believe.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty
Last edited by Muso on Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:38 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shash
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 220
Location: India
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | Shash, 1000 emails and over 3000 documents that were stolen. Expect much more evidence of a political agenda within the entire GW church in the months to come. |
I just spent the last few time periods going through the RealClimate thread on this, and reading the responses on it. As more and more such quotes are thrown about, it starts looking more and more like the denialists are quote-mining.
This type of hysteria is why there are more and more skeptics everyday.[/quote]
Well, badly put, but the destruction of livelihoods is something we see all the time, because of habitat destruction. May or may not have anything to do with climate change or AGW, but I certainly wouldn't rule it out.
_________________
The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
genstorm
Veteran
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 1957
Location: Austria
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drizek
n00b
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Believe in America
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | drizek wrote: |
You people never fail to amaze. |
You mean rational skeptics? Sorry that I don't go down on my knees and swallow this junk. |
Lol, rational skeptics. Half the poeple that deny global warming don't believe in evolution and think Obama is a secret muslim. Not exactly the posterchilds of rational people.
More like delusional paraniod morons who think the "elite" scientists and politicians are out to get them.
_________________
Stand With Mittens |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We're all going die, the seas are going to wipe out all coastal areas, and our women will become whores.
It's ridiculous on face value.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | stop confusing them with facts, try to give them something off fox news |
Or manipulated findings that intentionally omitted data to push an agenda driven thesis. Exmaple A. |
Oh, also, I dont care about mails or speeches, all I care about is the scientific analysis, the governmental and scientific reports, the overwhelming support from the vast majority of scientists from every country, from every religion and of every colour and the HUGE debates that thousands of people go to each year to try and sort this mess out.
To ignore the people who know what they are on about is just ignorant, which is how all the people who say "it's a load of rubbish" come across as.
So here's a little tip. Ignore "leaked mails", reports from the news and people trying to give deliberate disinformation and go read something like the IPCC report.
Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change
Last edited by cokehabit on Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drizek wrote: | | Half the poeple that deny global warming don't believe in evolution and think Obama is a secret muslim. Not exactly the posterchilds of rational people. |
I like how you just made that entire thing up to back up your claim. 
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cokehabit wrote: | | Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | stop confusing them with facts, try to give them something off fox news |
Or manipulated findings that intentionally omitted data to push an agenda driven thesis. Exmaple A. |
Oh, also, I dont care about mails or speeches, all I care about is the scientific analysis, the governmental and scientific reports, the overwhelming support from the vast majority of scientists from every country, from every religion and of every colour and the HUGE debates that thousands of people go to each year to try and sort this mess out. |
The emails show manipulation of all of those.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shash
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 220
Location: India
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | shash wrote: | | Climate scientists being skeptical of climate research is skepticism. |
Of which there are many who were intentionally excluded from the IPCC. |
Most (if not all - I have no information at present about the all part) of whom were excluded because their science was iffy.
One thing these mails show is a whole lot of dissent between climatologists on just what and how something or other is to be interpreted. Which is healthy, and what I would expect.
Like with evolution, everyone except some nutcases accept the fact of global warming, and most accept AGW also. They disagree on issues of extent, mitigation, risks, etc. The IPCC report that finally came out was formed after a lot of internal squabbling.
_________________
The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richk449
Guru
Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hellbringer wrote: | | richk449 wrote: | | hellbringer wrote: | | richk449 wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | why is it that it's only americans who argue against scientifically proven global warming? |
To generalize, we Americans have a proud history of questioning authority. |
You also have a proud history of questioning intelligence. |
It is tough to have one without the other. I would rather have a skeptical society that thinks for itself than a servile society that believes what the "elites" say. |
Scientists are hardly "elite" you know. |
True. Poor choice of words on my part. Still, I would rather have a skeptical society than a trusting society, whether it is elites or scientists or politicians or car mechanics that are offering opinions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | stop confusing them with facts, try to give them something off fox news |
Or manipulated findings that intentionally omitted data to push an agenda driven thesis. Exmaple A. |
Oh, also, I dont care about mails or speeches, all I care about is the scientific analysis, the governmental and scientific reports, the overwhelming support from the vast majority of scientists from every country, from every religion and of every colour and the HUGE debates that thousands of people go to each year to try and sort this mess out. |
The emails show manipulation of all of those. |
no they dont! Dude. I normally think you are a fairly intelligent person, we may not agree on something but I can see your side and you can probably see mine but you are basing all your ideas on hearsay instead of fact. How can a scientific inter-governmental body that has been going for 21 years be undermined by a couple of guys working for "advocacy centre"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| richk449 wrote: | | hellbringer wrote: | | richk449 wrote: | | hellbringer wrote: | | richk449 wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | why is it that it's only americans who argue against scientifically proven global warming? |
To generalize, we Americans have a proud history of questioning authority. |
You also have a proud history of questioning intelligence. |
It is tough to have one without the other. I would rather have a skeptical society that thinks for itself than a servile society that believes what the "elites" say. |
Scientists are hardly "elite" you know. |
True. Poor choice of words on my part. Still, I would rather have a skeptical society than a trusting society, whether it is elites or scientists or politicians or car mechanics that are offering opinions. |
you trust your doctor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richk449
Guru
Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cokehabit wrote: | | you trust your doctor |
No I don't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shash
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 220
Location: India
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drizek wrote: | | Chopinzee wrote: | | drizek wrote: |
You people never fail to amaze. |
You mean rational skeptics? Sorry that I don't go down on my knees and swallow this junk. |
Lol, rational skeptics. Half the poeple that deny global warming don't believe in evolution and think Obama is a secret muslim. Not exactly the posterchilds of rational people.
More like delusional paraniod morons who think the "elite" scientists and politicians are out to get them. |
I'd like to just ignore that crowd for this discussion. Or any other one. Not worth talking about, on all sides of any debate!
| Chopinzee wrote: | | We're all going die, |
Well, obviously! 
| Quote: | | the seas are going to wipe out all coastal areas, |
Low-lying coastal areas, probably. At the very least, they'll get badly affected by rising sea levels.
| Quote: | | and our women will become whores. |
Nice hyperbole there (though really not by you).
| Quote: | | It's ridiculous on face value. |
And I'm not asking you to take it at face value. Let's look at the (raw, unprocessed, uninterpreted) data that's available.
_________________
The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1096
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| richk449 wrote: | | True. Poor choice of words on my part. Still, I would rather have a skeptical society than a trusting society, whether it is elites or scientists or politicians or car mechanics that are offering opinions. |
Especially doubt the mechanic.
_________________
| drizek wrote: | | Here in America, we are like a bunch of shit-slinging monkeys. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
