Are you following this climatologist email scandal?

[bull]

It seems pretty odd to me that these scientists aren't having their lying a$$es handed to them after being exposed as frauds. IMO this is huge. To fudge numbers, hide data and omit facts that don't fit the green agenda is not only a firing offense, it's criminal. The phony information these people have created has caused extensive amounts of grief for all of us, most of it unnecessarily negative. How are they able to continue in their "work" with any credibility as if nothing has happened? And now we're heading off to Copenhagen to surrender more of our rights based on lies and fake conclusions. It's now obvious that this whole climate change BS is a fraud and until all the records have been publicized and the scientists discredited any further green legislation must be stopped. How many of our rights have already been infinged upon? If they hadn't gotten any resistance already these jack-booted envirotroopers would have had all our classic cars crushed and recycled by now.

Interesting reading:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936289.ece
http://www.examiner.com/x-26758-Loudoun-County-Libertarian-Examiner~y2009m11d30-Reaction-to-email-scandal-casts-doubts-on-scientific-community
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/politics/Climate-Scientists-Inconvenient-Scandal-78117727.html

[Dans 68]

It seems pretty odd to me that these scientists aren't having their lying a$$es handed to them after being exposed as frauds....

By whom? The MSM has yet to really cover the issue, and it is not in the current administrations interest to make anything of it (they believe in man-made global warming). The good question is why this fraud is not being elevated in the public forum. Peer review is just not anymore....

Dan

[Ghoste]

It's a new green socialist world Bull. 

[RD]

the smoking gun eh?  sorry, i am not a global warming guy, but i do believe in industrial waste responsibility.  these scientist wienies are no different from religious sects that are wackos

[68charger383]

Im sure they did it for our own good

Hey they just announced the 2011 Mustang will have a 305 HP 6cyl that gets 30 mpg. So some positive things did come from their lies.

Plus maybe this will be a repreive for the increase in CAFE standards which will probably kill the new challenger/camaro/mustangs

[KS71owner]

I think it's likely the MSM will try their best to keep this out of the public eye, much like the ACORN scandal. With the Copenhagen summit coming up, the last thing they want is definitive proof that the underlying science is unreliable, as are the "researchers" doing it. This does have the potential for a truly massive scandal though, considering how much money governments all over the world have sunk into global warming, I mean climate change.

For some of these guys though it really is like a religion....and they will cling to it for all it's worth, even if it's proven to be utterly false.

[Arthu®]

Yes.

Of course this is about the climatologists, but this happens in every single research. I wasn't very surprised. Basically any research is adapted either willingly or unwillingly to the outcome that the researchers had in mind.

Arthur

[Mike DC]

 
I find the whole thing depressing.  Not surprising, just depressing. 



Before he died recently, Michael Crichton said he was becoming very bothered by the politicization of scientific knowledge/research. 

I agree.  We're in trouble when the divisions of public opinion about a scientific issue are lined up according to political party leanings. 



   

[bull]

It seems pretty odd to me that these scientists aren't having their lying a$$es handed to them after being exposed as frauds....

By whom? The MSM has yet to really cover the issue, and it is not in the current administrations interest to make anything of it (they believe in man-made global warming). The good question is why this fraud is not being elevated in the public forum. Peer review is just not anymore....
Dan

Good point. Zero accountability = zero consequences. And I agree with the religious zealot comparison. These envirotroopers use the same tactics they accuse religious extremists of using. Because they are extremists. Extremists with a phony agenda, absolute power and no accountability.

[Long Island RT]

Having a backround in science whereas my job depends on scientific results, I have to say - these guys should at least be fired and not allowed to publish data that has any impact on decisions made by governments for any regulations what so ever.

Science is about facts - not opinions and feelings.

So when facts are bent around emotions and when religion and politics is added - I try to stay as objective as possible.

Regardless of how much we love our fossil fueled lives - common sense is telling me it's just not good, weather it's our health, environment... whatever - especially long term.  I feel confident we'll find a solution - were a relatively bright species....

If you think about the advancements in the last 100 years alone - they are tenfold from this planets first 4.5 billion years.  I can't imagine what the next 100 years will bring   

[dodgecharger-fan]

This is the kind of thing that I was thinking about when I posted this message: http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,51373.msg562150.html#msg562150

Not exactly this event - I can't see in to the future - but this KIND of event.

[defiance]

Well, looking through the data, and coming from years of experience in analytics and programming related to analytics, it's not as open-and-shut as everyone seems to imply- I regularly run into comments in some of my code that relate to when I was testing the code with "dummy" data or even completely different scripts I happen to have used a particular subroutine from or something like that.   Further, the exclusion of outliers, interpolating gap periods, and other data massaging tactics are normal and valid practices.  However, at a minimum this whole situation destroys the organization's credibility.

Sadly, this doesn't mean they're wrong, only that they probably massaged data (and MAYBE outside of acceptable levels of massaging). What would REALLY be awesome is if they did it out of laziness rather than a lack of supporting evidence, and global warming *is* a problem, and now they've destroyed any chance of the problem being taken seriously.

Either way, it's a sick sad world when people ignore scientists to listen to political pundits.
But nowhere near as completely effed up as when the pundits end up right.

