Quotes of the day

posted at 9:15 pm on November 27, 2009 by Allahpundit

“Global warming was a fraud, and it has now been exposed.

“That little fraud would have cost the taxpayers of the world trillions of dollars, not to mention wrecking their economies with carbon taxes and penalties.

“But that’s not even the worst of it. The most important take home lesson is that global frauding was the clear and conscious work of a political machine aiming to steal your money, your liberties, and your country. It was a massive, worldwide attempt at a coup d’etat, and the victims were going to include all the free and prosperous peoples of the world.”

***
“From my reading, the most damning e-mails are those in which scientists seem to be trying to squelch dissent from climate-change orthodoxy — threatening to withhold papers from journals if they publish the work of naysayers, vowing to keep skeptical research out of the official U.N.-sponsored report on climate change…

“The fact is that climate science is fiendishly hard because of the enormous number of variables that interact in ways no one fully understands. Scientists should welcome contrarian views from respected colleagues, not try to squelch them. They should admit what they don’t know.

“It would be great if this were all a big misunderstanding. But we know carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and we know the planet is hotter than it was a century ago. The skeptics might have convinced one another, but so far they haven’t gotten through to the vanishing polar ice.”

***
“I have seldom felt so alone. Confronted with crisis, most of the environmentalists I know have gone into denial. The emails hacked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, they say, are a storm in a tea cup, no big deal, exaggerated out of all recognition. It is true that climate change deniers have made wild claims which the material can’t possibly support (the end of global warming, the death of climate science). But it is also true that the emails are very damaging.

“The response of the greens and most of the scientists I know is profoundly ironic, as we spend so much of our time confronting other people’s denial. Pretending that this isn’t a real crisis isn’t going to make it go away. Nor is an attempt to justify the emails with technicalities. We’ll be able to get past this only by grasping reality, apologising where appropriate and demonstrating that it cannot happen again.”

***
“‘I’m sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real,’ said Ms. Browner, who President Obama has tapped as his chief of policy on global warming…

“Ms. Browner initially shrugged when asked about the e-mails, saying she didn’t have a reaction.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

TXUS on November 28, 2009 at 1:53 AM

I asked, in Gaelic, if you spoke Gaelic.

I was curious. It’s almost a dead language now.

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 1:55 AM

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 1:47 AM

Come back at me, lib. Keep proving yourself to me and everyone else here.

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:00 AM

As a student of climate change… I have never let my schooling interfere with my education. Therefore, the scientists that proclaim global warming an undisputed fact are in dispute of their own science.

Education is everything, but all colleges, have two great functions: to confer, and to conceal, valuable knowledge. The theological knowledge which they conceal cannot justly be regarded as less valuable than that which they reveal. That is, when a man is buying a basket of strawberries it can profit him to know that the bottom half of it is rotten.

It’s a little like getting a wet willy and being very annoyed by it.

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:02 AM

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:02 AM

You’re not a ‘student’ of anything other than your own navel.

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:03 AM

How come this isn’t QOTD:

Noted beta male and “many moons ago” entertaining blogger Allahpundit at Hot Air throws three Navy SEALs under the bus just to appease people who are only safe to be appeased, himself included, because of these rough men. No link from me.

Let me explain something to you amigo. That wrist slap would be a career-ender in Spec Ops for these men. You understand? We take three guys who accomplish more in a lazy afternoon than you have in your entire anonymous, snarking-from-the-sideline, existence and we put them out of work making dead tangos. And that sounds like what should have happened to this ass clown. If he dies during the take down we have no problems.

I know you have no earthly clue just how god-awful complicated it is to actually perform a raid and scarf up a bad guy, let’s just say it rates up there with trying to conduct a Beethoven Symphony with your orchestra in free fall, screaming towards Earth like a phalanx of freaking lawn darts. That is why we like to send a f**king Hellfire down on them and last time I checked that leaves a little more than a god damn bloody lip. And yes I am saying I don’t care if he got it once he got to base. What if the guy who clocked his murderous ass knew Scott Helverson, who this bastard helped kill, burn and then defile his corpse? Do you really want to be on record saying he should be made an example of? Do you remember what Kos said about the four men this scumbag killed you dumbass? I’ll remind you “F**k them”. You are sure in illustrious company.

I realize you get paid to say controversial shite all day long. Every once in a while you ought to take a gander at who gives you the freedom to flap your freakin’ gums and think twice before you decide that zero-tolerance demands that your betters suffer for some bullshit like this. Don’t offer the PC losers cover, ever. They will use it against my friends.

atheling on November 28, 2009 at 2:05 AM

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:02 AM

You talk much, but say nothing.

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:05 AM

atheling on November 28, 2009 at 2:05 AM

You got that from HuffPo, so it’s invalid.

Go to bed, lib. You’re a non sequitor

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:08 AM

Here is one client scientist who is not completely in denial:

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/27/a-climate-scientist-on-climate-skeptics/?hp

pedestrian on November 28, 2009 at 2:10 AM

Found on Al Gore’s IPOD

I ♥ Liam

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:11 AM

I ♥ Liam

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:11 AM

Actually, you don’t.

That makes you a liar.

Only the libs here lie.

That makes you a lib. We call you trolls.

Thank you for making my point!

I promise, you’ll be remembered.

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:16 AM

I ♥ Liam

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:11 AM

I have all night. Want to keep going, lib?

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:17 AM

I ♥ Liam

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:11 AM

Got your number.

Anything you do hereafter is just a fake, lib. So typical of your kind.

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:25 AM

pedestrian on November 28, 2009 at 2:10 AM

2. Circle the wagons/point guns outward: ad hominem/appeal to motive attacks; appeal to authority; isolate the enemy through lack of access to data; peer review process

Interesting find. Bear knuckle suppression of any questioning of the science. Reputable scientists, even ones that believe in anthropogenic warming, have been denied publication of their work. Why is that?

Such a Willy Wanker way of discussing issues, isn’t it.

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:26 AM

Uncle Jimbo

If we call AP a troll would it stick?
Persoanlly, I like his twisted POV.

But, then again, I have no portable massage table.

OkieDoc on November 28, 2009 at 2:27 AM

You know…. this junk science is addicting.

Just listen to uncle Willy, cause he’s full of OMG wizdome.
Mushrooms grow in the dark in doo doo….

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:37 AM

The environment is important…. you know

Teh oceans are important. Free Willie

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 2:44 AM

You guys are dreaming. If someone reveals that a group of scientists are trying to ‘squelch’ information suggesting that smoking is good for your health, would you take this as clear proof that smoking is in fact healthy? Probably not.

So where are you coming from? Either you don’t believe in the scientific process. Or you believe in a massive conspiracy theory whereby the top scientists at every major research university in the USA are the puppets of socialist politicians. This second point can’t be understated- if you go to any major research university in this country you will find that a consensus of researchers and scientists agree that global warming is real and happening.

If you’re in the Midwest, you may want to take a field trip to University of Michigan, Northwestern, Purdue, or Notre Dame. You’ll find that none of those scientists have been involved in suppressing knowledge, and at each institution all or a super-majority of researchers will put their reputations solidly behind global warming. True, you may dismiss the scientists at Michigan as an anomaly, but by the time you pass through Northwestern and reach South Bend and realize that even Notre Dame scientists have concluded that global warming is a major threat to humanity that demands action, your perception of scientists as hapless pawns of the liberal establishment will seem naive.

The position of top scientists in this country is clear, but since when did expert opinion slow down a conspiracy theory?

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

The position of top scientists in this country is clear, but since when did expert opinion slow down a conspiracy theory?

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

Its not about the “position” or “opinion ” of “top scientists”.
Its about the raw data and what these ” experts” did with them . If they are so sure about their statistical analysis, they should release each and every piece of raw datum and each and every note, with time-line.Until then, their opinions are just that, opinions. Everybody has one. How they arrived at their opinions is what needs to be exposed.
The more I look at the hacked e-mails of these elitist militant science-mongers, the more it seems that the conclusions had been pre-decided and the studies were tailored to fit the farce by using raw data not as a guide but as a cover-up

macncheez on November 28, 2009 at 3:21 AM

Sorry but this isn’t just a couple of rogues cooking the books. Their data was being used at universities/colleges across the world, is it any wonder you can jump from one to another and find “consensus.”

