Deniergate. The e-maiils you *didn't* see.
Adam Whyte-Settlar
discussions that reveal just how hard the
scientists work to make sure they are getting the information right:
Exactly as found - no emphasis added.
Michael Mann to Ed Cook re long-term temperature trends and how to
resolve differences in research findings.
"There are some substantial scientific differences here, lets let them play
out the way they are
supposed to, objectively, and in the peer reviewed literature."
April 12, 2002.
Eric Steig explaining the goal for new paper to examine more closely the
bearing that a particular line of evidence (icehole bores) has on the
temperature record since the last ice age.
"An example might be that the "thermal maximum" was actually warmer than
present - a major issue of
contention in the popular literature - and was more-or-less simultaneous in
both polar regions. If this is correct, it will be a useful service to the
paleoclimate community to demonstrate it. Alternatively, we may find after
carefully looking at the data that we CANNOT reach such a conclusion. This
would be an equally important result."
December 12, 2000.
Michael Mann to Ed Cook in an exchange about the possibility of Cook's
research being used to attack Mann's findings:
"Lets figure this all out based on good, careful work and see what the data
has to say in the end. We're
working towards this ourselves, using revised methods and including borehole
data, etc. and will keep everyone posted on this."
May 2, 2001.
Jonathan Overpeck to a team of scientists he coordinating to write a
section of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Summary for Policymakers, the
goal of which is to make clear the most certain aspects of the science that
policymakers need to understand in order to make policy decisions.
"We have to make sure we stick to only the best science."
July 14, 2005.
Keith Briffa and Tim Osborn to Tom Crowley, discussing how to best
represent what's known about the "Medeival Warming Period" for the upcoming
4th Assessment Report.
"I **absolutely** agree that we must avoid any bias or perception of bias.
My comment on "nailing" was made to mean that
uninformed people keeping coming back to the mwp, and describing it for what
I believe it wasn't. Our job is to make it clear what it was within the
limits of the data. If the data are not clear, then we have to be not
clear."
July 20, 2005.
Of course none of this will come as any surprise to anyone with a shred of
common sense or scientific background.
Time for libel prosecutions methinks.
fitlike min
> The e-mails are now all over the net so here's a sample of the myriad
Like I said in another email. it's finished now. nothing will happen.
Both sides have no idea and are just guessing.
Remember, if a butterfly flaps its wings the weather changes. Maybe
there is a chaotic element to climate too. If so then they will never
know. It is a complex system to understand and frankly I don;t thing
wither camp is up to it. They don;t have the mathematical background.
F.
fitlike min
<snipped>
David H. Douglass, a professor of physics, and John R. Christy, a
renown
professor of atmospheric science, descibe how the Climategate
scientists
conspired against them:
"The CRU e-mails have revealed how the normal conventions of the peer
review
process appear to have been compromised by a team* of global warming
"scientists", with the willing cooperation of the editor of the
International Journal of Climatology (IJC), Glenn McGregor."
"The team spent nearly a year preparing and publishing a paper that
attempted to rebut a previously published paper in IJC by Douglass,
Christy,
Pearson, and Singer (DCPS). The DCPS paper, reviewed and accepted in
the
traditional manner, had shown that the IPCC models that predicted
significant "global warming" in fact largely disagreed with the
observational data. "
"We will let the reader judge whether this team effort, revealed in
dozens
of e-mails and taking nearly a year, involves inappropriate behavior,
including
(a) unusual cooperation between authors and editor,
(b) misstatement of known facts,
(c) character assassination,
(d) avoidance of traditional scientific give-and-take,
(e) using confidential information,
(f) misrepresentation (or misunderstanding) of the scientific question
posed
by DCPS,
(g) withholding data, and more.
*The team is a group of climate scientists who frequently collaborate
and
publish papers which often support the hypothesis of human-caused
global
warming. For this essay, the leading team members include Ben Santer,
Phil
Jones, Timothy Osborn, and Tom Wigley, with lesser roles for several
others.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/com...
Scotty
OMD, there IS a cabal. Do we have to send them all jerseys? Deirdre.
maybe gelignite, Conway?
Deirdre Sholto Douglas
> OMD, there IS a cabal. Do we have to send them all jerseys? Deirdre.
> maybe gelignite, Conway?
No worries...wrong cabal and different jerseys.
Deirdre
________________
A pipe gives a wise man time to think and a fool
something to stick in his mouth.
Adam Whyte-Settlar
"Scotty" <nob...@home.net> wrote in message
news:pv61j554dd9ornfjo...@4ax.com...
>OMD, there IS a cabal.
You DO know who Andrew Bolt is I take it.
So it's OK for idiots to quote from the most motorious denier-blog in Oz but
my data direct from NASA and GISS is suspect.
You guys are a joke.
And why should I, or anyone else for that matter, believe a single word you
post about climate anymore after catching you out with your last utterly
dishonest trick?
You've got a lot of nerve posting anything at all after that.
Shame on you.
The Phantom Piper
>
> And why should I, or anyone else for that matter, believe a
> single word you post about climate anymore after catching
> you out with your last utterly dishonest trick?
Or, indeed, about *ANY* subject...
> You've got a lot of nerve posting anything at all after that.
But it's what they're best at! These folk make Ari Fleischer
look like Baghdad Bob by comparison! One has to beware
of close proximity to them to avoid Brain Damage from all
the Cosmic Debris being flung out by the Spin!
> Shame on you.
They're unfamiliar with the concept.
Having Seen This Movie Before,
The Phantom Piper
fitlike min
> "Scotty" <nob...@home.net> wrote in message
>
> news:pv61j554dd9ornfjo...@4ax.com...
>
> >OMD, there IS a cabal.
>
> You DO know who Andrew Bolt is I take it.
> So it's OK for idiots to quote from the most motorious denier-blog in Oz but
Fascinating - talk of deniers and believers. Makes it sound like a
religion!
Has any of you guggers got any - yes any training in the Sciences at
all? I know Scotty,Deirdre and myself do?
If you have to say denier - say Skeptic instead. To be Skeptical is a
good thing otherwise Uri Geller would be still conning you into
bending spoons. It is unhealthy to let one side have its way all the
time.
F.
The Phantom Piper
>
> If you have to say denier - say Skeptic instead.
You see, the problem with your proposal, Hardy, is
that then we would have to say 'Holocaust Skeptic'
as well, instead of 'Holocaust Denier' - and 'Evolution
Skeptic', and 'Round Earth Skeptic' (well, it *is* an
Oblate Spheroid, after all...), and '1969 Lunar Landing
Skeptic' and 'Obama US Citizen Skeptic' and '9/11
Terrorism Skeptic' and so forth. The fact is that these
people are *not* "skeptical," rather they are in Denial.
Not Confused,
The Phantom Piper
conwaycaine
A secret sign, secret handshake and secret password would be all that is
required
conwaycaine
"Adam Whyte-Settlar" <ador@ble> wrote in message
news:-v2dnZx6W7yS7KzW...@westnet.com.au...
I see you are pursuing your new crusade with your usual vigor.
You are passionate in your beliefs, Adam Whyte-Settlar.
conwaycaine
"The Phantom Piper" <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cbff283f-3bb8-4f24...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 22, 5:22 pm, "Adam Whyte-Settlar" <ador@ble> wrote:
> You've got a lot of nerve posting anything at all after that.
But it's what they're best at! These folk make Ari Fleischer
look like Baghdad Bob by comparison! One has to beware
of close proximity to them to avoid Brain Damage from all
the Cosmic Debris being flung out by the Spin!
*********
The word for today:
"Sycophant"
Adam Whyte-Settlar
"conwaycaine" <conwa...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:EJ6dnQlg2bXnr6_W...@giganews.com...
It's got nothing to do with 'belief' in anything. It's just basic physics.
OK - I suppose you could say I 'believe' in the basic laws of physics as
they stand.
I just hate all the lies that deniers spew out over and over again.
If they had any science behind their absurd claims they wouldn't have to lie
all the time.
conwaycaine
"Adam Whyte-Settlar" <ador@ble> wrote in message
> "conwaycaine" <conwa...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> I see you are pursuing your new crusade with your usual vigor.
>> You are passionate in your beliefs, Adam Whyte-Settlar.
>
> It's got nothing to do with 'belief' in anything. It's just basic physics.
> OK - I suppose you could say I 'believe' in the basic laws of physics as
> they stand.
> I just hate all the lies that deniers spew out over and over again.
> If they had any science behind their absurd claims they wouldn't have to
> lie all the time.
Could it be they are somewhat misguided in their beliefs?
On another subject (but akin) I do wish they would develop and mandate
installation of decent coal smokestack scrubbers.
People downwind of coal fired generating plants sometimes have quite the
problem.
Trees downwind as well.
Fred J. McCall
:
You see, the problem with your take on things, Pillock, is that you
don't know the difference between "denier" (didn't happen/isn't
happening) and "skeptic" (unproven).
Of course, this is typical of you folks who engage in 'faith-based'
reasoning...
:
:Not Confused,
:
Or Just Not Realizing It,
:The Phantom Piper
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
Fred J. McCall
:
:I just hate all the lies that deniers spew out over and over again.
:If they had any science behind their absurd claims they wouldn't have to lie
:all the time.
:
I'm sure they feel exactly the same way about you.
--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates
Fred J. McCall
:
:On another subject (but akin) I do wish they would develop and mandate
:installation of decent coal smokestack scrubbers.
:People downwind of coal fired generating plants sometimes have quite the
:problem.
:Trees downwind as well.
:
I thought they'd already done that. The problem is that there are
exemptions and such that allow old plants to continue to run.
--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
conwaycaine
"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:284ij5h9ufpu0pvvv...@4ax.com...
> "conwaycaine" <conwa...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> :
> :On another subject (but akin) I do wish they would develop and mandate
> :installation of decent coal smokestack scrubbers.
> :People downwind of coal fired generating plants sometimes have quite the
> :problem.
> :Trees downwind as well.
> :
>
> I thought they'd already done that. The problem is that there are
> exemptions and such that allow old plants to continue to run.
They did indeed mandate it many years ago but I think the technology has
greatly improved and no one, politicians included, wish to go to the expense
of demanding new scrubbers.
Meanwhile Tennessee sues North Carolina for polluting Tennessee rivers and
North Carolina sues Tennessee for coal fired electrical plant emissions.
And nothing gets done.