[Ghoste]

Well I think in this case the scientists have turned out to be just about exactly the same as the political pundits.  Whether the data was "massaged" out of laziness or merely a regard to push through a personal agenda it sounds to me like the very same thing that comes from government all the time.
In any case, I'm very proud to be one of the "climate deniers" as some of these green agenda pushers have come to label us and as far as I'm concerned this whole just vindicates my point of view.  Man made global climate change does not exist.

[defiance]

Man made global climate change does not exist.

From a logical standpoint, that statement is not in any way proven by this situation.  This situation certainly casts doubt on evidence produced by this research group, which I'll agree, seriously undermines the proof for global warming, but it provides no evidence in contrary to global warming.  All the evidence I've seen against it has been politically driven.  Apparently much of the evidence for it has been as well, so I'm moving firmly to the "neither believe nor disbelieve" column until I see something without the reek of politics.  Maybe it's true, maybe it's not. 

[Ghoste]

I think it's perfectly logical for me to say that it doesn't exist.  Until evidence is provided that it does exist, it remains little more than a far fetched theory at best.  It is no different to me than any other scientific theory, until it is proven to be, it remains not.  There will be some who say that science proves nothing it only disproves.  Whatever.  I say it is all semantics and until somebody brings forth real evidence that man has caused the earth's climate to alter I very simply cannot place any faith in the theory.
If I say that space junk has altered the natural flow of radiation and gravitational fields through the universe and that ultimately it will cause our planet to shrink everyone would demand proof. 

[defiance]

I hope you're right.  The fact that there are numerous models (one of which relates to the hacked information)  supporting global warming makes me wonder, though.  The hacked info is enough to make me question the validity of the entire camp, but think about it - if 10 research organizations all state that their analysis supports a theory, and one of them turns out to be using trash data, does this prove that all the others falsified?  Of course not. 

Again, if it turns out to be true, and humanity uses this incident to justify ignoring it, the impact could be horrific. 

So I think I'll remain open minded for now.

[Ghoste]

"What if it's true" has been a rationale that all doomsday theories have relied on heavily since long before my turn on earth.  Agreed, if it were true it could be horrific.  So could many many other things that science warns us about but have as yet not received the United Nations vote of approval and the great research dollars that implies.
This is a topic that has come up here many times and each time, the people who believe have always discredited the scientists who are opposed to the theory.  I have read numerous times that the scientists who dispute it have a personal, monetary or political agenda and sometimes all three.  Now that the "other camp" has a large stain on their scientific integrity I cannot help but notice the irony.

[mauve66]

yeah, when you look at huge disasters like chernobyl, 3 mile island, exxon valdez, hiroshima, nagasaki, these places aren't "un-inhabitable", the earth has recovered and reclaimed its own

if you take a 50 mile square on solid concrete and just leave it alone for 100 years, when you go back you won't know its there unless you start digging for it, the earth runs its own course, not what we want it to do

[bull]

"What if it's true" has been a rationale that all doomsday theories have relied on heavily since long before my turn on earth.  Agreed, if it were true it could be horrific.  So could many many other things that science warns us about but have as yet not received the United Nations vote of approval and the great research dollars that implies.
This is a topic that has come up here many times and each time, the people who believe have always discredited the scientists who are opposed to the theory.  I have read numerous times that the scientists who dispute it have a personal, monetary or political agenda and sometimes all three.  Now that the "other camp" has a large stain on their scientific integrity I cannot help but notice the irony.

You reminded me of this: http://michaelcrichton.com/speech-complexity.html

[defiance]

Ok, noted - scientists should be ignorerd as a whole because some of them are wrong or lie.  


Anyway, maybe it's just me, but the large number of models that HAVEN'T been shown fraudulent and still back global warming, combined with the weight of the consequences, seems to be enough to justify keeping an open mind ... but I guess this isn't the thread to discuss open minds, they get in the way of the torches and pitchforks.

[teamroth]

I have been following it, but just barely. My take on the whole thing is, the earth will wipe the slate clean when it is ready.
Could we speed up or slow down the process? Yeah maybe. But from where I sit right now, the whole thing is about money.
Take a look at Cafferty's blog subject for today.

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/

And I too agree that the greenies are just like the religious wackos, very disturbing.

[defiance]

Both sides have a fanatic devotion to their sides, both in spite of lack of evidence to support their positions.

[Ghoste]

Why is not believing it until it's proven mean I have a torch or pitchfork?  My mind is wide open, when man made climate change is proven then I will believe it. 

[0X01B8]

I think it's reasonably well established that something is going on with the climate, but it's difficult to find good information on stuff like this.  People care more about winning the argument than what the argument is actually about, and apparently, are just fine with polluting everything with politics.

The Earth has seen worse than us humans and our V8s and our factories.  There was at least one meteor that screwed the place pretty bad a long time ago for a good long time.  I'm not saying we should trash the place, but just because modern industrialization coincides with global warming doesn't sell me on the causality.  We've had several ice ages already.  Why?  Whose to say our current climate is the right one?  Maybe, as far as the Earth is concerned, it feels normal to be covered in ice.  Or maybe not.  Perhaps the Earth has been trying to shake this ice problem for millions of years, and it's finally making some progress.

There's no way to escape the awesomeness of my viewpoint.   

[Ghoste]

I'm not even sold on the "warming" part of it myself but apparently neither are all of the climate specialists.  Since the weather went and decided to do some cooling they changed the crisis from global warming to climate change.