“Yes we also agree with the consensus of the consensus that there is a consensus, now, where is our grant money?”

Albert Einstein, Genius [Jay Nordlinger]

All the talk about climate change, fraudulent science, the politicization of science, and so on has reminded me of one of my favorite stories of all time. I learned it from Tony Daniels (aka Theodore Dalrymple). In the Nazi period, 100 “Aryan” scientists signed a statement against Einstein — saying that the theory of relativity was a Jewish hoax or whatever. Asked to comment on this, Einstein said, “If what they are saying were true, one signature would have been enough.”

In science, as in other areas of life, beware the bandwagon.

As for your deeply flawed smoking analogy, it’s just common sense that inhaling toxic chemicals will be detrimental to health, I don’t need a “scientist” to educate me on that fact.

mudskipper on November 28, 2009 at 3:23 AM

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

The question is not whether their is global warming, but what is the cause. Many scientist think that sun spot activity is the major cause. Their have been many periods of warming and cooling cycles. Do you think that opposing views should not be heard?

Johan Klaus on November 28, 2009 at 3:24 AM

each institution all or a super-majority of researchers will put their reputations solidly behind global warming.
bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

I like your little trick, though you have to realize it does not work anymore. There is no question that there was warming, up until about a decade ago – though the knowledge there has been none since this has indeed only filtered out in the last year or two for some odd reason that has, I am sure, nothing to do with the East Anglia cabal.

18-1 on November 28, 2009 at 3:26 AM

macncheez on November 28, 2009 at 3:21 AM

Ya, junk in, junk out.

Johan Klaus on November 28, 2009 at 3:27 AM

Um the emails out right state there is a COOLING trend and that it does not fit what the they want to tell us. Plus they try to manipulate a graph to hide the Medieval Warming period which Micheal Mann now has suddenly “discovered”. Heads should role for this.

Sharr on November 28, 2009 at 3:29 AM

And of course if this was real science the books would have been opened for anyone to take a shot at and examine for themselves. There should be no need for FOIA requests when ti comes to checks and balance in science.

Sharr on November 28, 2009 at 3:31 AM

Either you don’t believe in the scientific process…. if you go to any major research university in this country you will find that a consensus of researchers and scientists agree that global warming is real and happening.

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

Consensus isn’t science, moron.

And to be clear, the controversy isn’t whether or not the earth is warmer or cooler but whether or not humans are affecting the earth’s climate with the production of CO2.

Hint: There is no proof that humans are affecting the earth’s climate even though a bunch of “scientists” that are vying for research grant money (in much the same way that Sen. Mary Landrieu prostitutes herself) are willing to “agree” about the issue.

Get a clue. Get a brain. Try thinking.

trapeze on November 28, 2009 at 3:31 AM

You guys are dreaming. If someone reveals that a group of scientists are trying to ’squelch’ information suggesting that smoking is good for your health, would you take this as clear proof that smoking is in fact healthy? Probably not.

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

If a group of scientists had been as personally invested in non-bacterial ulcer theory as Mann and his allies have been in AGW, and then proceeded to fake their own data, suppress Helicobacter pylori studies, and refused to release their own data, would you still depend on their “consensus science”?

Note that it took 15 years, of actual scientific process, not “consensus science” before Warren and Marshall’s work was widely accepted.

18-1 on November 28, 2009 at 3:32 AM

fFrom an earlier post:

I beg of you, please read Huston Smith’s Why Religion Matters:
The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Disbelief

It thoroughly covers the current debate of “Scientism”,
“World Views”,
and The Scopes Trial aka
“Inherit the Wind”’s whoreywood
production.

Be not slothful…

OkieDoc on November 28, 2009 at 2:42 AM

I figured this was a better thread than 3rd on the original one. So, stone me, turkey I eat.

OkieDoc on November 28, 2009 at 3:43 AM

Oh, and speaking of the wonders of “consensus science” – these guys apparently work much like ACORN.

