Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 11/23/2009 11:13:11 PM PST by dila813
There was no evidence of conspiracy among climate scientists in the leaked emails – so why was the University of East Anglia's response so pathetic?
The lay public, when presented with confusing data and competing arguments about climate change, deploy the mental shortcut of believing the people they most trust. Trust in the communicator is therefore crucial.
Unfortunately the three main climate change communicators: politicians, journalists and environmental campaigners, are among the least trusted people in society – fighting it out for bottom place in the ranking with lawyers and car salesmen. No one would pay any attention to them at all if they were not drawing on the aquifer of public trust in scientists.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
All comments are gone now.
If you make a cig, you got a deal
Whew! You’re a tough sale. Luckily I do roll my own. Hope you don’t mind ungummed papers. They do come undone sometimes. Hey! What do expect from a used hoax salesman?
Don’t lick it, I will lick it myself.
"If{SupportsTheory}, then {a}, If {DoesNotSupportTheory}, then {}"
Paraphrased here and the words are representative, but eerily similar. What does this little logical expression suggest to everyone?
An organized effort to massage the data, to marginalize the opposition, and to keep data from them. Sounds like a conspiracy to me.
If they are saying that the remarks are taken out of context, then give us the context. Give us ALL the emails, so we can see the whole context.
Somehow, I don't think the "out of context" argument will stand up to scrutiny, as bloggers and science writers are already reconstructing the context, which make the emails even more damning:
Here's Antonio Regalaldo, writing for Science Magazine:
...in May of 2008, the school received a legal information request for correspondence of an East Anglia researcher, Keith Briffa, involved in the preparation of the most recent scientific report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, known as AR4. Two days later, according to the alleged correspondence, Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, sent out an email to colleagues asking them to delete any such emails.
From: Phil Jones <p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Michael E. Mann" <mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: IPCC & FOI:04:11 2008
Date: Thu May 29 11
Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't
have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!
Cheers
Phil
Ouch. I don't think "context" will help them at all...
Thank you
It’s the Guardian. Global warming is their religion. To have it threatened, even questioned would bring the whole anti-capitalist, pro-collectivist edifice crashing down so you can imagine the violence of the reactions.
Sorry, don’t want to start a new thread, though someone else certainly could...from one of the emails:
“We are using the combined dataste for the estimation as this
should produce better rbar values around coasts and islands. If we
used the land only dataset we would have real problems with
isolated islands and with some coasts ( where all neighbouring
boxes will be in one direction from the coastal box).
2) Having got fields of the monthly rbars we’ll then apply the
formula to the land-only dataset. As you’re doing something
similar with the marine dataset, we can remerge the two
variance corrected datasets using David’s merging ( growing
land and neighbour checking) program.
3) We will then write this up as a small paper for GRL, about
the land only results. Both of you can be on this if you want.
We can decide later what to do about the merged dataset.
4) applying the correction in real time in the future will mean
that we will always be slightly changing approximately the last
15 years data - because of the filter end effects. Best would
seem to be to maintain the present version we have and apply
this variance correction every few years ( eg the IPCC cycle !).
Cheers
Phil “
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=116&filename=.txt
^^
also, “variance problem” may be a good keyword
Don’t know if you’ve visited the link again but the comments are there (although many of them removed). This one knocked my socks off:
“The writer employs the now common trick of using the word `denier’ to associate people who are sceptical of the (dubious to bogus) tenets of climate change with people who claim to doubt the holocaust.
The word `deny’ strongly implies a repudiation of a `fact’. In the case of the CC argument, the fact that there are strong positions expressed by many rational experts on either side of the argument implies that the proposition is not a `fact’ or not yet in any event.
If you read the above paragraph you see that the writer wants the reader to mentally compartmentalise all sceptics into an imaginary and sinister well organised group. Does this remind us of what went on in a certain European country immediately before the war and directed at a certain racial group. Is this what is going on here? “
This years winner of the Bagdad Bob Memorial Prize for Journalism.
There is a VERY simple explanation for the total denial in this article. You will find almost every Newspaper, TV station, an Magazine have an ‘Environmental’ Reporter. They just lost the reason for their existence. They are in FULL recovery mode. You know the truth now and they are trying to save their meal ticket.
