kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
apples and oranges when comparing a closed-body system that's internal versus an open body in a fluid environment.
Climate Skeptics See 'Smoking Gun' in Researchers' Leaked E-Mails
- Thread starter kokonut
- Start date
apples and oranges when comparing a closed-body system that's internal versus an open body in a fluid environment.
R
rockdrummer
Guest
this reinforces why I am such a cynical bastard. Somebody is making money off of this somehow somewhere. My personal belief (supported by evidence) is that the earth has gone through many warming then cooling cycles. It's natural. That said, I am sure that mankind has contributed to current warming trends however it is questionable if it is anything as significant as some would have you believe.
kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
Not even that significant. 10 years ago they predicted additional warming over the next 10 yeas because of man's contribution of CO2 except that global temps didn't go up but show signs of a cooling. Go figure. Yet, we're at a low cycle of sun's energy output and people say that the sun has not contribution to Earth's warming and cooling?
kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
R
rockdrummer
Guest
Source: http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/comment.php?comment.news.116
A server belonging to the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit was hacked and a large file containing documents and emails was obtained. A number of these documents seem to indicate an attempt to manipulate data and public opinion.
"Wow!" hardly seems to cover it. There is a huge amount of material here and people are still going through it. No one is denying that this data is legit but we have spent some time investigating it ourselves and have concluded that to fake this much data would be extremely difficult. Even the IP numbers of the mail servers shown in the messages check out (on both the to and from email servers). The data is legit, now the question remains what impact will this have and why hasn't CRU taken action against some of the people involved?
Many of the documents seem to be concerned with hiding scientific results that don't agree with them. There are also references to destroying data. Some email messages actually suggest that others destroy data before its discovered under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (and ironically all of these documents were contained in a folder called "FOIA"). So the next time someone says that "scientists would never fake or manipulate data" here is evidence that they would. (all names listed in the documents and quoted below are to be presumed innocent until fired and publicly humiliated).
Now here are just a few quotes from the documents.
"And don't leave stuff lying around on ftp sites - you never know who is trawling them. The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone."
"The two MMs" refers to McKitrick (a Canadian economist and professor at the University of Guelph, Ontario. He is also a Senior Fellow of the Fraser Institute), McIntyre (of climateaudit.org fame). These two have been two of the biggest thorns in the side of those wishing to skew data towards the warming argument and they do it simply through analyzing the data.
A server belonging to the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit was hacked and a large file containing documents and emails was obtained. A number of these documents seem to indicate an attempt to manipulate data and public opinion.
"Wow!" hardly seems to cover it. There is a huge amount of material here and people are still going through it. No one is denying that this data is legit but we have spent some time investigating it ourselves and have concluded that to fake this much data would be extremely difficult. Even the IP numbers of the mail servers shown in the messages check out (on both the to and from email servers). The data is legit, now the question remains what impact will this have and why hasn't CRU taken action against some of the people involved?
Many of the documents seem to be concerned with hiding scientific results that don't agree with them. There are also references to destroying data. Some email messages actually suggest that others destroy data before its discovered under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (and ironically all of these documents were contained in a folder called "FOIA"). So the next time someone says that "scientists would never fake or manipulate data" here is evidence that they would. (all names listed in the documents and quoted below are to be presumed innocent until fired and publicly humiliated).
Now here are just a few quotes from the documents.
"And don't leave stuff lying around on ftp sites - you never know who is trawling them. The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone."
"The two MMs" refers to McKitrick (a Canadian economist and professor at the University of Guelph, Ontario. He is also a Senior Fellow of the Fraser Institute), McIntyre (of climateaudit.org fame). These two have been two of the biggest thorns in the side of those wishing to skew data towards the warming argument and they do it simply through analyzing the data.
kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
Yep. Yep. And....yep.
They are pursuing criminal charges but the cat is already out of the bag. There is now a call for a congressional hearing on this since if the idea is to fudge data in order to get more federal money would constitute as an attempt to defraud the govt. That's a big no no.
They are pursuing criminal charges but the cat is already out of the bag. There is now a call for a congressional hearing on this since if the idea is to fudge data in order to get more federal money would constitute as an attempt to defraud the govt. That's a big no no.
kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
CRU relied on unreliable data sets, bad computer models, and a desire to reach a conclusion rather than do actual science.
Congress May Probe Leaked Global Warming E-Mails - Taking Liberties - CBS News
Eh? It is obvious that man-made pollution causes climate change. At least, that is the logical assumption when you read sites such as
Greenhouse Gases’ Effect on the Climate - Energy Explained, Your Guide To Understanding Energy
Of course, there are plenty of other sites, just pick your poison.
I don't think there has been enough attention placed on how much pollution humanity causes, and this investigation is just another smoke screen to the real issue.
Greenhouse Gases’ Effect on the Climate - Energy Explained, Your Guide To Understanding Energy
Of course, there are plenty of other sites, just pick your poison.
I don't think there has been enough attention placed on how much pollution humanity causes, and this investigation is just another smoke screen to the real issue.
yizuman
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2008
- Messages
- 2,344
- Reaction score
- 2
Volcanoes produces more CO2 than any man made product combined. Yet, it's been erupting long before man came to the scene. Yet, we're all still here.
If CO2 really were a threat to the earth's ozone layer, we would all have been dead long before one single production of a man made CO2 product came to existence.
Volcanic Gases and Their Effects
If CO2 really were a threat to the earth's ozone layer, we would all have been dead long before one single production of a man made CO2 product came to existence.
Volcanic Gases and Their Effects
somedeafdudefromPNW
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2009
- Messages
- 9,499
- Reaction score
- 1
Everything is toxic when it is in excess.
Yes, mankind have been around for a few millions year, however the difference is that all that stored carbon sink that were tucked away in the earth are being used up and are in the atmosphere. You can't honestly tell me that won't have a long-term effect.
Yes, mankind have been around for a few millions year, however the difference is that all that stored carbon sink that were tucked away in the earth are being used up and are in the atmosphere. You can't honestly tell me that won't have a long-term effect.
kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
Obama to Declare Carbon Dioxide Dangerous Pollutant (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
He believes and says that CO2 is a pollutant. If that's the case, then what we exhale is a pollutant as well. Problem is, CO2 is NOT a pollutant.
Agreed. People really have NO IDEA how much pollution is being spewed daily. It is simply not reported.
16 of the world's biggest ships give off as much pollution as all the world's cars. When you consider the total number of ships using dirty fuel, do the math.
How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world | Mail Online
kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
Used up? No. CO2 is absorbed and released in a variety of pathways involving the oceans, lakes, plants, trees, the soils, and such. This CO2 cycle continues to occur.
kokonut
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 16,007
- Reaction score
- 1
Exhaust pollution is one thing, CO2 is no a pollutant. It's the very thing that plants thrive on. The more CO2 concentration the better as much as 1200 ppm.