PDA

View Full Version : Climatologists under pressure



wilbur
12-04-2009, 02:24 PM
For a welcome break from the frantic bloodlust of denialists gone mad, here is a more reasoned and calm take on the on the situation, from Nature:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v462/n7273/full/462545a.html



The e-mail archives stolen last month from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA), UK, have been greeted by the climate-change-denialist fringe as a propaganda windfall (see page 551). To these denialists, the scientists' scathing remarks about certain controversial palaeoclimate reconstructions qualify as the proverbial 'smoking gun': proof that mainstream climate researchers have systematically conspired to suppress evidence contradicting their doctrine that humans are warming the globe.

This paranoid interpretation would be laughable were it not for the fact that obstructionist politicians in the US Senate will probably use it next year as an excuse to stiffen their opposition to the country's much needed climate bill. Nothing in the e-mails undermines the scientific case that global warming is real — or that human activities are almost certainly the cause. That case is supported by multiple, robust lines of evidence, including several that are completely independent of the climate reconstructions debated in the e-mails.

Something the skeptics don't ever seem to acknowledge...



A fair reading of the e-mails reveals nothing to support the denialists' conspiracy theories. In one of the more controversial exchanges, UEA scientists sharply criticized the quality of two papers that question the uniqueness of recent global warming (S. McIntyre and R. McKitrick Energy Environ. 14, 751–771; 2003 and W. Soon and S. Baliunas Clim. Res. 23, 89–110; 2003) and vowed to keep at least the first paper out of the upcoming Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Whatever the e-mail authors may have said to one another in (supposed) privacy, however, what matters is how they acted. And the fact is that, in the end, neither they nor the IPCC suppressed anything: when the assessment report was published in 2007 it referenced and discussed both papers.

If there are benefits to the e-mail theft, one is to highlight yet again the harassment that denialists inflict on some climate-change researchers, often in the form of endless, time-consuming demands for information under the US and UK Freedom of Information Acts. Governments and institutions need to provide tangible assistance for researchers facing such a burden.


More stuff at link.

patriot45
12-04-2009, 02:42 PM
For a welcome break from the frantic bloodlust of denialists gone mad, here is a more reasoned and calm take on the on the situation, from Nature:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v462/n7273/full/462545a.html



Something the skeptics don't ever seem to acknowledge...



More stuff at link.

I heard last nite it was niether hacking or theft! So your premise is off to a bad start!
It was a whistle blower! And you lefty tree huggers love whistle blowers dontcha?

FlaGator
12-04-2009, 04:11 PM
Wilbur, your AGW propaganda is now being recognized for what it truly is, untrustworthy opinion from zealots who have proven that they are capable of any distortion in order to convince people that they are really concerned about climate change... as long as the grant money keeps coming.

Over the years Nature has become nothing but a shill for the AGW crowd so it is not surprising that they would jump in to defend the AGW scam artists. Nature's reputation rises or falls with that of the scientists that propagated this hoax.

Constitutionally Speaking
12-04-2009, 07:27 PM
How's your religion treating you Wilbur???

AmPat
12-04-2009, 10:04 PM
Originally Posted by wilbur
For a welcome break from the frantic bloodlust of denialists gone mad, here is a more reasoned and calm take on the on the situation, from Nature:
As opposed to what, the "calm, reasoned" bloodlust of Global Warming alarmists?:rolleyes:

Rockntractor
12-04-2009, 10:07 PM
For a welcome break from the frantic bloodlust of denialists gone mad, here is a more reasoned and calm take on the on the situation, from Nature:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v462/n7273/full/462545a.html



Something the skeptics don't ever seem to acknowledge...



More stuff at link.
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/e2c5b947.jpg?t=1259982427

3rd-try
12-06-2009, 12:20 AM
Wilbur, give it up. This one has blown up in your face. Find some other cause to be passionate about. Try to avoid anything related to Al Gore.

Why were you so quick to side with a "science" that has been suspect to those with an open mind from the beginning? If this makes you feel like an idiot, it's because you, at least on this subject acted exactly like an idiot.

marv
12-06-2009, 08:59 AM
Okay wilbur, here's another cause you can support.........

THE DREAD TOMATO ADDICTION
Mark Clifton

This essay originally appeared in the February 1958 edition of Astounding.
The dates in this version have been modified (all original dates plus 50 years).

Ninety-two point four per cent of juvenile delinquents have eaten tomatoes.

Eighty-seven point one per cent of the adult criminals in penitentiaries throughout
the United States have eaten tomatoes.

Informers reliably inform that of all known American Communists ninety-two point
three percent have eaten tomatoes.

Eighty-four per cent of all people killed in automobile accidents during the year
2004 had eaten tomatoes.

Those who object to singling out specific groups for statistical proofs require
measurements within in the total. Of those people born before the year 1850,
regardless of race, color, creed or caste, and known to have eaten tomatoes,
there has been one hundred per cent mortality!

In spite of their dread addiction, a few tomato eaters born between 1850
and 1900 still manage to survive, but the clinical picture is poor-their
bones are brittle, their movements feeble, their skin seamed and wrinkled,
their eyesight failing, hair falling, and frequently they have lost all their
teeth.

Those born between 1900 and 1950 number somewhat more survivors,
but the overt signs of the addiction's dread effects differ not in kind but
only in degree of deterioration. Prognostication is not hopeful.

Exhaustive experiment shows that when tomatoes are withheld from an
addict, invariably his cravings will cause him to turn to substitutes-such
as oranges, or steak and potatoes. If both tomatoes and all substitutes are
persistently withheld-death invariably results within a short time!

The skeptic of apocryphal statistics, or the stubborn nonconformist who
will not accept the clearly proved conclusions of others may conduct his
own experiment.

Obtain two dozen tomatoes-they may actually be purchased within a block
of some high schools, or discovered growing in a respected neighbor's
back yard! - crush them to a pulp in exactly the state they would have if
introduced into the stomach, pour the vile juice into a bowl, and place a
goldfish therein. Within minutes the goldfish will be dead!

Those who argue that what affects a goldfish might not apply to a human
being may, at their own choice, wish to conduct a direct experiment by
fully immersing a live human head* into the mixture for a full five minutes.

* It is suggested that best results will be obtained by using an experimental
subject who is thoroughly familiar with and frequently uses the logical
methods demonstrated herein, such as:

(a) The average politician. Extremely unavailable to the average citizen
except during the short open season before election.

(b) The advertising copywriter. Extremely wary and hard to catch due to
his experience with many lawsuits for fraudulent claims.

(c) The dedicated moralist. Extremely plentiful in supply, and the experimenter
might even obtain a bounty on each from a grateful community.

Any problem with the conclusion? After all, it's made from fact, at least some of them as needed. http://users.mo-net.com/mcruzan/avatars/laugher.gif

Big Guy
12-06-2009, 02:41 PM
Hey Wilbur, try this link; http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/ they have evidence also. :D

AmPat
12-06-2009, 04:14 PM
Here in Colorado, we have had two, 2 foot snowfalls, an 8 incher, assorted dustings (1-4 inches) and it is currently snowing. The temperature is near record lows. All this global warming is costing me a fortune in heating bills.