From: Joseph Alcamo
To: m.hulme@uea.ac.uk, Rob.Swart@rivm.nl
Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:33 0100
Reply-to: alcamo@usf.uni-kassel.de

Mike, Rob,

Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.

I would like to weigh in on two important questions –

Distribution for Endorsements —
I am very strongly in favor of as wide and rapid a distribution as
possible for endorsements. I think the only thing that counts is
numbers. The media is going to say “1000 scientists signed” or “1500
signed”. No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000
without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a
different story.

Conclusion — Forget the screening, forget asking
them about their last publication (most will ignore you.) Get those
names!

18-1 on November 28, 2009 at 3:47 AM

18-1 on November 28, 2009 at 3:47 AM

Operative word ” cause”

Mike, Rob,

Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.

It was a cause and thats how they went about their cause
This is how people like Lenin and Marx and Hitler and BinLaden talk, not ‘academic scholars’

macncheez on November 28, 2009 at 3:55 AM

So where are you coming from? Either you don’t believe in the scientific process. Or you believe in a massive conspiracy theory whereby the top scientists at every major research university in the USA are the puppets of socialist politicians. This second point can’t be understated- if you go to any major research university in this country you will find that a consensus of researchers and scientists agree that global warming is real and happening.

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

How about just trusting your own senses? Do you feel like it is now hotter than it was 10 years ago? If I told you that some “consensus of researchers and scientists” (even never minding emails showing “research” shenanigans) agree that you have 4 ears would you believe that you have 4 ears?

We have had NO global warming for 10 years. That is what statistics show. How many years of NO global warming would it take for you to believe that there is no global warming? 15 years? 20 years? 25 years?

How after 10 years of NO global warming even the most die hard global warming zealot can not have at least become a global warming agnostic is absolutely astounding.

MB4 on November 28, 2009 at 3:56 AM

Face it: these people are as dumb as a sack of hammers. Start treating them as such, they deserve no better.

trapeze on November 28, 2009 at 4:11 AM

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

Either you don’t believe in the scientific process. Or you believe in a massive conspiracy theory whereby the top scientists at every major research university in the USA are the puppets of socialist politicians.

We all believe in the science process, unless it’s funded by socialist politicians who have an agenda to control commerce and control the free distributions of goods and services. Then that’s a problem, because the research is predetermined. It certainly looks like this is the case.

if you go to any major research university in this country you will find that a consensus of researchers and scientists agree that global warming is real and happening.

I point you to Dr.Roy Spenser’s website.

At least, you’ll get a less than liberal opinion to the degree of what Global warming is, or isn’t. At least Dr. Spenser is willing to admit he may be wrong. Unlike all the other scientists that have deliberately squelched any and all debate. Suppressing discussion is censorship.

So how do these great minds of science account for the global cooling phenomena?

The position of top scientists in this country is clear, but since when did expert opinion slow down a conspiracy theory?

Many scientists get their funding from government grants.

And Like many questions, is, show me the money, determining the science?

Ya think?

Kini on November 28, 2009 at 4:15 AM

Its always about the money, isn’t it ?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/commonwealthsummitunclimate

macncheez on November 28, 2009 at 4:23 AM

Im still waiting on how the AGW true believers square the circle to the fact that Mars, Venus, Neptune and saturn all showed warming at the same time the earth did.

I heard a couple liberals say the mars warming was do to dust storms. LOL other than that nothing.

I wonder why the media never reports these facts:

Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.

In 2005 data from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide “ice caps” near Mars’s south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Pluto and other worlds in our solar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in the sun’s activity is the common thread linking all these baking events.…..

…..Others have pointed out anomalous warming on other worlds in our solar system.

Benny Peiser, a social anthropologist at Liverpool John Moores University who monitors studies and news reports of asteroids, global warming and other potentially apocalyptic topics, recently quoted in his daily electronic newsletter the following from a blog called Strata-Sphere:

“Global warming on Neptune’s moon Triton as well as Jupiter and Pluto, and now Mars has some [scientists] scratching their heads over what could possibly be in common with the warming of all these planets … Could there be something in common with all the planets in our solar system that might cause them all to warm at the same time?”

