Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#241
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
In article ,
Tim McNamara wrote: In article , Michael Press wrote: In article , Tim McNamara wrote: In article , Michael Press wrote: In article , Les Cargill wrote: Stephen Cowell wrote: "Andre Jute" wrote ... one instinctively wants the contrary to be true. I'm pretty sure that sums it up, en toto, for the AGW crowd. Thanks for being real. __ Steve . If the only thing we can say is "we don't really know", then ... what? That's always a start, but it makes for a short sorta conversation. Nobody repudiates the emails made public from CRU, East Anglia. That is something we know. We also know that the emails contain plans to subvert the scientific peer review process. And the ill-mannered comments of three or four people invalidate the entire field, in your opinion? Ill mannered? I made myself plainer than that. I tell you what I think. No need for you to guess. It appears you overestimate the completeness of your writing. You overestimate my estimate of the completeness of my writing. -- Michael Press |
#242
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
In article ,
Tim McNamara wrote: In article , Michael Press wrote: In article , Tim McNamara wrote: In article , Michael Press wrote: In article , Les Cargill wrote: Stephen Cowell wrote: "Andre Jute" wrote ... one instinctively wants the contrary to be true. I'm pretty sure that sums it up, en toto, for the AGW crowd. Thanks for being real. __ Steve . If the only thing we can say is "we don't really know", then ... what? That's always a start, but it makes for a short sorta conversation. Nobody repudiates the emails made public from CRU, East Anglia. That is something we know. We also know that the emails contain plans to subvert the scientific peer review process. It's also interesting that the ire is directed at the victims of theft, not at the sociopaths who did the thieving Name the sociopaths who did the thieving. Since they know their actions were illegal, they have seen fit to not divulge their names. I know very little about the release of the files. Was a report of theft filed with the civil authorities? My web search did not find anything. We do know that Phil Jones is guilty of destroying data that was not his to destroy, data that belonged in the public domain. So far one crime against CRU; and as far as I know, nobody at CRU has alleged a crime in regard to the copied files. Found this in my search. Department of Energy sends a litigation hold notice on CRU materials to DOE employees. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/14/doe-sends-a-litigation-hold-notice-regarding-cru-to-employees-asking-to-preserve-documents/ and the politicians who have publicly supported theft. Names. Jim Inhofe in particular, publicly praising the actions of the hackers who stole the e-mails. By the way, this was a useless exercise given the very public statements made by these characters. Did you have some kind of imagined point to make, or are you just stalling? How times in our society have changed from 1972 when the rule of law was apparently taken more seriously than today. Emotional. Apparently? Three unsupported, emotional assertions. "Emotional?" Hardly. Perhaps theft no longer bothers you? "sociopaths" is emotional. "hackers" is emotional, and a corruption of the original meaning of `hacker.' -- Michael Press |
#243
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
In article
, Chalo wrote: Don Pearce wrote: Tim McNamara wrote: Jim Inhofe in particular, publicly praising the actions of the hackers who stole the e-mails. No, not stolen but revealed. And very well done to whoever did the revealing. Fraud should always be exposed - this is actually more important than the revelations of Watergate. This whole affair just makes me wonder what exquisite corruption would come to light if the most incriminating emails of the denialists' emails were made public. They did something wrong. I just know it, and if I wish hard enough I can make it true. -- Michael Press |
#244
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
In article .at,
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" wrote: Chalo wrote: This whole affair just makes me wonder what exquisite corruption would come to light if the most incriminating emails of the denialists' emails were made public. I was wondering how long it would be before some AGW nutter sprang up and screched "THEY"RE PROBABLY AS CORRUPT AS WE ARE!. You got double trouble there nutter. Your "if A then B" pseudo-logic is totally fallacious, and you just inadvertently acknowledged the fact that your beloved IPCC goons and such are total assholes. Ooopsies! *chuckle* Now you went and used logic. The Cadre is going to be very unhappy. You know you were supposed to adhere to a strictly emotional campaign. -- Michael Press |
#245
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
On 2009-12-20, Phil W Lee phil wrote:
Ben C considered Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:43:58 -0600 the perfect time to write: [...] But the main thrust of the AGW argument presented to the public was: "trust us we're scientists", and that's what's been most significantly undermined here. You don't seem to realise that the climate modellers were predicting the rise in global temperature IF CO2 levels increased long before they rocketed to anything like their current levels. Based on all the information I've seen, they predicted a much bigger rise as a result of less CO2, which hasn't happened. http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/ctest.pdf See "History Lesson 1988" on page 7. The increase in global temperature is a confirmation of the science of computational climate modeling It doesn't seem that way, especially as temps have gone up very little since 1998. It's also not enough to say just that temps have gone up. I could do a computer model that said the increase in atmospheric CO2 will make this next coin toss come up heads, which after all has a 50/50 chance of being "proved right". which had already been proven by the accurate prediction of short term global cooling from volcanic eruptions. The fact that it's vaguely "the same model" that predicts warming as that predicted cooling by a completely different mechanism doesn't validate the warming predictions at all. |
