Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 23, 1:41*am, Andre Jute wrote:
landotter wrote: On Nov 21, 11:14*pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 20, 4:28 pm, RonSonic wrote: Like so many things I recommend giving this time to prove itself out before acting or speaking rashly. But then, that's how I felt about Global Warmism itself. Short version: The British Met office at Hadley has been allegedly hacked and years of emails and documents were opened and exposed on the internets. The director there confirms the hackage and says that these are indeed their emails and documents. Actually, it looks a lot more like an inside job than an external hacker http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a.../heraldsun/com... Unless someone spent a lot of time writing fake emails the numbers have been subjected to a lot more warming than has our climate. Easy to create a "consensus" if you're willing to just lie to people. Ron One really has to wonder how many times the corruption in climatogy will have to be exposed before the politicians start smelling the decay of scientific principle. This is utterly Stalinesque. Lie. Perhaps, before you start namecalling, dear Maxine, you should let me develop my thought: These socalled scientists are not even asking, "What is the truth?" Lie. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", understand that to be true science, the results must be falsifiable. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", share data. Instead these jerks admit in their e-mails to going to great lengths to keep the data from which they falsified their desired result from those who would prove their incompetence and lying. Refusal to share data is adequate and sufficient proof of bad science. They start and end by saying, "How can we arrive at the politically desired result?" Lie. They knew that in the face of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age *there is no global warming*, merely a partial and ongoing recovery to a prior equilibrium state. They knew the Hockey Stick was a lie. They knew 1998 was not the hottest year on record, that 1934 was (in the depth of the Depression -- what did industry contribute to that?). They knew all that, and kept producing the Hockey Stick even after it was condemned as incompetent science by both the North and the Wegman committees of the NAS testifying under oath before the Barton Committee of the US Senate. These self-styled "scientists" lied for political and financial advantage. Period. Their e-mails prove it. In short, they knew from the beginning that they were lying, that Michael Mann was lying, that the hockey stick was and is a lie told by Mann, Briffa, the IPCC, and by the so-called "peer reviewers". Lie. No evidence of claim. In a separate thread "US National Academy of Science CONDEMNS Global Warming Lies"http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/... I publish the evidence given on oath by the NAS Panel under North, constituted to defend Mann against questions by the US Senate as if these were merely political questions (!), which none the less found Mann incompetent in exactly the same way the Wegman Panel of statisticians denounced Mann. That's all the evidence, even without the recent exposures of the damning e-mails between this conspiring claque of crooks, required to state that they knew for years, and yet continued to write IPCC reports showing the lying hockey stick. McIntyre and McKittrick's paper exposing the Hockey Stick as a statistical fraud was published even earlier. There is no possible defense of ignorance for the scientific crooks Mann, Jones and Briffa (all important writers of IPCC reports on which trillions were misspent; all beneficiaries under false pretenses of huge government grants, about which there should be a police investigation); they knew precisely what they were doing, as the e-mails prove. They sold out to the IPCC bureaucrats more than a decade ago, and the pols (with the honorable exception of Senator Barton's committee whom I've quoted here before) still haven't found them out! Lie. No evidence of claim. The proof that I quoted the evidence before Senator Barton's committee stands here on RBT in the archives. I republish that evidence in a separate thread.http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bi...thread/thread/... The date on which they sold out is fixed by the Reuter report of the complaint. That these self-styled messiahs sold out to the bureaucrates at the IPCC "more than a decade ago" is easily proved by the Reuters report of Dec. 20, 1995 which quoted British scientist Keith Shine, one of IPCC's lead authors, discussing the IPCC Policymakersí Summary: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report." The Science and Environmental Policy Project conducted a survey of IPCC scientific contributors and reviewers and found that about half did not support the Policymakers' Summary. Parallel surveys by the Gallup organization and even by Greenpeace International produced similar results. In 1995 it was already long since clear and established that the scientists were not independent and should have rejected the IPCC shilling (and influence and interference) with contempt. Ugh! Is that a post-lying interjection? Poor Maxine. If you didn't invite all the world vicariously into your pain, you wouldn't look so stupid for having believed these crooks from whom you bought that bottle of snake oil called global warming. By contrast, I've been on the arse of these doomsayers since I was a precocious teenager with a newspaper column. These global warming bozos are no less incompetent and no less crooked than the hole in the ozone layer clowns, or the global popsicle clowns of the seventies, or the Millennium Bug clowns. Your response is juvenile: denial and name-calling. The facts are on the table: proof positive, rational, incontestable. Your heroes lied, and lied, and lied, and lied. Knowingly, repeatedly. For base motives. For financial gain. And they were so arrogant, they wrote it all down in their e-mails for posterity to see their pettiness and baseness. Suck it up and move on, Maxine. There are plenty of other unworthy causes for a worthless trendy like you to give her whole whoring little heart to, so that you can feel you belong somewhere at least until all the other worthless little trendies move on to the next fad. Andre Jute Reformed petrol head Car-free since 1992 Greener than thou! XXX XXX XXX |
#2
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
Andre Jute wrote:
On Nov 23, 1:41 am, Andre Jute wrote: landotter wrote: On Nov 21, 11:14 pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 20, 4:28 pm, RonSonic wrote: Like so many things I recommend giving this time to prove itself out before acting or speaking rashly. But then, that's how I felt about Global Warmism itself. Short version: The British Met office at Hadley has been allegedly hacked and years of emails and documents were opened and exposed on the internets. The director there confirms the hackage and says that these are indeed their emails and documents. Actually, it looks a lot more like an inside job than an external hacker http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a.../heraldsun/com... Unless someone spent a lot of time writing fake emails the numbers have been subjected to a lot more warming than has our climate. Easy to create a "consensus" if you're willing to just lie to people. Ron One really has to wonder how many times the corruption in climatogy will have to be exposed before the politicians start smelling the decay of scientific principle. This is utterly Stalinesque. Lie. Perhaps, before you start namecalling, dear Maxine, you should let me develop my thought: These socalled scientists are not even asking, "What is the truth?" Lie. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", understand that to be true science, the results must be falsifiable. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", share data. Instead these jerks admit in their e-mails to going to great lengths to keep the data from which they falsified their desired result from those who would prove their incompetence and lying. Refusal to share data is adequate and sufficient proof of bad science. They start and end by saying, "How can we arrive at the politically desired result?" Lie. They knew that in the face of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age *there is no global warming*, merely a partial and ongoing recovery to a prior equilibrium state. They knew the Hockey Stick was a lie. They knew 1998 was not the hottest year on record, that 1934 was (in the depth of the Depression -- what did industry contribute to that?). They knew all that, and kept producing the Hockey Stick even after it was condemned as incompetent science by both the North and the Wegman committees of the NAS testifying under oath before the Barton Committee of the US Senate. These self-styled "scientists" lied for political and financial advantage. Period. Their e-mails prove it. In short, they knew from the beginning that they were lying, that Michael Mann was lying, that the hockey stick was and is a lie told by Mann, Briffa, the IPCC, and by the so-called "peer reviewers". Lie. No evidence of claim. In a separate thread "US National Academy of Science CONDEMNS Global Warming Lies"http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/... I publish the evidence given on oath by the NAS Panel under North, constituted to defend Mann against questions by the US Senate as if these were merely political questions (!), which none the less found Mann incompetent in exactly the same way the Wegman Panel of statisticians denounced Mann. That's all the evidence, even without the recent exposures of the damning e-mails between this conspiring claque of crooks, required to state that they knew for years, and yet continued to write IPCC reports showing the lying hockey stick. McIntyre and McKittrick's paper exposing the Hockey Stick as a statistical fraud was published even earlier. There is no possible defense of ignorance for the scientific crooks Mann, Jones and Briffa (all important writers of IPCC reports on which trillions were misspent; all beneficiaries under false pretenses of huge government grants, about which there should be a police investigation); they knew precisely what they were doing, as the e-mails prove. They sold out to the IPCC bureaucrats more than a decade ago, and the pols (with the honorable exception of Senator Barton's committee whom I've quoted here before) still haven't found them out! Lie. No evidence of claim. The proof that I quoted the evidence before Senator Barton's committee stands here on RBT in the archives. I republish that evidence in a separate thread.http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bi...thread/thread/... The date on which they sold out is fixed by the Reuter report of the complaint. That these self-styled messiahs sold out to the bureaucrates at the IPCC "more than a decade ago" is easily proved by the Reuters report of Dec. 20, 1995 which quoted British scientist Keith Shine, one of IPCC's lead authors, discussing the IPCC Policymakersí Summary: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report." The Science and Environmental Policy Project conducted a survey of IPCC scientific contributors and reviewers and found that about half did not support the Policymakers' Summary. Parallel surveys by the Gallup organization and even by Greenpeace International produced similar results. In 1995 it was already long since clear and established that the scientists were not independent and should have rejected the IPCC shilling (and influence and interference) with contempt. Ugh! Is that a post-lying interjection? Poor Maxine. If you didn't invite all the world vicariously into your pain, you wouldn't look so stupid for having believed these crooks from whom you bought that bottle of snake oil called global warming. By contrast, I've been on the arse of these doomsayers since I was a precocious teenager with a newspaper column. These global warming bozos are no less incompetent and no less crooked than the hole in the ozone layer clowns, or the global popsicle clowns of the seventies, or the Millennium Bug clowns. Your response is juvenile: denial and name-calling. The facts are on the table: proof positive, rational, incontestable. Your heroes lied, and lied, and lied, and lied. Knowingly, repeatedly. For base motives. For financial gain. And they were so arrogant, they wrote it all down in their e-mails for posterity to see their pettiness and baseness. Suck it up and move on, Maxine. There are plenty of other unworthy causes for a worthless trendy like you to give her whole whoring little heart to, so that you can feel you belong somewhere at least until all the other worthless little trendies move on to the next fad. Andre Jute Reformed petrol head Car-free since 1992 Greener than thou! XXX XXX XXX That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. Bill "don't need to be no stinkin' Kreskin to predict such stuff" S. |
#3
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 22, 8:38 pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 23, 1:41 am, Andre Jute wrote: landotter wrote: On Nov 21, 11:14 pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 20, 4:28 pm, RonSonic wrote: Like so many things I recommend giving this time to prove itself out before acting or speaking rashly. But then, that's how I felt about Global Warmism itself. Short version: The British Met office at Hadley has been allegedly hacked and years of emails and documents were opened and exposed on the internets. The director there confirms the hackage and says that these are indeed their emails and documents. Actually, it looks a lot more like an inside job than an external hacker http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a.../heraldsun/com... Unless someone spent a lot of time writing fake emails the numbers have been subjected to a lot more warming than has our climate. Easy to create a "consensus" if you're willing to just lie to people. Ron One really has to wonder how many times the corruption in climatogy will have to be exposed before the politicians start smelling the decay of scientific principle. This is utterly Stalinesque. Lie. Perhaps, before you start namecalling, dear Maxine, you should let me develop my thought: These socalled scientists are not even asking, "What is the truth?" Lie. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", understand that to be true science, the results must be falsifiable. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", share data. Instead these jerks admit in their e-mails to going to great lengths to keep the data from which they falsified their desired result from those who would prove their incompetence and lying. Refusal to share data is adequate and sufficient proof of bad science. They start and end by saying, "How can we arrive at the politically desired result?" Lie. They knew that in the face of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age *there is no global warming*, merely a partial and ongoing recovery to a prior equilibrium state. They knew the Hockey Stick was a lie. They knew 1998 was not the hottest year on record, that 1934 was (in the depth of the Depression -- what did industry contribute to that?). They knew all that, and kept producing the Hockey Stick even after it was condemned as incompetent science by both the North and the Wegman committees of the NAS testifying under oath before the Barton Committee of the US Senate. These self-styled "scientists" lied for political and financial advantage. Period. Their e-mails prove it. In short, they knew from the beginning that they were lying, that Michael Mann was lying, that the hockey stick was and is a lie told by Mann, Briffa, the IPCC, and by the so-called "peer reviewers". Lie. No evidence of claim. In a separate thread "US National Academy of Science CONDEMNS Global Warming Lies"http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/... I publish the evidence given on oath by the NAS Panel under North, constituted to defend Mann against questions by the US Senate as if these were merely political questions (!), which none the less found Mann incompetent in exactly the same way the Wegman Panel of statisticians denounced Mann. That's all the evidence, even without the recent exposures of the damning e-mails between this conspiring claque of crooks, required to state that they knew for years, and yet continued to write IPCC reports showing the lying hockey stick. McIntyre and McKittrick's paper exposing the Hockey Stick as a statistical fraud was published even earlier. There is no possible defense of ignorance for the scientific crooks Mann, Jones and Briffa (all important writers of IPCC reports on which trillions were misspent; all beneficiaries under false pretenses of huge government grants, about which there should be a police investigation); they knew precisely what they were doing, as the e-mails prove. They sold out to the IPCC bureaucrats more than a decade ago, and the pols (with the honorable exception of Senator Barton's committee whom I've quoted here before) still haven't found them out! Lie. No evidence of claim. The proof that I quoted the evidence before Senator Barton's committee stands here on RBT in the archives. I republish that evidence in a separate thread.http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bi...thread/thread/... The date on which they sold out is fixed by the Reuter report of the complaint. That these self-styled messiahs sold out to the bureaucrates at the IPCC "more than a decade ago" is easily proved by the Reuters report of Dec. 20, 1995 which quoted British scientist Keith Shine, one of IPCC's lead authors, discussing the IPCC Policymakersí Summary: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report." The Science and Environmental Policy Project conducted a survey of IPCC scientific contributors and reviewers and found that about half did not support the Policymakers' Summary. Parallel surveys by the Gallup organization and even by Greenpeace International produced similar results. In 1995 it was already long since clear and established that the scientists were not independent and should have rejected the IPCC shilling (and influence and interference) with contempt. Ugh! Is that a post-lying interjection? Poor Maxine. If you didn't invite all the world vicariously into your pain, you wouldn't look so stupid for having believed these crooks from whom you bought that bottle of snake oil called global warming. By contrast, I've been on the arse of these doomsayers since I was a precocious teenager with a newspaper column. These global warming bozos are no less incompetent and no less crooked than the hole in the ozone layer clowns, or the global popsicle clowns of the seventies, or the Millennium Bug clowns. Your response is juvenile: denial and name-calling. The facts are on the table: proof positive, rational, incontestable. Your heroes lied, and lied, and lied, and lied. Knowingly, repeatedly. For base motives. For financial gain. And they were so arrogant, they wrote it all down in their e-mails for posterity to see their pettiness and baseness. Suck it up and move on, Maxine. There are plenty of other unworthy causes for a worthless trendy like you to give her whole whoring little heart to, so that you can feel you belong somewhere at least until all the other worthless little trendies move on to the next fad. Andre Jute Reformed petrol head Car-free since 1992 Greener than thou! XXX XXX XXX That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. "... ideologically driven... "? |
#4
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 22, 10:38*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 23, 1:41 am, Andre Jute wrote: landotter wrote: On Nov 21, 11:14 pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 20, 4:28 pm, RonSonic wrote: Like so many things I recommend giving this time to prove itself out before acting or speaking rashly. But then, that's how I felt about Global Warmism itself. Short version: The British Met office at Hadley has been allegedly hacked and years of emails and documents were opened and exposed on the internets. The director there confirms the hackage and says that these are indeed their emails and documents. Actually, it looks a lot more like an inside job than an external hacker http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a.../heraldsun/com... Unless someone spent a lot of time writing fake emails the numbers have been subjected to a lot more warming than has our climate. Easy to create a "consensus" if you're willing to just lie to people. Ron One really has to wonder how many times the corruption in climatogy will have to be exposed before the politicians start smelling the decay of scientific principle. This is utterly Stalinesque. Lie. Perhaps, before you start namecalling, dear Maxine, you should let me develop my thought: These socalled scientists are not even asking, "What is the truth?" Lie. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", understand that to be true science, the results must be falsifiable. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", share data. Instead these jerks admit in their e-mails to going to great lengths to keep the data from which they falsified their desired result from those who would prove their incompetence and lying. Refusal to share data is adequate and sufficient proof of bad science. They start and end by saying, "How can we arrive at the politically desired result?" Lie. They knew that in the face of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age *there is no global warming*, merely a partial and ongoing recovery to a prior equilibrium state. They knew the Hockey Stick was a lie. They knew 1998 was not the hottest year on record, that 1934 was (in the depth of the Depression -- what did industry contribute to that?). They knew all that, and kept producing the Hockey Stick even after it was condemned as incompetent science by both the North and the Wegman committees of the NAS testifying under oath before the Barton Committee of the US Senate. These self-styled "scientists" lied for political and financial advantage. Period. Their e-mails prove it. In short, they knew from the beginning that they were lying, that Michael Mann was lying, that the hockey stick was and is a lie told by Mann, Briffa, the IPCC, and by the so-called "peer reviewers". Lie. No evidence of claim. In a separate thread "US National Academy of Science CONDEMNS Global Warming Lies"http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/... I publish the evidence given on oath by the NAS Panel under North, constituted to defend Mann against questions by the US Senate as if these were merely political questions (!), which none the less found Mann incompetent in exactly the same way the Wegman Panel of statisticians denounced Mann. That's all the evidence, even without the recent exposures of the damning e-mails between this conspiring claque of crooks, required to state that they knew for years, and yet continued to write IPCC reports showing the lying hockey stick. McIntyre and McKittrick's paper exposing the Hockey Stick as a statistical fraud was published even earlier. There is no possible defense of ignorance for the scientific crooks Mann, Jones and Briffa (all important writers of IPCC reports on which trillions were misspent; all beneficiaries under false pretenses of huge government grants, about which there should be a police investigation); they knew precisely what they were doing, as the e-mails prove. They sold out to the IPCC bureaucrats more than a decade ago, and the pols (with the honorable exception of Senator Barton's committee whom I've quoted here before) still haven't found them out! Lie. No evidence of claim. The proof that I quoted the evidence before Senator Barton's committee stands here on RBT in the archives. I republish that evidence in a separate thread.http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bi...thread/thread/... The date on which they sold out is fixed by the Reuter report of the complaint. That these self-styled messiahs sold out to the bureaucrates at the IPCC "more than a decade ago" is easily proved by the Reuters report of Dec. 20, 1995 which quoted British scientist Keith Shine, one of IPCC's lead authors, discussing the IPCC Policymakersí Summary: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report." The Science and Environmental Policy Project conducted a survey of IPCC scientific contributors and reviewers and found that about half did not support the Policymakers' Summary. Parallel surveys by the Gallup organization and even by Greenpeace International produced similar results. In 1995 it was already long since clear and established that the scientists were not independent and should have rejected the IPCC shilling (and influence and interference) with contempt. Ugh! Is that a post-lying interjection? Poor Maxine. If you didn't invite all the world vicariously into your pain, you wouldn't look so stupid for having believed these crooks from whom you bought that bottle of snake oil called global warming. By contrast, I've been on the arse of these doomsayers since I was a precocious teenager with a newspaper column. These global warming bozos are no less incompetent and no less crooked than the hole in the ozone layer clowns, or the global popsicle clowns of the seventies, or the Millennium Bug clowns. Your response is juvenile: denial and name-calling. The facts are on the table: proof positive, rational, incontestable. Your heroes lied, and lied, and lied, and lied. Knowingly, repeatedly. For base motives. For financial gain. And they were so arrogant, they wrote it all down in their e-mails for posterity to see their pettiness and baseness. Suck it up and move on, Maxine. There are plenty of other unworthy causes for a worthless trendy like you to give her whole whoring little heart to, so that you can feel you belong somewhere at least until all the other worthless little trendies move on to the next fad. Andre Jute Reformed petrol head Car-free since 1992 Greener than thou! XXX XXX XXX That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. There is no evidence to support this claim. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. And here we go again, the cocksuckers love to play the victim in lieu of having evidence for their hysterical emotionalism. moo. |
#5
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 23, 4:38*am, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 23, 1:41 am, Andre Jute wrote: landotter wrote: On Nov 21, 11:14 pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Nov 20, 4:28 pm, RonSonic wrote: Like so many things I recommend giving this time to prove itself out before acting or speaking rashly. But then, that's how I felt about Global Warmism itself. Short version: The British Met office at Hadley has been allegedly hacked and years of emails and documents were opened and exposed on the internets. The director there confirms the hackage and says that these are indeed their emails and documents. Actually, it looks a lot more like an inside job than an external hacker http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a.../heraldsun/com... Unless someone spent a lot of time writing fake emails the numbers have been subjected to a lot more warming than has our climate. Easy to create a "consensus" if you're willing to just lie to people. Ron One really has to wonder how many times the corruption in climatogy will have to be exposed before the politicians start smelling the decay of scientific principle. This is utterly Stalinesque. Lie. Perhaps, before you start namecalling, dear Maxine, you should let me develop my thought: These socalled scientists are not even asking, "What is the truth?" Lie. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", understand that to be true science, the results must be falsifiable. Real scientists, rather than these so-called, self-styled "scientists", share data. Instead these jerks admit in their e-mails to going to great lengths to keep the data from which they falsified their desired result from those who would prove their incompetence and lying. Refusal to share data is adequate and sufficient proof of bad science. They start and end by saying, "How can we arrive at the politically desired result?" Lie. They knew that in the face of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age *there is no global warming*, merely a partial and ongoing recovery to a prior equilibrium state. They knew the Hockey Stick was a lie. They knew 1998 was not the hottest year on record, that 1934 was (in the depth of the Depression -- what did industry contribute to that?). They knew all that, and kept producing the Hockey Stick even after it was condemned as incompetent science by both the North and the Wegman committees of the NAS testifying under oath before the Barton Committee of the US Senate. These self-styled "scientists" lied for political and financial advantage. Period. Their e-mails prove it. In short, they knew from the beginning that they were lying, that Michael Mann was lying, that the hockey stick was and is a lie told by Mann, Briffa, the IPCC, and by the so-called "peer reviewers". Lie. No evidence of claim. In a separate thread "US National Academy of Science CONDEMNS Global Warming Lies"http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/... I publish the evidence given on oath by the NAS Panel under North, constituted to defend Mann against questions by the US Senate as if these were merely political questions (!), which none the less found Mann incompetent in exactly the same way the Wegman Panel of statisticians denounced Mann. That's all the evidence, even without the recent exposures of the damning e-mails between this conspiring claque of crooks, required to state that they knew for years, and yet continued to write IPCC reports showing the lying hockey stick. McIntyre and McKittrick's paper exposing the Hockey Stick as a statistical fraud was published even earlier. There is no possible defense of ignorance for the scientific crooks Mann, Jones and Briffa (all important writers of IPCC reports on which trillions were misspent; all beneficiaries under false pretenses of huge government grants, about which there should be a police investigation); they knew precisely what they were doing, as the e-mails prove. They sold out to the IPCC bureaucrats more than a decade ago, and the pols (with the honorable exception of Senator Barton's committee whom I've quoted here before) still haven't found them out! Lie. No evidence of claim. The proof that I quoted the evidence before Senator Barton's committee stands here on RBT in the archives. I republish that evidence in a separate