Peiser included quotes from recent news articles that take up other aspects of the idea.

“I think it is an intriguing coincidence that warming trends have been observed on a number of very diverse planetary bodies in our solar system,” Peiser said in an email interview. “Perhaps this is just a fluke.”

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070312_solarsys_warming.html

yeap everthing getting warmer yet it is only earth that has man made global warming. got that. Liberals are the stupid it appears and water is wet

unseen on November 28, 2009 at 5:10 AM

Guess what
Earth’s got a fever
and the only prescription is more Al Gore

macncheez on November 28, 2009 at 6:37 AM

The whole of science is on trial with this fraud … If not careful, science will never be accepted again by the people when it comes to making decisions of public importance.

A purge of the bad is needed immediately. Followed by a switch to open science, the gate keepers of peer review is where the problem lies.

tarpon on November 28, 2009 at 6:49 AM

Despite being battered by missteps in his Middle East peace efforts, President Obama must learn from his recent mistakes and seek a route towards multilateral peace talks…

Mr. Obama’s own credibility is so diminished (his approval rating in Israel is 4 percent) that serious negotiations may be farther off than ever…

Peacemaking takes strategic skill. But we see no sign that President Obama and Mr. Mitchell were thinking more than one move down the board…

We don’t know exactly what happened but we are told that Mr. Obama relied more on the judgment of his political advisers — specifically his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel — than of his Mideast specialists…

Who authored the editorial, Diplomacy 101, from which these tidbits have been taken? Ouch!

Drained Brain on November 28, 2009 at 7:54 AM

The researchers did not release their data starting from the mid-1990′s onwards. They released graphs and conclusions, but not the data, itself, unaltered. When the New Zealand meteorological data station numbers are compared to those that are purported for it, the ‘global warming’ disappears. Instead normal temperature variation is seen within a range of values, and the current readings are heading down. Yet that didn’t fit the global warming theory but, somehow, the numbers were made to fit the graph.

When your graph from previous projects does not fit the data nor if its predictions prove inaccurate can you say that your graph is accurate and that your conclusions have a basis on the dataset. If the researchers had released the datasets they could have been compared to the known temps and discrepencies would have been obvious.

That is how the tree ring hockey stick graph was exposed as a fraud: a researcher actually went to the same geographic area, sampled a large number of trees, and the entire hockey stick disappeared in the larger mass of data. Even worse is through the graphs it was identified that the entire hockey stick was based on 12 trees in a much larger set of forests, and yet larger data samples were not presented nor used. The forest was not represented well by the trees and the trees were not the forest. Yet that dataset took over a decade to be released by its researchers who stonewalled all requests for it until the larger sampling and residuals were analyzed pointing to the fraud involved.

A French climatologist wanted the global dataset for the IPCC report and was denied it by the researchers. He then painstakingly went to all the sites and asked for complete datasets and found that the researchers had asked only for a limited data sub-set, and missed entire global regions and periods of recorded historical data. When the French researcher tried to publish the data, he was stonewalled by the climatology journals even though he had a better, larger and more representative data set than that put forth by the East Anglia group. It didn’t show global warming, however… but that was just the data which was not interpoleted, was not ‘normalized’ to a given period of history and was just presented plain and straight up.

Can’t have that, now, can we?

Unmanipulated data for researchers to examine that has better scope, depth and breadth than the ‘consensus’ one?

I have been saying, nearly continuously, since AGW started as a religion that I, as a geologist, want the time delimited dataset raw numbers to compare to the 800 million year global history of planet Earth. It has periods of far higher carbon dioxide, water vapor and methane than today by over an order of magnitude for each simultaneously and we did not become a burnt cinder. Mind you, the sun was a bit cooler, but a few million years of that sort of climate would have done exactly what the AGW hypothosis wanted if the hypothosis was accurate and factual… but you couldn’t get the data.

East Anglia CRU corrupted their data so much that they can’t even get their ORIGINAL documents to agree with their current data covering the same period. No one should trust those datasets. Period. They do not make reproducible results. That is a touchstone of science: reproducible results from given data sets.

ajacksonian on November 28, 2009 at 7:56 AM

The position of top scientists in this country is clear, but since when did expert opinion slow down a conspiracy theory?

bayam on November 28, 2009 at 3:00 AM

If I’m understanding you correctly, you’re either missing the point, or are willfully blind.

Garbage in = garbage out.
Opinion is not science.

Itchee Dryback on November 28, 2009 at 8:06 AM

A purge of the bad is needed immediately. Followed by a switch to open science, the gate keepers of peer review is where the problem lies.

tarpon on November 28, 2009 at 6:49 AM

It is a shame that the only real science is being done in the R&D labs of companies or the universities getting funded from those companies. t does however, go to show the power of capitalism and the profit motive in play.

I question the motives of any scientists that “wants to change the world” instead of wanting to make the world a better place. It is a fine line in some cases but it makes a world of difference.

unseen on November 28, 2009 at 8:16 AM

If AGW were a stock symbol, it would be down to about $0.18 right about now.

angryed on November 28, 2009 at 8:18 AM

I question the motives of any scientists that “wants to change the world” instead of wanting to make the world a better place. It is a fine line in some cases but it makes a world of difference.

unseen on November 28, 2009 at 8:16 AM

same goes for lawyers and teachers

angryed on November 28, 2009 at 8:20 AM

Ultimately, the climate frauds were seeking power over our economies, our liberties, and our countries.

Hey climate alarmers, release the data or STFU.

petefrt on November 28, 2009 at 8:23 AM

I finally feel vindicated. I have been screaming B.S. over global warming for 12 or 15 years now.

I remember the last great climate change hysteria, global cooling in the 70′s. Complete with scientists and celebrities warning us about the coming ice age and how we were all going to starve to death in the cold. Of course it was all man made too. And the only way to salvation was to tax polluters into oblivion. And just like with global warming, by the time the debate got going really good the planet started warming back up again, of course we went through a few years of the real deniers being the scientists and true believers that refuse to give any credence to the data that showed the warming.

Skip ahead a few decades and strangely those same folks were running around screaming about global warming. My first thought was “Do you think I am that stupid, I remember you harping about global cooling 20 years ago?”

Then looking at their “proof” the data showed the warming trend coming out of the last cooling period that had their panties in a wad. I thought “my god, these tools are using the same data that proved their last theory bunk to sell their new one.”

Look, I’m no scientist, I am an engineer. But I can usually smell a snake oil salesman. In my opinion, (because I have known some folks that went into the field) most climatologists and environmental scientists have an agenda. They spend their entire careers attempting to justify that agenda.

Therefore always look at their “consensus” with a skeptical eye.

conservnut on November 28, 2009 at 8:56 AM

conservnut on November 28, 2009 at 8:56 AM

+10,0000

BetseyRoss on November 28, 2009 at 9:17 AM

I am skeptical that the emails are going to change public opinion. I hope so though.

Spirit of 1776 on November 27, 2009 at 9:20 PM

What emails?-Charlie Gibson

artist on November 28, 2009 at 9:18 AM

The “Gig” is up AGW fraudsters.

SC’s Grahamnesty needs to do a quick about face. Probably won’t matter as his conservative cover was blown after the amnesty, Sotomayor, town hall meetings……

Wanted: “Conservative” to run as Republican for Senate in SC

blaque jacques on November 28, 2009 at 9:19 AM

same goes for lawyers and teachers

angryed on November 28, 2009 at 8:20 AM

and reporters and politicians

unseen on November 28, 2009 at 9:21 AM

anyone that still does not understand the power of the truth is smoking something

unseen on November 28, 2009 at 9:22 AM

Ahbail Galig akem?

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 1:38 AM

I dont speak it either but heard it quite a bit while in Ireland. Hence my pseudonym Faol = wolf

faol on November 28, 2009 at 9:30 AM

Our Winnie the Pooh White House bear was looking out for the Polar

bluegrass on November 28, 2009 at 9:41 AM

Global Warming debunked.
Next: Darwinian Evolution
Or are Christian scientists not scientists, they say?

maynila on November 28, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Hoisted by their own canard

jacrews on November 27, 2009 at 9:21 PM

hoisted by their own petard

ted c on November 27, 2009 at 9:36 PM

..first one was deft humor and yours should have been “Hoist with their own petard”.