“There was no evidence of conspiracy among climate scientists in the leaked emails...”
Startling evidence of the insane apoplectic communist mind at work.
Hey, George Marshall, you syphilitic, brain-addled commie, you’re a DENIER!!!
Anyone have a picture of Mitchell? Bet he looks like Trotsky after Stalin stuck the icepick in his head.
The lay public, when presented with confusing data and competing arguments about climate change, deploy the mental shortcut of believing the people they most trust. Trust in the communicator is therefore crucial.
Well, that's why it's so important for that same lay public to see the video below. It will disabuse them from that notion... LOL...
It’s one thing to gripe and complain about these things and disagree with it, but it’s quite another to convince your friends and neighbors and relatives and coworkers...
THEREFORE..., it’s also absolutely necessary for people to know the information in the following documentary. If there were simply one video that you could see and/or show people you know... this would be the one...
The following is an excellent video documentary on the so-called “Global Warming” I would recommend it to all FReepers. It’s a very well-made documentary.
“The Great Global Warming Swindle”
If you want to download it, via a BitTorrent site (using a BitTorrent client), you can get it at the following link. Information about BitTorrent protocol and BitTorrent clients and their comparison at these three links (in this sentence). Some additional BitTorrent information here and here.
Download it here...
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3635222/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle
[This is a high-quality copy, of about a gigabyte in size. This link is the information about it, and you have to click the download link to get it on your BitTorrent client software. You'll also find users' comments here, too.]
It’s worth seeing and having for relatives, friends, neighbors and coworkers to see.
Also, see it online here...
http://www.moviesfoundonline.com/great_global_warming_swindle.php
[this one is considerably lower quality, is a flash video and viewable online, of course..., and also, you can download flash video on a website either yourself or some software doing it.]
Buy it on DVD here...
[this would be the very highest quality version, on a DVD disk, of several gigabytes in size...] At Amazon, it seems to be high-priced now and have only a few copies right now.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000WLUXZE
At WAGtv (a UK shop), but don't know about shipping. The price is reasonable, though.
https://www.wagtv.com/product/The-Great-Global-Warming-Swindle-322.html
[And..., some information from WAGtv about this item.]
Also, in split parts on YouTube...
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 1 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TqqWJugXzs
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 2 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5rGpDMN8lw
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 3 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzFL6Ixe_bo
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 4 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQy2rT_dvU
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 5 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dzIMXGI6k8
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 6 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GjOgQN1Jco
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 7 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHI2GfbfrYw
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 8 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7N9benJh3Lw
The Great Global Warming Swindle - Credits (Part 9 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_1ifP-ri58
I don't get any respect I tell ya. One little pandemic and no one will let you live it down.
“George Marshall is the founder and director of projects at the Climate Outreach and Information Network.” FOLLOW THE MONEY! According to the profile on CiF, “George Marshall is the founder and director of projects at the Climate Outreach and Information Network. This set me digging.I discovered that COIN was a registered charity, so my next port of call was the Charity Commission, to have a look at their accounts.
None have yet been filed, as the organisation is newly registered: Mem and Arts were incorporated on 21st December 2007 and they were registered with the Charity Commission on 26th March 2008 (though according to their own website they were founded in 2004).
Its charitable objects are listed on the Charity Commission website as “to promote any charitable purposes at the discretion of the trustees concerning climate change and its impact”.
Their objects look rather more political on their “about us” page. The contact was listed as a Mr Tim Baster of Oxford. Additionally there are two trustees.
Googling Mr Baster’s name came up trumps. The buggers are getting close on £700,000 from DEFRA over two years.
According to DEFRA’s press release this is to “profoundly change the attitude of rank and file union members; generating visible collective reduction action, establishing a social norm for personal action, and creating a persuasive synergy and cross over between personal action, work-placed programmes such as ‘Greening the workplace’, and the emissions reduction targets of employers.”
The other awards on the press release merit a look too. http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/11/25/whos-been-spinning-in-my-newspaper.html
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.