Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 12/03/2011 7:11:59 AM PST by MontaniSemperLiberi
It’s possible to accept the underlying science of global warming, as Mr. Pielke does, while also maintaining that substantial uncertainties still exist. Why wouldn’t they? Climate science is relatively new, and it’s also insanely complicated. No one knows with any certainty the exact impact of carbon dioxide emissions, what long-term climate trends will be or the effect of other factors, such as the sun.
But don’t take it from me. Take it from the climate scientists themselves.
By no coincidence, a new cache of hacked e-mails from leading climate scientists hit the Internet last week, just in time for the lead-up to the United Nations climate conference in Durban, South Africa. The e-mails are not recent – they are a new instalment in the so-called Climategate affair, which broke two years ago. They deal with a small area of global-warming studies that addresses the question: How do we know the Earth is warmer now than it was 1,000 years ago? The evidence is not straightforward, because it relies on proxy data such as tree rings.
Although Climategate has been widely dismissed as nothing more than the usual academic sniping, it is much more than that. In some of the e-mails, scientists propose ways to massage the data to make it look better. They try to figure out how to get dissident scientists fired. Others are unhappy because they believe important information has been simplified, suppressed or misrepresented for public consumption.
(Excerpt) Read more at theglobeandmail.com ...
The warmists i.e. fraudists set themselves up the well-deserved fall they’re taking. They claimed that the science was set, no doubters, skeptics allowed. In fact, they were on the verge of trying to get skeptics treated like criminals and tossed in jail. Now it looks as though some of these fraudsters might be thrown in the klink. I doubt that will happen, but if it does, let’s start with Al Gore.
:: it relies on proxy data such as tree rings ::
And, according to a disciple of the Goracle, here’s how that proxy works (this is NOT from a scientist, just a “true believer” in CACA - see tag).
Larger rings indicate a warmer period because the tree is assumed to have a longer growing period. They can process more nutrients over a longer period between dormancy periods.
Get that? Larger rings show an increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and an increase in CO2 indicates a warmer period.
The answer in a nutshell based on the latest release of Climategate 2 emails:
Because the science of Global Warming as practiced by the GW advocates is no longer a science - it has morphed into a "cause". And, to these people, supporting this "cause" is more important than preserving the basic principles that are the foundation of real science. Those principles require a continuous probing of your basic theories and never-ending doubt that your assumptions are in some way flawed. Those principles are totally absent from the current "research" conducted by the Global Warming Advocates. To these people, global warming (or lately climate change) MUST be shown to be true and man-made in order to convince society to make massive, economy destroying investments in clean energy and equally massive transfers of wealth from the U.S. and European nations to the third world. Given this mindset, who would be surprised that it is junk science and not climate science that we have ended up with.
“- it has morphed into a “cause”.
It is a scam. It is racketeering. Plain and simple. Just as much a con as the fancy $100,000.00 electric car scams (Fisker Automotive, Tesla Motors) all of which are mechanisms by which taxpayer monies are stolen Aided and abetted by Congress and staffers on Capitol Hill-many unwitting participants-suckered by their warm and fuzzy feelings about the cause du jour—but led by those criminally inclined. Undoubtedly much of which finds its way back into “campaign financing” or offshore accounts .
Exactamundo my friend! While I am NOT a "denier" by any means, the FACT of the matter is, SCIENCE has been corrupted, or perhaps exposed, but the Cult of Global Warming. This is a demonstrable fact, as these emails have shown. Not only that, but even "new believers" like Muller have admitted in the past that they have known that some scientists were purposely exaggerating the issue because it was the only way to get the public on their side.
While I do believe there may be "something" to GW, and AGW, and CO2 release, etc, at this point I don't think I will ever know, in my lifetime, what the damn truth is. I am disgusted.
True that, and it would be of concern if this was about science. But it is NOT; it is about fraud, crony grantism, new world order ... anything BUT science!
I’ll say this about the emails.
The childishness, the pettiness, the cattiness is nothing new in science. Scientists are no different in character from anyone else and in fact may be worse. Imagine a room full of Newt Ginrich’s all trying to argue that everyone is dumber than they are. It comes pretty close to what happens in science.
What’s different in climate science is the tie in with government. The most immature, thin skinned, whiny little bit*hes got control of the room and sought to cast everyone out.
There is no more science, and there are no more scentists.
There are only politicists, and they deserve to be ignored.
I’m waiting for people to realize that Evolution is just as corrupted as Global Warming. It’s far more politics than it is science.
If the science is “settled” why are thousands of scientist writing 10s of thousands of grants for money to study it?
You convince no one with that irrelevant statement. You must know that. So you must simply be trying to stir up a fight.
Sad.
Debate is not science.
Neither are pomegranates nor the key of B minor.
Just saw a bright white meteorite burn up west of central SC. As it burned up it split in three and turned a bright green.
Posting for posterity.
I thought larger rings also indicated more water available to grow with so that water and temperature are interactive. The most interesting measure is the number of stoma (?) in the leaves which are fewer when there is more CO2
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.
