Major scandal; Now proven that the entire global warming threat is based on fabricated data

  • Thread starter Thread starter WinterWH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sidbrown said:
Photos don’t lie.
Here are photos of glaciers before and after proving that global warming is a fact.
We can argue all day long about whether or not the earth is flat, but the satellite phots prove that the earth is round, even though some scientist may have sent an email saying he doubts it. Similarly these phots prove that the global warming is real.
livescience.com/php/multimedia/imagegallery/igviewer.php?imgid=626&gid=42&index=0
Click to expand...
Thanks, Sidbrown – as a mountaineer, it’s sad to see this regression.
 
qui_est_ce said:
Do you only surround yourself with scientists who agree with you?
Click to expand...
Let me ask you the same question: Do you only surround yourself with scientists who agree with you?

I think I made it clear that I regard cheating and falsification of data as morally wrong. I also made it clear that there are many, many scientists and scientific organizations in the world working on this question. Catching one student cheating on a test does not justify failing the entire class, does it?
 
paully said:
I really wish you would take some time and check the sites that people that are not in your corner have suggested. It seems that you refuse to do that? Or at least you haven’t posted any responses to those articles and scientists.
Click to expand...
Paully, I too wish you would take the time to check sites offering evidence for a position contrary to yours. It cuts both ways, you know.

Better yet, perhaps we should start a thread that opens the discussion of this question in a neutral way, rather than framing it in the ridiculous fashion of suggesting that an email scandal in one university invalidates the entire field of global warming study.

StAnastasia
 
StAnastasia said:
Paully, I too wish you would take the time to check sites offering evidence for a position contrary to yours. It cuts both ways, you know.

Better yet, perhaps we should start a thread that opens the discussion of this question in a neutral way, rather than framing it in the ridiculous fashion of suggesting that an email scandal in one university invalidates the entire field of global warming study.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
I never stated a position. I don’t have one yet.

YES But only if it’s done from a neutral starting point. And everyone must be willing to investigate each others claims. We can’t just right them off.

Have you checked www.icecap.us? I really am interested in what you’ve got to say. I’m looking forward to it.

God Bless you 👍
 
StAnastasia said:
Let me ask you the same question: Do you only surround yourself with scientists who agree with you?
Click to expand...
No, it’s just the only scientists I happen to know personally think the the man made part of Climate Change is B*. Reading some of the sites provided here back them up. IOW there is a lot of credible evidence to refute yours.
StAnastasia said:
Catching one student cheating on a test does not justify failing the entire class, does it?
Click to expand...
If the teacher is telling the students how to cheat, then we have a problem. And that is exactly the case here. I’ve already provided links to Dr. Jones and his buddies.
 
qui_est_ce said:
No, it’s just the only scientists I happen to know personally think the the man made part of Climate Change is B*. Reading some of the sites provided here back them up. IOW there is a lot of credible evidence to refute yours. If the teacher is telling the students how to cheat, then we have a problem. And that is exactly the case here. I’ve already provided links to Dr. Jones and his buddies.
Click to expand...
So we know different sets of scientists – let’s get them discussing among themselves, as they are in the best position to make their respective cases. I’ll ask Steven Newton why the American Geophysical Union didn’t have any scientists there today who reject AGW. Perhaps they hold their own conferences.
 
I was doing some more reading last night after homework. Methane is 20 times more affective than CO2 in trapping outgoing radiation. It then said that a large part of methane is now coming from animals raised for humans to eat. PEEEEW, I remember when my family drove through Nebraska a long while ago. It stunk. Maybe if we cut down on eating meat we can help combat any warming if it is occurring.

I could do it. 👍
 
Hi StAnastisia,

Please answer my post. Number 700.

I really want to hear what you have to say. I want to see you discuss these reports. I know I can learn from it.

Thanks and God Bless

Paully
 
paully said:
I was doing some more reading last night after homework. Methane is 20 times more affective than CO2 in trapping outgoing radiation… Maybe if we cut down on eating meat we can help combat any warming if it is occurring. I could do it. 👍
Click to expand...
Paully, my family have already made the switch away from beef, both for this reason and out of general health concerns. It would be interesting to know how much methane chickens contribute as compared with cows or pigs.
 
StAnastasia said:
Paully, my family have already made the switch away from beef, both for this reason and out of general health concerns. It would be interesting to know how much methane chickens contribute as compared with cows or pigs.
Click to expand...
Hi

I think that chickens produce a lot of nitorgen. When I googled it though, it seems as though chicken waste produces enough methane that in some places in Europe it is being used as a source of methane fuel.
 
StAnastasia said:
No, climate science has not lost its credibility. Certainly, cheating on tests and fudging data is obviously wrong at the most basic level. But the problem emails in the exchange at the University of East Anglia were ***only a small proportion of all emails sent ***by scientistsm and the university of East Anglia is **only one university in the world **studying the problem of global warming. The work of the vast majority of scientists, universities, laboratories, and scientific communities continues unsullied.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
Sorry I can’t stand it. First you power us over with talk of large numbers make for truth ( most scientists agree) and we should capitulate to the sway of large numbers and now when they get caught in deliberately deceiving the entire basis for that consensus, you flip flop and tell us that only a few were bad.Only one bomb hit Hiroshimo so it’s not bad? It is clear that numbers with you are to be manipulated and cherry picked.

I fail to see that you’re at all interested in truth.
 
paully said:
Hi I think that chickens produce a lot of nitorgen. When I googled it though, it seems as though chicken waste produces enough methane that in some places in Europe it is being used as a source of methane fuel.
Click to expand...
We could certainly do more to harvest methane from dumps and feedlots.
 
StAnastasia said:
So we know different sets of scientists – let’s get them discussing among themselves, as they are in the best position to make their respective cases. I’ll ask Steven Newton why the American Geophysical Union didn’t have any scientists there today who reject AGW. Perhaps they hold their own conferences.
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that people who disagree with AGCC are marginalized in Copenhagen.

Interestingly, many appear to have gone to Copenhagen:
Copenhagen climate conference
Copenhagen day of mass protest passes without major incident
Click to expand...
Danish police arrest 260 people after a day of mass protest where 4,000 campaigners marched on the Bella centre and activists inside staged a noisy walkout
Click to expand...
Protests involving thousands of people today inside and outside the Bella conference centre hosting UN climate talks in Copenhagen have passed off without major incident.
Click to expand...
About 4,000 campaigners marched on the Bella centre in an attempt to stage a “people’s assembly” inside the summit, but were stopped by police. At least 260 protesters have been detained following clashes outside the Bella centre, said the Danish police spokesman, Per Larsen.
Click to expand...
Tim Jones, policy officer for anti-poverty campaigners the World Development Movement, said: “Today thousands of people sought to create a people’s assembly to get voices heard offering real solutions to the climate crisis. The people’s assembly was stopped by police who committed unprovoked violence on both protesters and official delegates to the UN negotiations. This is a moment in history where the right to protest is of vital importance.”
Click to expand...
Campaigners complained at officers’ use of pepper spray to keep the march – organised by the Climate Justice Action and Climate Justice Now! (CJN) networks – away from the conference centre. Magnus Leitt, an eyewitness, said of the tactic: “[The spray] went right into my eyes, I couldn’t do anything to get out of the way. It burns like fire. But the worst thing is that you start to hyperventilate, you can’t get your breath and then it’s hard not to panic,” he said.
Click to expand...
Patrick Gillett, a demonstrator who was arrested this morning, spoke to the Guardian from one of the cages at a holding centre in the city’s Valby district. “We were coming down the cycle path towards the Bella centre and the police came to get us. They chased us with dogs and one bloke had to climb up a tree because the dog was biting his legs. Then they brought us here, with our hands cuffed behind our backs and we had to sit on the floor until they put us into the cages. There are about 10 people in my cage but some people have got 12, 20, 25.”
Click to expand...
Let’s go plant a few trees!:christmastree1:
 
sidbrown said:
Photos don’t lie.
Here are photos of glaciers before and after proving that global warming is a fact.
Similarly these phots prove that the global warming is real.
Click to expand...
Well as long as we are arguing REAL science, these photos prove no more then the ice coverage in specific areas is smaller now then it was at some time in the past.

Now is this caused by Global Warming? No one can tell. A photo doesn’t say.
For any type of conjecture, we would need much more data.
 
Don_L said:
Sorry I can’t stand it. First you power us over with talk of large numbers make for truth ( most scientists agree) and we should capitulate to the sway of large numbers and now when they get caught in deliberately deceiving the entire basis for that consensus, you flip flop and tell us that only a few were bad.Only one bomb hit Hiroshimo so it’s not bad? It is clear that numbers with you are to be manipulated and cherry picked. I fail to see that you’re at all interested in truth.
Click to expand...
Don L, do you like truth? I do. I haven’t seen any evidence that the majority of climate scientists “get caught in deliberately deceiving the entire basis [sic] for that consensus.” I thought it was a couple of scientists at one university out of thousands of institutions. It’s a grave accusation you make. Sorry, I can’t stand it either.

StAnastasia
 
The real forces behind climate change politics just showed up in Copenhagen

hotair.com/archives/2009/12/17/aw-communists-march-for-climate-justice-or-whatever-in-copenhagen/

President Chavez brought the house down.
When he said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships” he got a rousing round of applause.
When he said there was a “silent and terrible ghost in the room” and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top