Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/25/2009 6:02:10 PM PST by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: tobyhill

Smeared with their own words.

That’s becoming a common defense.


2 posted on 11/25/2009 6:04:02 PM PST by cripplecreek (Seniors, the new shovel ready project under socialized medicine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill; Nervous Tick; 4horses+amule; WL-law; Fractal Trader; Beowulf; Genesis defender; ...
 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

3 posted on 11/25/2009 6:05:04 PM PST by steelyourfaith (Time to prosecute Al Gore now that fellow scam artist Bernie Madoff is in stir.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill

Poor, poor babies. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!


4 posted on 11/25/2009 6:07:08 PM PST by RushIsMyTeddyBear (I don't have a 'Cousin Pookie'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
"We're facing an effort by special interests who are trying to confuse the public,"

For certain somebody is trying to "confuse" the public.

"Confuse" New euphemism for screw.

5 posted on 11/25/2009 6:09:56 PM PST by Graybeard58 ("Get lost, Mitt. You're the Eddie Haskell of the Republican party." (Finny))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
First of all, it isn't a "smear" when you're impaled by your own words and claims. Refusal to honor a FOI request in Great Britain is a felony, and all of those emails *should* have been freely available. In fact, Phil Jones was told he shouldn't be deleting such emails. He's since been caught lying about the matter (on record in 2008 saying he deleted emails, 11/24/2009 denying he's ever deleted anything).

The only two linchpins of AGW are:

1) The reconstructed paleoclimate record claiming unusual warming in present times.
2) The IPCC climate models that claim human greenhouse gasses are an important forcing of global climate.

From everything I've seen so far, both are incorrect, and possibly represent outright fraud.

6 posted on 11/25/2009 6:10:34 PM PST by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
"We're facing an effort by special interests who are trying to confuse the public...

...and that's OUR job, dammit!"

7 posted on 11/25/2009 6:11:17 PM PST by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all. -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill

I don’t see where the global warming alarmists have any other option but to try and fight this.

They really don’t have a way to save face in light of these new revelations and they are facing the probability of total academic disgrace and for many, economic ruin should the global warming bubble burst.

I’d be suprised if they had a different response.


8 posted on 11/25/2009 6:11:40 PM PST by I_Like_Spam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
If your data is truly scientific, then the smear campaign will just reinforce your point.
10 posted on 11/25/2009 6:14:39 PM PST by The_Victor (If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill

Well, they *are* in Britain where a true report which destroys someone’s reputation is considered libel.

Of course, us Yanks (and I use that the way Brits and Aussies do, so no offense to those of you whose ancestors resisted The War of Northern Aggression) don’t have to accept that notion of libel or smear.

But the e-mails aren’t the really d*mning thing: scientists are catty with those who uphold competing theories. The comments in the FORTRAN code prove there was fraud.


11 posted on 11/25/2009 6:17:17 PM PST by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
I'll buy frogs "still running the muck" but . . .
13 posted on 11/25/2009 6:20:42 PM PST by Misterioso (The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. -- Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
S-mores
14 posted on 11/25/2009 6:22:21 PM PST by blueyon (It is worth taking a stand even if you are standing alone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill

LOL @ ‘running the muck’.


15 posted on 11/25/2009 6:32:58 PM PST by jra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
Was this an editorial? Sure reads like one.
16 posted on 11/25/2009 6:37:14 PM PST by willk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill

Now there is a great example of propagandizing. There is no fact checking, no semblance or reporting balance, and really no logic. Pure propaganda, that is all those bastards have. They HAVE to lie because truth is not their friend.


18 posted on 11/25/2009 6:43:47 PM PST by Wpin (I do not regret my admiration for W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
I don’t see where the global warming alarmists have any other option but to try and fight this.

You think Obamacare has been a dirty fight, you ain't seen nothing yet. The left have gone “all in” on global warming. A defeat would be worse for them then any global warming scenario.

19 posted on 11/25/2009 7:01:55 PM PST by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill

Carp like watching cockroaches fleeing en masse.


23 posted on 11/25/2009 7:40:01 PM PST by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
This is a "smear campaign to distract the public," said Mann. "Those opposed to climate action, simply don't have the science on their side," he added.

. . . The vital point being left out, he said, is that "regardless of how cherry-picked," there is "absolutely nothing in any of the emails that calls into the question the deep level of consensus of climate change."

Of course there is "absolutely nothing in any of the emails that calls into the question the deep level of consensus of climate change." Bernard Madoff was deeply committed, too. That's always true of the conspirators in any successful fraud.

27 posted on 11/26/2009 5:27:38 AM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (Anyone who claims to be objective marks himself as hopelessly subjective.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill
Thus we see the problem inherent in any advocacy science trying to gage the importance of their own issue.

Hire an “Air Quality Expert” for 100,000 a year.

Then ask him... “Do you think air quality is a problem?”

Do you think he is going to say “Not really, air quality has been improving over the last decade.”?

Or is he going to say “The longterm effects of many of these pollutants has never been gaged and we must be ever vigilant....”

28 posted on 11/26/2009 5:37:08 AM PST by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: tobyhill

“Global warming is manmade, all right. It’s made by men in lab coats who angle for government grants by fudging the data. “


30 posted on 11/26/2009 9:00:29 AM PST by ventanax5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson