[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I am going to add some material to this:

Starting with this from the JoNva website in Australia, the locale of the most deliberate modification of climate date.

***************************EXCERPT************************

http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/new-scientist-becomes-non-scientist/

******************************

You might think journalists at a popular science magazine would be able to investigate and reason.

In DenierGate, watch New Scientist closely, as they do the unthinkable and try to defend gross scientific malpractice by saying it’s OK because other people did other things a little bit wrong, that were not related, and a long time ago. Move along ladies and gentlemen, there’s nothing to see…

The big problem for this formerly good publication is that they have decided already what the answer is to any question on climate-change (and the answer could be warm or cold but it’s always ALARMING). That leaves them clutching for sand-bags to prop up their position as the king-tide sweeps  away any journalistic credibility they might have had.

I’ve added my own helpful notes into the New Scientist article, just so you get the full picture.

***********************************

The above from the JoNova website.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

fyi

[markomalley]

Why post something from the New Scientist Propagandist magazine?

[a fool in paradise]

A hundred years ago the study of eugenics and somatyping was used to defend forced sterilization in the US and the holocaust in Germany.

[MrB]

Man's contribution to the greenhouse effect amounts to statisticaly noise:
Anthropogenic (man-made) Contribution to the "Greenhouse
Effect," expressed as % of Total (water vapor INCLUDED)

Based on concentrations (ppb) adjusted for heat retention characteristics	% of Greenhouse Effect	% Natural	% Man-made
Water vapor	95.000%	94.999%	0.001%
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)	3.618%	3.502%	0.117%
Methane (CH4)	0.360%	0.294%	0.066%
Nitrous Oxide (N2O)	0.950%	0.903%	0.047%
Misc. gases ( CFC's, etc.)	0.072%	0.025%	0.047%
Total	100.00%	99.72	0.28%

[cripplecreek]

I know there are trillions of dollars at stake and I know the climatologists are very aware of what the grant givers want to see.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

They need to explain this:

The Evolution of the Global Temperature Record ( Skullduggery with Darwin, Australia records)

And the Graphic:

[Da Coyote]

For basic physics, New Scientist is great.

For anything else, it’s TIME of Britain.

I know - I started reading it whilst a student at Oxford and subscribed for years. Dropped it a couple of years ago because their “science” reached “progressive idiocy” levels.

[dila813]

It isn’t 10s of Thousands, only 50 or so scientists have been spinning the research of global destruction warming.

[a fool in paradise]

Why redistribute trillions from the US to the Third World if the goal is just to reduce global carbon production? Why permit China and India to ramp up carbon byproduct?

Force everyone to new technologies and don’t use Marxist plans to funnel money to third world despots.

[Pietro]

How about these people address the real issues exposed by Climategate.

I guess their starting to feel some heat.

[KarlInOhio]

If you believe climate sceptics, a huge body of evidence involving the work of tens of thousands of scientists over more than a century should be thrown out

Evidence thown out? No, we should just restart with the original weather measurements because the methodology is in question... now if we can just find the landfill all the original raw data was dumped into.

[saganite]

Citing the E-mails is the fallback position for the defenders of those scientists. However, the real story lies in the rest of that data, namely the programs used to manipulate the data. That’s far more damning than the E-mails. Also, I haven’t seen the other institutions that supply the IPCC with data stepping up to reveal that East Anglia is an outlier and the data presented by them will correct the record. We’re waiting.

[Tzimisce]

You know, Sometimes the facts get in the way of the truth...

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Here's the thread I wanted:

Smoking Guns Across Australia: Where’s the warming? Looking at 16 other locations.

The article is from the JoNova website....

[danielmryan]

Thus speaketh the New Lobbyist.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Another thread of interest:

Sarah Palin Responds: On Climate Change And Her WaPost Op-Ed

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

JoNva website

***********************************

Should be JoNova website

[Right Wing Assault]

Who do I trust? Hmmm, let’s see. Maybe I’ll read this article first:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100020126/climategate-goes-serial-now-the-russians-confirm-that-uk-climate-scientists-manipulated-data-to-exaggerate-global-warming/

[chris_bdba]

Don’t you just love people who write stories and know nothing about what they are talking about?