Regards,

Mr Too-much-time-on-my-hands

VoyskaPVO on November 28, 2009 at 9:50 AM

conservnut on November 28, 2009 at 8:56 AM

I too remember in high school the poor ozone was being depleted and the heat would escape so we were to plunge into a new ice age for decades. When it didnt get cold they they changed it to greenhouse effect because the ozone could not keep the harmfull sun rays from heating the earth. The global warming and when it didnt get hot enough it was climate change.Same BS different day.

faol on November 28, 2009 at 9:51 AM

It is simply a move for world order:

Lord Christopher Monckton on the real agenda behind Copenhagen. Obama will sign our sovereignty away. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAkiDhS0XIA

True_King on November 28, 2009 at 9:55 AM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

I do not get cap-and-trade as any kind of solution, though. That makes zero sense.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Then I recommend you keep donating to Al Gore. He’s only worth $100,000,000 now.

Mojave Mark on November 28, 2009 at 10:34 AM

Funny about that Question that Al Gore would NOT answer, and its absence in any global warming “Discussion”. Funny how that one Science Fact seldom appears in Blogs.

But Now its NOT FUNNY anymore, now that the Planet has been cooling instead of warming the last 10 years, along with these New found E-mails of deception and how to manipulate the Data and the Masses along with a Global Warming Hoax.

Oh, the Question Al Gore avoids ?….”How many Carbon atoms are there in the atmosphere, percentage wise ?”

.038% and for you math challenged GW’s, that 4 molecules per 10,000 rounded up in your favor. Powerful stuff those 4 molecules, but they do NOT control the Weather, and thanks to TRUTH, they will not control your Economics.

JayTee on November 28, 2009 at 10:49 AM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Then there’s really no point in discussing it with you is there?

PackerBronco on November 28, 2009 at 10:52 AM

Read this analysis that showshow the Climate Research Unit scientists wrote the computer code to fake the “hockey stick” graph of Northern Hemisphere temperatures:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1447

It is all a fraud.

albill on November 28, 2009 at 11:06 AM

Or you believe in a massive conspiracy theory whereby the top scientists at every major research university in the USA are the puppets of socialist politicians

Yeah, about that. Are you completely unfamiliar with academia, Virginia? As someone once said, the next time some academic carps at you about diversity, ask them how many Republicans they have in their anthropology department.

The tenure system is a disaster, as is government funding of research and the attendant grant money machinery. Would you really quibble that the left controls the “top” positions in “every major university” in every liberal arts deparment? (By “controls” I mean that those who hold those positions identify and think like the left. Conspiracy does not require active collusion when those in positions of influence simply all think the same way.) Why then is it such a stretch to see that extended to the rather imprecise science of climatology? I say imprecise becasue it is that very aspect of the science that lends itself to personal influence and politics, both within the university and out.

I always loved quote generally attributed to Kissinger:

Academic politics are so bitter because the stakes are so small.

Except I’m no longer convinced the stakes are small, after all.

TexasDan on November 28, 2009 at 11:58 AM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

The earth heats and cools in cycles. It always has, and always will.

Johan Klaus on November 28, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

I do not get cap-and-trade as any kind of solution, though. That makes zero sense.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Which is why even when you make sense most ignore you. Even the facts won’t change your mind.

kahall on November 28, 2009 at 12:32 PM

The data isn’t “fake” fake.

obleo on November 28, 2009 at 12:44 PM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

As someone licenced to practice geological science allow me to suggest otherwise.

obleo on November 28, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Well, I disagree. I think it is a massive fraud. Some are perpetrators of the fraud, some are trapped by it and many (more every day) are exposing it.

I’m not trying to sell you anything. But you have bought the snake oil, that much is apparent.

conservnut on November 28, 2009 at 1:11 PM

atheling on November 28, 2009 at 2:05 AM
You got that from HuffPo, so it’s invalid.

