Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 11/24/2009 5:18:46 PM PST by Kaslin
Junk Science: The Senate expects to take up global warming legislation by spring, but nothing more should happen in Congress on this issue until there's been a thorough probe of the ClimateGate scandal.
The scientists who have rung over and again the global warming alarm appear to be guilty of fraud. This we long suspected. Now, their own words, exposed by hackers who hijacked their e-mails, seem to confirm our suspicions.
For decades they've told us that the Earth is warming because of a greenhouse effect caused by man's carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. But what they've been telling each other isn't consistent with that story. The e-mails, more than a thousand of them, use phrases and terms such as "hide the decline," "trick" and "contain" (as in to conceal the Medieval Warm Period, an era in which temperatures might have been higher than today's).
There's also at least one damning admission — "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment" — sent by Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
There are attempts to conspire. Phil Jones, head of Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England, wrote that "If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the U.K., I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone."
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
It’s going to take a boat load of spin and talking points to get out of this one.
That was taken out of context. Clearly he was talking about the heat in his office being broken on a cold day. (/snicker)
I want to know why most of the few news outlets covering this refer to the con men as “scientists” and anyone who disagrees is a “skeptic” or “denier.”
Because those are the ones that are easily fooled
from Tom Wigley to Michael Mann,
On Oct 14, 2009, at 5:57 PM, Tom Wigley wrote: Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive. As an example, historicalruns with PCM look as though they match observations -- but the match is a fluke. PCM has no indirect aerosol forcing and a low climate sensitivity -- compensating errors. In my (perhaps too harsh)view, there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC.
This is why I still use results from MAGICC to compare with observed temperatures. At least here I can assess how sensitive matches are to sensitivity and forcing assumptions/uncertainties.
So why would a dem congressman want to cling to this flawed belief?
They had the sense of the economic devastation it would cause, now they have an easy out.
Are they truly enemies of the truth?
This will certainly show where they stand.
There’s no “might have been warmer” about the Medieval Warm Period. Norsemen raised cattle on the east coast of Greenland. Nobody does that today.
We knew this was a scam when David Deming was e-mailed the command: “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” This isn’t even junk science. It’s not even alchemy. It’s pure fraud.
For a moment I thought you was serious
One thing I picked up in all the e-mails was the use of the label “sceptic” to anyone who questioned the true faith. One could just as easily substitute the label “heretic” for “sceptic” and lose nothing in context.
No but it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if that or something similar was the spin
bfl
I suspect he knows my ex wife. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.