#246
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
On 2009-12-20, Bill Sornson wrote:
Ben C wrote: [...] But the main thrust of the AGW argument presented to the public was: "trust us we're scientists", and that's what's been most significantly undermined here. True, but unless and until the "mass media" actually REPORT WHAT'S GOING ON, morons like Timmy and Ground Rat can get away with declaring that only nutty /deniers/ buck the consensus. The mass media _is_ reporting it. The Express, and possibly also the Mail-- both very widely read tabloids here-- did front pages on it. The ones saying nothing and mumbling about illegal hacking are making their clique membership obvious which just further undermines the consensus myth. New Scientist (usually otherwise a good rag) ran a very lame rebuttal of the Express's "100 reasons why AGW is bunk" story which really made them look bad. |
#247
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Why Climategate crucially undermines the possibility of manmade global warming, was Appeasing Carbo Doxy, was Al Bore cancels Nopenhagen lovefest for his global warmies
Andre Jute tapped the mic and amongst other things,
said, "Is this on?" : On Dec 14, 7:11*pm, Les Cargill wrote: Michael Press wrote: In article , snip Don't go all foam at the mouth here - it's time to be coldly, dispassionately rational about all this. And there needs to be a dialogue. What dialogue do you anticipate with those who deliberately obfuscate data, withhold data, erase data, and corrupt the scientific peer review system? I'm not convinced any of that actually happened. It will take time for the full story to come out. Hell, some of that was clear in 2003 when Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitric story of trying to get the data and algorithms from Mann first hit the headlines, and the rest of it was confirmed in 2006 by the Wegman Report to the Senate, when Wegman also named the 43 of the people involved as a corrupt "clique". That's nearly four years ago. How long do you want to make up your mind that the IPCC and all its works are fraudulent, another twenty-odd years? Andre Jute “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.” -- Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution John-Daly.com beat them to it 4 years before that, and was widely ridiculed by the politically correct/disgraced former scientist crowd. They were actually celebrating his death in the emails. Their entire argument was a house of cards, icecaps, sea levels, polar bears, www.surfacestations.org, etc. based on East Anglia... and the proverbial bottom card has been yanked. -- All the perplexities, confusion, and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation, John Adams |
#248
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Appeasing Carbo Doxy, was Al Bore cancels Nopenhagen lovefest for his global warmies
Andre Jute tapped the mic and amongst other things,
said, "Is this on?" news:c9fb7f4d-d7e0-43a0-adf7-a9fcd0612543 @u1g2000pre.googlegroups.com: On Dec 15, 9:02*am, Ben C wrote: On 2009-12-15, Michael Press wrote: In article , *Andre Jute wrote: [...] The IPCC -- longest hand job in the history of mass hysteria -- has now lasted almost twice as long as the Third Reich Has it been that long? I did not bestir myself to look it up. Seehttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/ctest.pdf, especially the graph titled "History Lesson 1988" on page 7. James Hansen is one of the most expensive comedians the world has ever known. He cost not just trillions in money but lives that will before this this global warming madness finishes be counted in tens of millions if we're lucky, and in billions if we're not. -- Andre Jute I has already cost the US over $100 billion invested in energy independence in the Athabasca Oil Sands... although that may be recouped shortly as anyone connected to the AGW crowd is instantly dismissed as a fraudulent ko0k, complete with legal smoking gun. All they got out of COP15 was the proverbial, "the check is in the mail!" -- All the perplexities, confusion, and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation, John Adams |
#249
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
Ben C wrote:
On 2009-12-20, Bill Sornson wrote: Ben C wrote: [...] But the main thrust of the AGW argument presented to the public was: "trust us we're scientists", and that's what's been most significantly undermined here. True, but unless and until the "mass media" actually REPORT WHAT'S GOING ON, morons like Timmy and Ground Rat can get away with declaring that only nutty /deniers/ buck the consensus. The mass media _is_ reporting it. The Express, and possibly also the Mail-- both very widely read tabloids here-- did front pages on it. My bad. I should have specified the /U.S./ mass media. Deafening (and despicable) silence. The ones saying nothing and mumbling about illegal hacking are making their clique membership obvious which just further undermines the consensus myth. Not happening over here. Other than Fox News Channel and AM radio, zilch nada nuttin' honey. New Scientist (usually otherwise a good rag) ran a very lame rebuttal of the Express's "100 reasons why AGW is bunk" story which really made them look bad. Good. BS |
#250
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:
Yes, we shouldn't attempt to disguise the act of common thieves. So you'll be cheering when the courts jail Phil Jones and Michael Mann, who stole from the taxpayers and are also guilty of crimes against humanity in that their invention of global warming cost lives and will cost many more. That's good, Phil, very good indeed. -- Andre Jute |
#251
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
In article ,
Michael Press wrote: In article , Tim McNamara wrote: In article , Michael Press wrote: In article , Tim McNamara wrote: In article , Michael Press wrote: In article , Les Cargill wrote: Stephen Cowell wrote: "Andre Jute" wrote ... one instinctively wants the contrary to be true. I'm pretty sure that sums it up, en toto, for the AGW crowd. Thanks for being real. __ Steve . If the only thing we can say is "we don't really know", then ... what? That's always a start, but it makes for a short sorta conversation. Nobody repudiates the emails made public from CRU, East Anglia. That is something we know. We also know that the emails contain plans to subvert the scientific peer review process. It's also interesting that the ire is directed at the victims of theft, not at the sociopaths who did the thieving Name the sociopaths who did the thieving. Since they know their actions were illegal, they have seen fit to not divulge their names. I know very little about the release of the files. Was a report of theft filed with the civil authorities? My web search did not find anything. We do know that Phil Jones is guilty of destroying data that was not his to destroy, data that belonged in the public domain. So far one crime against CRU; and as far as I know, nobody at CRU has alleged a crime in regard to the copied files. I see that the Norfolk police are investigating the unauthorized copying of the files. -- Michael Press |
#252
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Why Climategate crucially undermines the possibility of manmade
On Dec 20, 11:26*am, sam booka wrote:
Andre Jute tapped the mic and amongst other things, said, "Is this : On Dec 14, 7:11*pm, Les Cargill wrote: Michael Press wrote: In article , snip Don't go all foam at the mouth here - it's time to be coldly, dispassionately rational about all this. And there needs to be a dialogue. What dialogue do you anticipate with those who deliberately obfuscate data, withhold data, erase data, and corrupt the scientific peer review system? I'm not convinced any of that actually happened. It will take time for the full story to come out. Hell, some of that was clear in 2003 when Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitric story of trying to get the data and algorithms from Mann first hit the headlines, and the rest of it was confirmed in 2006 by the Wegman Report to the Senate, when Wegman also named the 43 of the people involved as a corrupt "clique". That's nearly four years ago. How long do you want to make up your mind that the IPCC and all its works are fraudulent, another twenty-odd years? Andre Jute “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.” -- Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution John-Daly.com beat them to it 4 years before that, and was widely ridiculed by the politically correct/disgraced former scientist crowd. They were actually celebrating his death in the emails. Their entire argument was a house of cards, icecaps, sea levels, polar bears,www.surfacestations.org, etc. based on East Anglia... and the proverbial bottom card has been yanked. Their pyramid of ice cubes fell down before it could even melt... Andre Jute Global Warming is like Scientology, only with less science -- and I said it long before the Climategate exposed those clowns as crooks |
#253
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Appeasing Carbo Doxy, was Al Bore cancels Nopenhagen lovefestfor his global warmies
On Dec 20, 11:37*am, sam booka wrote:
Andre Jute tapped the mic and amongst other things, said, "Is this on?" news:c9fb7f4d-d7e0-43a0-adf7-a9fcd0612543 @u1g2000pre.googlegroups.com: On Dec 15, 9:02*am, Ben C wrote: On 2009-12-15, Michael Press wrote: In article , *Andre Jute wrote: [...] The IPCC -- longest hand job in the history of mass hysteria -- has now lasted almost twice as long as the Third Reich Has it been that long? I did not bestir myself to look it up. Seehttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/ctest.pdf, especially the graph titled "History Lesson 1988" on page 7. James Hansen is one of the most expensive comedians the world has ever known. He cost not just trillions in money but lives that will before this this global warming madness finishes be counted in tens of millions if we're lucky, and in billions if we're not. -- Andre Jute I has already cost the US over $100 billion invested in energy independence in the Athabasca Oil Sands... although that may be recouped shortly as anyone connected to the AGW crowd is instantly dismissed as a fraudulent ko0k, complete with legal smoking gun. All they got out of COP15 was the proverbial, "the check is in the mail!" Yes, but they didn't deserve even that courtesy. Jones, Mann, Briffa and a bunch of others should have been publicly horsewhipped. As for those politicians still trying to pretend that global warming is real, they deserve everything they got coming to them of their hypocrisy. If they aren't smart enough to work out that there is no global warming, only a mild, slow recovery from an ice age, they aren't smart enough to rule us. I do think the tide is turning in the mind of Everyman. About time too. Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
#254
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
On Dec 20, 8:28 am, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
snip On 2009-12-20, Bill Sornson wrote: snip ... unless and until the "mass media" actually REPORT WHAT'S GOING ON, morons... can get away with declaring that only nutty /deniers/ buck the consensus. snip Other than Fox News Channel and AM radio, zilch nada nuttin' honey. This is just rich :-) |
#255
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,rec.bicycles.tech,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
climate research contretemps
On Dec 20, 4:28*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
Ben C wrote: On 2009-12-20, Bill Sornson wrote: Ben C wrote: [...] But the main thrust of the AGW argument presented to the public was: "trust us we're scientists", and that's what's been most significantly undermined here. True, but unless and until the "mass media" actually REPORT WHAT'S GOING ON, morons like Timmy and Ground Rat can get away with declaring that only nutty /deniers/ buck the consensus. The mass media _is_ reporting it. The Express, and possibly also the Mail-- both very widely read tabloids here-- did front pages on it. My bad. *I should have specified the /U.S./ mass media. *Deafening (and despicable) silence. The ones saying nothing and mumbling about illegal hacking are making their clique membership obvious which just further undermines the consensus myth. Not happening over here. *Other than Fox News Channel and AM radio, zilch nada nuttin' honey. New Scientist (usually otherwise a good rag) ran a very lame rebuttal of the Express's "100 reasons why AGW is bunk" story which really made them look bad. Good. BS The Mail and the Express are important. They make and break governments in the UK. They're like the NH primary once was, the key windvane of UK political change; by the time they change direction, it is usually too late for politicians to cover their arses. The New Scientist doesn't matter ****; it is the voice of the chattering classes, who have their snouts in the trough of global warming one way or another, in a country where PBS still matters and where the main public broadcaster, the BBC has invested all its awesome credibility in a policy that global warming is above journalistic questions. If you want to know where the breaking edge of the wave of politics is in UK politics, try the New Statesman; that is usually two or three years in advance of the popular view as expressed by the Express and the Mail. Andre Jute Visit Andre's recipes: http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/FOOD.html |
#256
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Journalistic malpractice on climate change
In article ,
"RichL" wrote: DGDevin wrote: http://www.economist.com/blogs/democ...egate_distorti ons You're doing the equivalent of trying to explain quantum mechanics to a brick. Schroedinger's cat is smarter. Tony |
#257
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Journalistic malpractice on climate change
"Tony Elka" wrote in message ... You're doing the equivalent of trying to explain quantum mechanics to a brick. Schroedinger's cat is smarter. Tony Sometimes I think that cat is real, and then I don't, it's very confusing. |
#258
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Journalistic malpractice on climate change
In article ,
"DGDevin" wrote: "Tony Elka" wrote in message ... You're doing the equivalent of trying to explain quantum mechanics to a brick. Schroedinger's cat is smarter. Tony Sometimes I think that cat is real, and then I don't, it's very confusing. Sometimes I think you're confused, then I don't. Tony |
#259
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Journalistic malpractice on climate change
In article ,
Les Cargill wrote: Even if the teabaggers are wrong, they are still owed a clear and concise explanation in words they can understand. This has not yet happened. Indeed, I pretty much hold to Micheal Crichton's views on AGW, and he was not a stupid guy, but he was also clear and easy to understand. Michael Crichton was a medical school graduate, novelist and film/television producer/director but he was not a scientist. His views on global warming/climate change were rebuked by numerous scientists, including Peter Doran, author of the scientific paper which appeared in the January 2002 issue of Nature that inspired Crichton's book State of Fear. He said "Our results have been misused as 'evidence' against global warming by Michael Crichton in his novel." Tony |
#260
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,alt.guitar.amps
|
|||
|
|||
Journalistic malpractice on climate change
Tony Elka wrote:
In article , Les Cargill wrote: Even if the teabaggers are wrong, they are still owed a clear and concise explanation in words they can understand. This has not yet happened. Indeed, I pretty much hold to Micheal Crichton's views on AGW, and he was not a stupid guy, but he was also clear and easy to understand. Michael Crichton was a medical school graduate, novelist and film/television producer/director but he was not a scientist. This is true. But he had a very firm grasp on a subject quite close to my heart - complexity theory. That's the main reason I found him easy to understand. Non-linear systems are breathtakingly difficult to reason about. His views on global warming/climate change were rebuked by numerous scientists, including Peter Doran, author of the scientific paper which appeared in the January 2002 issue of Nature that inspired Crichton's book State of Fear. He said "Our results have been misused as 'evidence' against global warming by Michael Crichton in his novel." Thanks for the reference. Tony -- Les Cargill |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Al Bore cancels Nopenhagen lovefest for his global warmies | Vacuum Tubes | |||
On the hubris of the global warmies | Vacuum Tubes | |||
On the hubris of the global warmies | Vacuum Tubes | |||
The web's prime bore | Audio Opinions | |||
Spain "appeasing" terrorists? Baloney! | Audio Opinions |