Go to bed, lib. You’re a non sequitor

Liam on November 28, 2009 at 2:08 AM

Yo, dummkopf, did you even look at the link? That’s not from the Kos, it’s from Blackfive, a milblog. And I’m not a lib, moron.

atheling on November 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM

It’s been clear since the ‘hockey stick’ was debunked, that higher temps cause rising CO2, not the other way around. It’s also clear that the global temp has been going down since 1998, not up.

Now we’re in the deepest solar minimum since something like 1913 and emails have confirmed the deliberate fraud and disinformation conspiracy amoung the so-called scientists who have been profiting from the AGW movement.

As I continue to read about ClimateGate, I’ve noticed all of the reports out of the AP about the upcoming Copenhagen conference are “Chicken Little – the sky is falling” “We’re All Doomed” stories about how global warming is worse than we thought. What planet are these reporters on? How can they call themselves journalists when they deliberately deny the existence of ClimateGate and the body of non-AGW climate change evidence?

Common Sense on November 28, 2009 at 1:20 PM

I’m willing to bet that the “scientists” involved in this fraud are atheists.

atheling on November 28, 2009 at 1:25 PM

Credibility is like virginity. Easy to lose, impossible to regain.

theCork on November 28, 2009 at 1:28 PM

bayam, I see one huge problem with your analysis. Most of the climate scientists are using “data” from CRU and East Anglia. Do all of these scientists have access to the same raw data that the CRU people had?

Hell yes the Earth has been warming – since the Little Ice Age that ended around 1850. There is no clear consensus of what caused the Little Ice Age and also what ended it. If scientists cannot agree about the past, how can we expect them to agree about the future?

Pelayo on November 28, 2009 at 1:44 PM

To Bayam – The facts, that are coming out, show that a few people controlled the “debate” on global warming. In fact, if you really like the scientific process you’d be screaming about how it’s been subverted by the likes of Jones and Mann.

Look, I understand how difficult it is to have your faith shattered. I can understand how many people want to fight just how important these revelations are. I understand all of it; yet I also understand how important it is now for us to have a concensus that the science has been bastardized and we need to step back and give the contrarians a chance to straighten it all out. Once that’s done, then the people that screwed it up should be allowed to start from scratch, if they’re open minded enough to allow their research to be critiqued by the likes of Steve McIntyre, and promise to stop exaggerating their findings. It’s obvious these people fell into the academic trap “I’m smarter than you, therefore…………….” I’m not sure they should have jobs where they have them now, however. They have taken advantage of the public trust in them and they should have to earn it back. That’s just my opinion.

In the meantime, it’s much more important that the world’s politicians realize that the cash cow, that was once carbon taxation, is gone and they’ll have to take a step back and figure out what environmental laws need to be taken off the books and re-thought.

One thing’s for sure, it’s a brave new world out there, as far as the climate is concerned, and we’re all going to have to face it head on.

bflat879 on November 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.

AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

We know dear, that’s why there’s still a flat earth society.

bflat879 on November 28, 2009 at 1:59 PM

All of a sudden the “believers” are now the rabid “deniers”…I find that gratifying.

Wyznowski on November 28, 2009 at 2:04 PM

Eugene Robinson

“But the “hide the decline” part refers to a real issue among climate researchers called the “divergence problem.”

Meaning a deviation from their “model” with respect to “reality”.

The model say with X amount of Y we should see Z.

Reality shows with X amount of Y we get Q

Either the “model” is wrong

OR

Reality is wrong!

Those who deny AGW cite “reality”
Those who support AGW cite the “model”.

Is that it? Do I “get it”?

DSchoen on November 29, 2009 at 4:11 AM

Global warming isn’t a fraud. You’ll never sell that whopper to me.
AnninCA on November 28, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Not exactly open minded.

Does it bother you that “2500” scientists have drawn their conclusions based on faulty, altered and fabricated data?

DSchoen on November 29, 2009 at 4:17 AM

***
“‘I’m sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real,’ said Ms. Browner, who President Obama has tapped as his chief of policy on global warming…

There never was 2,500 scientists. The true number is a few dozen.

MarkTheGreat on November 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3