thread.http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.bi...thread/thread/... The date on which they sold out is fixed by the Reuter report of the complaint. That these self-styled messiahs sold out to the bureaucrates at the IPCC "more than a decade ago" is easily proved by the Reuters report of Dec. 20, 1995 which quoted British scientist Keith Shine, one of IPCC's lead authors, discussing the IPCC Policymakersí Summary: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report." The Science and Environmental Policy Project conducted a survey of IPCC scientific contributors and reviewers and found that about half did not support the Policymakers' Summary. Parallel surveys by the Gallup organization and even by Greenpeace International produced similar results. In 1995 it was already long since clear and established that the scientists were not independent and should have rejected the IPCC shilling (and influence and interference) with contempt. Ugh! Is that a post-lying interjection? Poor Maxine. If you didn't invite all the world vicariously into your pain, you wouldn't look so stupid for having believed these crooks from whom you bought that bottle of snake oil called global warming. By contrast, I've been on the arse of these doomsayers since I was a precocious teenager with a newspaper column. These global warming bozos are no less incompetent and no less crooked than the hole in the ozone layer clowns, or the global popsicle clowns of the seventies, or the Millennium Bug clowns. Your response is juvenile: denial and name-calling. The facts are on the table: proof positive, rational, incontestable. Your heroes lied, and lied, and lied, and lied. Knowingly, repeatedly. For base motives. For financial gain. And they were so arrogant, they wrote it all down in their e-mails for posterity to see their pettiness and baseness. Suck it up and move on, Maxine. There are plenty of other unworthy causes for a worthless trendy like you to give her whole whoring little heart to, so that you can feel you belong somewhere at least until all the other worthless little trendies move on to the next fad. Andre Jute Reformed petrol head Car-free since 1992 Greener than thou! XXX XXX XXX That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. Stupid to leave the evidence lying around, though. Or, more likely, arrogant. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. Very disappointed in Maxine von Ott und zu Ott. A pretty ****poor performance from her. But I suppose anyone would be bitter at seeing her religion of global warming crumbling from the feet up before her very eyes. Serve her right for whoring after false gods like that Budha-figure, Fat Al Gore. Andre Jute Global Warming is like Scientology, only with less science -- and I said it long before the Hadley Hack exposed those clowns as crooks |
#6
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
flipper wrote:
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:59:49 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 22, 10:38 pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote: snip That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. There is no evidence to support this claim. Snipping the links to smoking gun proof doesn't make it go away. Ostrich School of GW Debate. There is, unfortunately, a ton of evidence to support that claim with not the least of which being the well know, by now, Mann hockey stick fraud. Simply put, in addition to using known problematic datasets he created a cute little mechanism that automagically produces hockey stick trends from trendless data. Hell, just stick another "temperature data recording station" on a concrete slab in direct sun next to an air conditioning unit and call it good. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. And here we go again, the cocksuckers love to play the victim in lieu of having evidence for their hysterical emotionalism. Noting crude, personal attacks on someone else is hardly playing victim. GrndRt's logic is as sound as his science. LOL You're going to find yourself either outraged or crying if the media ever bothers to investigate what's in the FOI2009.zip data. Anyone else notice the terravermin's near /obsession/ with (all-male) fellatio? Better Scotchguard that shrink's couch... BS |
#7
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 23, 11:47*pm, flipper wrote:
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:59:49 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 22, 10:38*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote: snip That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. There is no evidence to support this claim. There is, unfortunately, a ton of evidence to support that claim with not the least of which being the well know, by now, Mann hockey stick fraud. Why is it then--that you authoritarian science deniers can't provide any of this evidence that's not tainted by either Big Oil or right wing political organizations? There is no hockey stick fraud. Claiming that there is makes you a liar. Simply put, in addition to using known problematic datasets he created a cute little mechanism that automagically produces hockey stick trends from trendless data. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. And here we go again, the cocksuckers love to play the victim in lieu of having evidence for their hysterical emotionalism. You're going to find yourself either outraged or crying if the media ever bothers to investigate what's in the FOI2009.zip data. Here we see an example of typical right wing authoritarian nanner nanner boo booing. All with zero evidence. Pathetic. |
#8
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 24, 12:36*am, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
flipper wrote: On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:59:49 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 22, 10:38 pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote: snip That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. There is no evidence to support this claim. Snipping the links to smoking gun proof doesn't make it go away. *Ostrich School of GW Debate. What smoking gun? There's no evidence or "smoking gun". I know you right wing authoritarians want a smoking gun really bad--but it doesn't work like Jesus or Jiminey Cricket. Squinting, crapping your pants, and praying really hard won't make evidence manifest itself in order to defend your rigid political ideology--ideology so disgusting that it's willing to gamble with the Earth itself. Ask yourself--why is it only the radical conservatives who won't believe in scientific reality? I mean--your Queen in America is so radically anti-science that she admits to not believing in natural selection in her new book--because it contradicts her faith in magic. When that's the mainstream of your faction--base denial of scientific reality--I beg of you, **** off. |
#9
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 24, 4:15*pm, flipper wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:53:40 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 23, 11:47*pm, flipper wrote: On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:59:49 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 22, 10:38*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote: snip That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. There is no evidence to support this claim. There is, unfortunately, a ton of evidence to support that claim with not the least of which being the well know, by now, Mann hockey stick fraud. Why is it then--that you authoritarian science deniers can't provide any of this evidence I just did. If you want more then go here http://www.climateaudit.org/?page_id=354 that's not tainted by either Big Oil or right wing political organizations? Poison well fallacies don't fly. Science, or any argument for that matter, stands on it's own merits. There is no hockey stick fraud. In my opinion, creating a cute little algorithm that produces hockey stick trends from trendless data, and then defending it once exposed, is evidence of fraud. Claiming that there is makes you a liar. Claiming a 'lie' just proves your ignorance. Simply put, in addition to using known problematic datasets he created a cute little mechanism that automagically produces hockey stick trends from trendless data. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. And here we go again, the cocksuckers love to play the victim in lieu of having evidence for their hysterical emotionalism. You're going to find yourself either outraged or crying if the media ever bothers to investigate what's in the FOI2009.zip data. Here we see an example of typical right wing authoritarian nanner nanner boo booing. All with zero evidence. I gave you the name of the blooming file so you can find it yourself, hysterical cry baby. Pathetic. Climateaudit is a right wing misinformation site run by a paid shill for the minerals industry. But when you're desperate TO BELIEVE in your conspiracy--you'll suck on the teat of whatever ugly old beast that'll have you. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ephen_McIntyre There is no smoking gun. If there was--wouldn't you be able to nurse from a prettier beast? LOL An unconfirmed email is the smoking gun that there's an entire worldwide conspiracy of scientists, politicians, and investors? Hahahahahahahahaha [gasp] hahahahahahahahahahahaha. |
#10
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
Maxine von Ottbott aka landotter:
There is no hockey stick fraud. Flipper: In my opinion, creating a cute little algorithm that produces hockey stick trends from trendless data, and then defending it once exposed, is evidence of fraud. Plus the criminal destruction of evidence, the unscientific and unethical denial of data and algorithms to dissenters, collusion and conspiracy to continue defrauding the public purse, ditto to cover up the crime, the unethical bullying of editors and publishers not to accept dissenting papers, the unethical and disgusting attempts to ruin the lieves of dissenters -- ugh, this list grows and grows. These are all matters either for criminal charges by the police or charges before ethics bodies or investigations by university authorities under various rules (a good one is bringing learning and research and science into disrepute). More data in support at http://www.megaupload.com/?d=U44FST89 Andre Jute Visit Andre's books at http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/THE%20WRITER'S%20HOUSE.html |
#11
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
flipper wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:24:44 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 24, 4:15 pm, flipper wrote: On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:53:40 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 23, 11:47 pm, flipper wrote: On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:59:49 -0800 (PST), landotter wrote: On Nov 22, 10:38 pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote: snip That the Global Warming Activist Sect would stoop to ideologically driven falsification of data and then lie more to cover it up is hardly surprising. There is no evidence to support this claim. There is, unfortunately, a ton of evidence to support that claim with not the least of which being the well know, by now, Mann hockey stick fraud. Why is it then--that you authoritarian science deniers can't provide any of this evidence I just did. If you want more then go here http://www.climateaudit.org/?page_id=354 that's not tainted by either Big Oil or right wing political organizations? Poison well fallacies don't fly. Science, or any argument for that matter, stands on it's own merits. There is no hockey stick fraud. In my opinion, creating a cute little algorithm that produces hockey stick trends from trendless data, and then defending it once exposed, is evidence of fraud. Claiming that there is makes you a liar. Claiming a 'lie' just proves your ignorance. Simply put, in addition to using known problematic datasets he created a cute little mechanism that automagically produces hockey stick trends from trendless data. That the Ground Rat would stoop to crude, mean-spirited personal attacks on the poster(s) who provided the link(s) proving it, even less so. And here we go again, the cocksuckers love to play the victim in lieu of having evidence for their hysterical emotionalism. You're going to find yourself either outraged or crying if the media ever bothers to investigate what's in the FOI2009.zip data. Here we see an example of typical right wing authoritarian nanner nanner boo booing. All with zero evidence. I gave you the name of the blooming file so you can find it yourself, hysterical cry baby. Pathetic. Climateaudit is a right wing misinformation site run by a paid shill for the minerals industry. But when you're desperate TO BELIEVE in your conspiracy--you'll suck on the teat of whatever ugly old beast that'll have you. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ephen_McIntyre Besides that being misleading, but then you don't care, you are engaging in the typical poison well fallacy. Hey, at least he (?) has graduated from a cock-sucking obsession to teat sucking! LOL Rat progress... There is no smoking gun. If there was--wouldn't you be able to nurse from a prettier beast? LOL NAS agreed with McIntyre's criticisms. I suppose you'll now claim NAS is a "right wing misinformation" organization. An unconfirmed email is the smoking gun that there's an entire worldwide conspiracy of scientists, politicians, and investors? Hahahahahahahahaha [gasp] hahahahahahahahahahahaha. "Worldwide conspiracy" is your invention, hyena boy. Just a hunch: Verminosity hasn't looked at a single incriminating e-mail. Typical. Bill "Congressional Inquiry, anyone?" S. |
#12
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 26, 2:03*am, flipper wrote:
Anyone who thinks this is going to play out like a movie mystery where all the questions are wrapped up in 2 hours is deluding themselves. Well, I don't support a witch-hunt, or some kind of Orwellian confession. We have a thing called due process here in the United States. Give them a fair chance to explain & defend themselves. And then we can drive them into the streets like dogs and beat them to death with hockey sticks and CFL-filled pillow cases. |
#13
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
Good grief. Well, at least some illegally obtained and cherry picked
e-mails have provided hours of fun for the paranoid and the desperate- including one whacked-out Congressmen applauding the breaking of laws. Unfortunately for all of us, the science still stands. Climate change is real, the role of humans in that change is clear- and like the conservatives keep telling us, we need to take responsibility for our actions. Oh, wait, they don't keep telling us that except in election years. And even then, they really just want *other* people to take responsibility. You go first. |
#14
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Timmie tries to sneer global warming back into existence, was News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 26, 5:16*am, Tim McNamara wrote:
Good grief. *Well, at least some illegally obtained and cherry picked e-mails have provided hours of fun for the paranoid and the desperate- including one whacked-out Congressmen applauding the breaking of laws. All the sneering in the world will not detract one whit from the content of that material, which demonstrates conclusively that the climate crooks knew they were lying -- "hide the downturn" indeed! -- which is enough to condemn all their work, even without the criminal destruction of data, the malicious attempts to suppress the voices of critics, the conspiracy against the truth coming out, the assaults on freedom of speech by trying to gag editors who permitted skeptics to publish, etc, etc, etc, so many more unscientific behaviours demonstrated by that correspondence. Unfortunately for all of us, the science still stands. * It doesn't now. It hasn't ever. The brief moment when it *appeared* as if there was global warming was created by statistical trickery which removed the globally true, historically verified Medieval Warm Period. Once Mann and Briffa's statistical tricks were exposed -- and now confirmed by the e-mails as deliberate dishonesty rather than mere incompetence -- and the Medieval Warm Period was reinstated and forever enshrined in the science *there could be no global warming*. “We must get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” -- Jonathan Overpeck, climate "scientist", IPCC writer. Climate change is real, the role of humans in that change is clear- Crap. There is no proof of the link to manmade CO2. Quite the contrary. All evidence points to CO2 emissions lagging temperature rise by 800 years. How can something which happens afterwards be the cause of a prior effect? That cannot ever be science because times winged arrow flies only one way. These supposed clamatic evils of anthropogenic CO2 is pure science fiction. and like the conservatives keep telling us, we need to take responsibility for our actions. These crooks who call themselves scientists should certainly resign before they are fired by their institutions, and the unoversity officials, who helped them cover up their lies by helping them destroy data subject to Freedom of Information legislation and deny what was left to others, should be fired from their jobs for failing to do the jobs and for betraying the spirit of enquiry which should underpin every university. Oh, wait, they don't keep telling us that except in election years. *And even then, they really just want *other* people to take responsibility. * You go first. I've been saying for half a century that these climate scaremongers should be put down once and for all. When Michael Mann's meretricious Hockey Stick first appeared, I wrote plainly that it was a statistical fraud, a historical lie, that it would be disproven by pre-existing interdisciplinary knowledge, that Mann should be charged with contempt of science and be run out of science (and certainly any honest university) for it, and that the IPCC would continue to tell the Mann Hockey Stick lie because *of course* a committee constituted to find climate change *would* find climate change to keep themselves in jobs. Now it's your turn to be honest for a change, Timmie. Andre Jute “There is always an easy solution to every human problem — neat, plausible and wrong.” -- H. L. Mencken "Hell, we're so rich and bored, we invent problems to find wrong solutions to. We even have a name for it. It is called Government by Accident." -- Andre Jute PS I only wish you were right, Timmie. I would just dearly love some global warming. But, unfortunately, the only manmade global warming was made by Mann, Jones, Briffa et al, right inside a computer. We don't cycle inside computers. |
#15
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 25, 11:16*pm, Tim McNamara wrote:
Good grief. *Well, at least some illegally obtained and cherry picked e-mails have provided hours of fun for the paranoid and the desperate- including one whacked-out Congressmen applauding the breaking of laws. Unfortunately for all of us, the science still stands. *Climate change is real, the role of humans in that change is clear- and like the conservatives keep telling us, we need to take responsibility for our actions. Oh, wait, they don't keep telling us that except in election years. *And even then, they really just want *other* people to take responsibility. * You go first. I have to give conspiracy theorists credit for efficiency. Al Gore could break wind in an elevator and they'd stretch it into a binder full of conspiracy like a dust bowl mother cooking soup from a rusty nail. |
#16
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Jute melts down
On Nov 26, 7:21*am, Andre Jute wrote:
[logic free rant] Perhaps a mental health professional can help you with this deeply emotional connection you have to things for which there is no evidence. Or you might be able to channel it into being a radical Muslim/Christian/etc--same ****, different day. Cheapest option is really a sandwich board and two mismatched boots. The medium is the message! |
#17
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Timmie tries to sneer global warming back into existence, was News in the world of Global Warming
On Nov 26, 5:00*pm, landotter wrote:
On Nov 26, 7:21*am, Andre Jute wrote: [logic free rant] Perhaps a mental health professional can help you with this deeply emotional connection you have to things for which there is no evidence. Or you might be able to channel it into being a radical Muslim/Christian/etc--same ****, different day. Cheapest option is really a sandwich board and two mismatched boots. The medium is the message! I should think anyone who calls my post "logic-free" is by definition logic-free, and anyone who thinks so closely reasoned an argument is a sign of mental illness is by definition not the sharpest knife in the drawer, in fact best kept away from sharp knives. Here it is, the logic Maxine Land-Otter doesn't want you to see: On Nov 26, 5:16*am, Tim McNamara wrote: Good grief. *Well, at least some illegally obtained and cherry picked e-mails have provided hours of fun for the paranoid and the desperate- including one whacked-out Congressmen applauding the breaking of laws. All the sneering in the world will not detract one whit from the content of that material, which demonstrates conclusively that the climate crooks knew they were lying -- "hide the downturn" indeed! -- which is enough to condemn all their work, even without the criminal destruction of data, the malicious attempts to suppress the voices of critics, the conspiracy against the truth coming out, the assaults on freedom of speech by trying to gag editors who permitted skeptics to publish, etc, etc, etc, so many more unscientific behaviours demonstrated by that correspondence. Unfortunately for all of us, the science still stands. * It doesn't now. It hasn't ever. The brief moment when it *appeared* as if there was global warming was created by statistical trickery which removed the globally true, historically verified Medieval Warm Period. Once Mann and Briffa's statistical tricks were exposed -- and now confirmed by the e-mails as deliberate dishonesty rather than mere incompetence -- and the Medieval Warm Period was reinstated and forever enshrined in the science *there could be no global warming*. “We must get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” -- Jonathan Overpeck, climate "scientist", IPCC writer. Climate change is real, the role of humans in that change is clear- Crap. There is no proof of the link to manmade CO2. Quite the contrary. All evidence points to CO2 emissions lagging temperature rise by 800 years. How can something which happens afterwards be the cause of a prior effect? That cannot ever be science because times winged arrow flies only one way. These supposed clamatic evils of anthropogenic CO2 is pure science fiction. and like the conservatives keep telling us, we need to take responsibility for our actions. These crooks who call themselves scientists should certainly resign before they are fired by their institutions, and the unoversity officials, who helped them cover up their lies by helping them destroy data subject to Freedom of Information legislation and deny what was left to others, should be fired from their jobs for failing to do the jobs and for betraying the spirit of enquiry which should underpin every university. Oh, wait, they don't keep telling us that except in election years. *And even then, they really just want *other* people to take responsibility. * You go first. I've been saying for half a century that these climate scaremongers should be put down once and for all. When Michael Mann's meretricious Hockey Stick first appeared, I wrote plainly that it was a statistical fraud, a historical lie, that it would be disproven by pre-existing interdisciplinary knowledge, that Mann should be charged with contempt of science and be run out of science (and certainly any honest university) for it, and that the IPCC would continue to tell the Mann Hockey Stick lie because *of course* a committee constituted to find climate change *would* find climate change to keep themselves in jobs. Now it's your turn to be honest for a change, Timmie. Andre Jute “There is always an easy solution to every human problem — neat, plausible and wrong.” -- H. L. Mencken "Hell, we're so rich and bored, we invent problems to find wrong solutions to. We even have a name for it. It is called Government by Accident." -- Andre Jute PS I only wish you were right, Timmie. I would just dearly love some global warming. But, unfortunately, the only manmade global warming was made by Mann, Jones, Briffa et al, right inside a computer. We don't cycle inside computers. |
#18
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Jute melts down
On Nov 26, 5:11*pm, Jobst Brandt wrote:
Max Otter wrote: Perhaps a mental health professional can help you with this deeply emotional connection you have to things for which there is no evidence. *Or you might be able to channel it into being a radical Muslim/Christian/etc--same ****, different day. *Cheapest option is really a sandwich board and two mismatched boots. *The medium is the message! The symptom is entirely that of religion supported by faith alone. Jobst Brandt Yes, poor Maxine has screeched "Lie, lie," around a hundred times now in these global warming debates, without ever offering a single fact. Poor dear can't even offer amusing character assassination, just the same old dull reiteration. Maxine is, I fear, the stereotypical dumb blonde, and very impressionable with it, as witness the poor dear's fundie faith in the long-discredited schismatic fallacy of global warming. Andre Jute On the evidence or no way |
#19
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
The Andre Jute Drinking Game gets you "there" faster!
On Nov 26, 12:48*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
[drivel] GURGLE GURGLE GURGLE GURGLE! |
#20
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Timmie tries to sneer global warming back into existence, was News in the world of Global Warming
Andre Jute wrote:
On Nov 26, 5:16 am, Tim McNamara wrote: Good grief. Well, at least some illegally obtained and cherry picked e-mails have provided hours of fun for the paranoid and the desperate- including one whacked-out Congressmen applauding the breaking of laws. All the sneering in the world will not detract one whit from the content of that material, which demonstrates conclusively that the climate crooks knew they were lying -- "hide the downturn" indeed! -- which is enough to condemn all their work, even without the criminal destruction of data, the malicious attempts to suppress the voices of critics, the conspiracy against the truth coming out, the assaults on freedom of speech by trying to gag editors who permitted skeptics to publish, etc, etc, etc, so many more unscientific behaviours demonstrated by that correspondence. Funny how liberals had no issue with using e-mails to ruin the life and career of a middle-aged gay congressman, or publishing (in the NYT) leaked classified material that greatly endangered lives and undermined national security, but exposing Global Warming Hoaxism and worse is...unacceptable?!? Too freaking rich, even for Timmie and his fellow religious nutjobs. Unfortunately for all of us, the science still stands. It doesn't now. It hasn't ever. The brief moment when it *appeared* as if there was global warming was created by statistical trickery which removed the globally true, historically verified Medieval Warm Period. Once Mann and Briffa's statistical tricks were exposed -- and now confirmed by the e-mails as deliberate dishonesty rather than mere incompetence -- and the Medieval Warm Period was reinstated and forever enshrined in the science *there could be no global warming*. “We must get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” -- Jonathan Overpeck, climate "scientist", IPCC writer. Climate change is real, the role of humans in that change is clear- Crap. There is no proof of the link to manmade CO2. Quite the contrary. All evidence points to CO2 emissions lagging temperature rise by 800 years. How can something which happens afterwards be the cause of a prior effect? That cannot ever be science because times winged arrow flies only one way. These supposed clamatic evils of anthropogenic CO2 is pure science fiction. and like the conservatives keep telling us, we need to take responsibility for our actions. These crooks who call themselves scientists should certainly resign before they are fired by their institutions, and the unoversity officials, who helped them cover up their lies by helping them destroy data subject to Freedom of Information legislation and deny what was left to others, should be fired from their jobs for failing to do the jobs and for betraying the spirit of enquiry which should underpin every university. Oh, wait, they don't keep telling us that except in election years. And even then, they really just want *other* people to take responsibility. You go first. I've been saying for half a century that these climate scaremongers should be put down once and for all. When Michael Mann's meretricious Hockey Stick first appeared, I wrote plainly that it was a statistical fraud, a historical lie, that it would be disproven by pre-existing interdisciplinary knowledge, that Mann should be charged with contempt of science and be run out of science (and certainly any honest university) for it, and that the IPCC would continue to tell the Mann Hockey Stick lie because *of course* a committee constituted to find climate change *would* find climate change to keep themselves in jobs. Now it's your turn to be honest for a change, Timmie. There's a first time for everything, but don't get any hopes up... Andre Jute “There is always an easy solution to every human problem — neat, plausible and wrong.” -- H. L. Mencken "Hell, we're so rich and bored, we invent problems to find wrong solutions to. We even have a name for it. It is called Government by Accident." -- Andre Jute PS I only wish you were right, Timmie. I would just dearly love some global warming. But, unfortunately, the only manmade global warming was made by Mann, Jones, Briffa et al, right inside a computer. We don't cycle inside computers. Nice and warm in LoSoCal today. I blame Bush. BS |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
News in the world of Global Warming | Vacuum Tubes | |||
News in the world of Global Warming | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Global warming is the new religion of First World urban elites | Audio Opinions | |||
For Mickey.. a guide to Global Warming | Audio Opinions |