Isn't this just too convenient?
To: Askwhy5times
Isn't this just too convenient? It makes all their data completely worthless.
To: Askwhy5times
Isn't this just too convenient?Well then, I guess we will just have to rely on what has been called in other articles the "value-adjusted" processed data for our multi-trillion dollar decision to save the planet. /s
To: Askwhy5times
Well there you have it.
There is now no discernible difference between the tactics of the CRU and the tactics of ACORN.
4 posted on
11/29/2009 6:45:19 AM PST by
Flycatcher
(God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
To: Askwhy5times
We’ve GOT to keep this story alive.
Our LIVES depend on it.
5 posted on
11/29/2009 6:46:39 AM PST by
samtheman
To: Askwhy5times
Two questions I have are:
1. If they were collecting data from around the world and you assume that they didn't own the collectors, did'nt they destroy other peoples property?
2. Can't the data be reproduced in some fashion for such an important issue?
8 posted on
11/29/2009 6:49:16 AM PST by
Thebaddog
(AYBABTU)
To: Askwhy5times
In the 60's one of the demonstrators' slogans was something like
NO JUSTICE! - NO PEACE!
So we could now adapt this as
NO DATA! - NO WARMING!
9 posted on
11/29/2009 6:52:08 AM PST by
magooey
(The Mandate of Heaven resides in the hearts of men)
To: Askwhy5times
The Earth receives 99.999999999999% of its heat from our Sun! The rest comes from the stars in the heavens but they have very little impact!
I'm happy to report that NASA has reported that Mars' atmospheric warming results from solar not human activity. So Marvin is off the hook.
I propose a special Gore tax at 100% of his wealth derived from his Inconclusive Truths. We then use these funds to launch him to Mars where he can dicuss this issue with Marvin!
13 posted on
11/29/2009 7:06:47 AM PST by
Young Werther
("Quae Cum Ita Sunt - Julius Caesar "Since these things are so!")
To: Askwhy5times
How soon before all related stories disappear off of Google?
14 posted on
11/29/2009 7:16:00 AM PST by
Mrs. Don-o
(Opportunity may knock once, but temptation bangs on your front door forever.)
To: Askwhy5times
This is a load of crap. Convert the adjusted data back to its raw form using the inverse of the equations that adjusted it in the first place.
To: Askwhy5times
Your dog ate it?
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
16 posted on
11/29/2009 7:27:50 AM PST by
The Comedian
(Evil can only succeed if good men don't point at it and laugh.)
To: Askwhy5times
Lets see, the data was disposed of when they moved into a new building? The company I work for pays a RECORDS STORAGE SERVICE to keep all our old stuff in a warehouse.
The dog at their homework?
How about criminal acts!
17 posted on
11/29/2009 7:30:00 AM PST by
lacrew
(The 274th trimester is a very late procedure)
To: Askwhy5times
In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual. - Galileo Galilei, 1564-1642
20 posted on
11/29/2009 7:48:57 AM PST by
ChildOfThe60s
(If you can remember the 60s........you weren't really there)
To: Askwhy5times
...the University of East Anglia has been forced to admit they threw away the raw temperature data they used to make their predictions of anthropogenic global warming. They claim they only kept the 'adjusted' data.If the data was digital, ie: in spreadsheet or csv files, then they should have notes and copies of e-mails from whence the source data came.
Release all of the e-mail, source data files and climate modelling routines held locked up at the CRU.
If there was no finaggling of the data, ie: the results are what they are, then there should be no repercussions.
If, on the other hand, there is no "data-dump" then there can be no reproducable results to confirm theirs.
The choice is simple. How's that for a catch 22?
21 posted on
11/29/2009 7:49:45 AM PST by
woofer
To: Askwhy5times
..... the CRU said: We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added .... ..... Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.
To: Askwhy5times
Perhaps the ‘hacker’ who got the emails has the technical skill to extract the ‘deleted’ raw data as well. I have been told that nothing is ever REALLY deleted if it is sought by a really experienced technician.
As I recall, a witness in a Congressional hearing some years ago had written and deleted an anti-Clinton email to a friend that was recovered, much to her embarrassment.
26 posted on
11/29/2009 9:00:54 AM PST by
EDINVA
To: Askwhy5times; Little Bill; Nervous Tick; 4horses+amule; Desdemona; Fractal Trader; grey_whiskers; ..
29 posted on
11/29/2009 9:51:17 AM PST by
steelyourfaith
(Time to prosecute Al Gore now that fellow scam artist Bernie Madoff is in stir.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson