513 replies to this topic

[DAVID SNOW]

noggin, on 02 December 2009 - 20:47 , said:

http://www.dailymail...ers-banned.html

The police are involved now.

Great band
Great songs
Are they the hackers?

[SteveB]

The main BBC news mentioned the leaked E-mail scandal, Apparently Dubai are not happy & it could have ramifications at the Copenhagen summit.

Edited by SteveB, 03 December 2009 - 18:51 .

[rob48]

This is a disturbing trend, destroying data/evidence:


http://www.spectator...l-science.thtml


It has eerie connotations with the behaviour of fascist dictators burning libraries (oh and the mysterious disappearance of all of Anthony Blair's expenses claims).

[Devonian]

rob48, on 03 December 2009 - 22:31 , said:

This is a disturbing trend, destroying data/evidence:


http://www.spectator...l-science.thtml


It has eerie connotations with the behaviour of fascist dictators burning libraries (oh and the mysterious disappearance of all of Anthony Blair's expenses claims).

Oh dear, getting close to a Goodwin now...

[Solar Cycles]

rob48, on 03 December 2009 - 22:31 , said:

This is a disturbing trend, destroying data/evidence:


http://www.spectator...l-science.thtml


It has eerie connotations with the behaviour of fascist dictators burning libraries (oh and the mysterious disappearance of all of Anthony Blair's expenses claims).

Come off it Rob, are you really surprised?


Climate scientists have been fudging data from the start, their whole theory is based on manipulation and lies. What the public wants to know, will justice be served, and all those involved with the century's biggest crime ( manipulation, lies, and e-mails ), be stripped off all funding, and kindly shown the door!
!

[Solar Sausage]

Is any of that substantiated, Solar - or is it simply yet more hearsay??

[Solar Cycles]

Pete Tattum, on 04 December 2009 - 09:23 , said:

Is any of that substantiated, Solar - or is it simply yet more hearsay??

Just 3 words Pete, Biffin, Mann, and Hansen!

[Solar Sausage]

Solar Cycles, on 04 December 2009 - 09:27 , said:

Just 3 words Pete, Biffin, Mann, and Hansen!

In other words: probably not, then: as even the largest list of ad homs doesn't sum-up to the smallest amount of evidence...

[Solar Cycles]

Pete Tattum, on 04 December 2009 - 09:39 , said:

In other words: probably not, then: as even the largest list of ad homs doesn't sum-up to the smallest amount of evidence...

Not really Pete, all three have been involved in manipulation of data. And all of this has been well documented, as you know!

[Solar Sausage]

Solar Cycles, on 04 December 2009 - 09:46 , said:

Not really Pete, all three have been involved in manipulation of data. And all of this has been well documented, as you know!

Well, it's has certainly been claimed...Personally, I don't like cherry-picking much, either. Which is why I find the climate deniers to be every bit as bad...'Tis why I'm a sceptic, and neither a believer nor a denier...

[SteveB]

More concerns raised about the leaked E-mails.

The UN to investigate.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ech/8394483.stm

[Dartmoor_Matt]

Sky News was reporting that the UN Climate Change committee are going to start investigating the possible data manipulation.

[Solar Cycles]

Pete Tattum, on 04 December 2009 - 09:57 , said:

Well, it's has certainly been claimed...Personally, I don't like cherry-picking much, either. Which is why I find the climate deniers to be every bit as bad...'Tis why I'm a sceptic, and neither a believer nor a denier...

Well I've stated many times, that I believe Co2 has played a small part in our previous warming Pete. It's the manipulation and fabrication of data, which really does science no favours. And that's the reason why the general public are so scathing!

[Solar Sausage]

Dartmoor_Matt, on 04 December 2009 - 10:41 , said:

Sky News was reporting that the UN Climate Change committee are going to start investigating the possible data manipulation.

IMO, any suspicion of deliberate misrepresentation of data should be thoroughly investigated...

Solar Cycles, on 04 December 2009 - 10:41 , said:

Well I've stated many times, that I believe Co2 has played a small part in our previous warming Pete. It's the manipulation and fabrication of data, which really does science no favours. And that's the reason why the general public are so scathing!

Which is the very thing that has yet to be proved...And, would this be the same 'general public' that once took to stoning the house of a paediatrician???

[Dartmoor_Matt]

Pete Tattum, on 04 December 2009 - 10:55 , said:

IMO, any suspicion of deliberate misrepresentation of data should be thoroughly investigated...

I agree entirely, and it's good that they are going ahead with it despite the reassurances from Phil Jones and others.

[osmposm]

Devonian, on 03 December 2009 - 23:27 , said:

Oh dear, getting close to a Goodwin now...

Not Goodwin, it seems, but Godwin, Dev. But thanks for the link, I'd not come across it before....Godwin's Law, that is, not the phenomenon. I like the description of the related logical fallacy, Reductio ad Hitlerum, too, though in this case only a more general and commonplace reductio ad fascistum.

Sorry, mods, this is really one for Grammarian's Corner in The Lounge...but the essential point remains that comparing destruction of embarrassing evidence (allegedly) with the burning of books in a totalitarian state is an absurd analogy; comparing it with lost expenses claims is perfectly valid, however.

[Devonian]

Solar Cycles, on 04 December 2009 - 10:41 , said:

Well I've stated many times, that I believe Co2 has played a small part in our previous warming Pete. It's the manipulation and fabrication of data, which really does science no favours. And that's the reason why the general public are so scathing!

I'm sure the private emails of McIntyre and Watts are as incriminating as the CRU ones...

[Dartmoor_Matt]

Devonian, on 04 December 2009 - 13:39 , said:

I'm sure the private emails of McIntyre and Watts are as incriminating as the CRU ones...

Mine are too probably. The difference? Mine and theirs aren't going on to form global policies with ramifications for all of us. Which bit of that is hard to comprehend?

[Devonian]

Dartmoor_Matt, on 04 December 2009 - 13:42 , said:

Mine are too probably. The difference? Mine and theirs aren't going on to form global policies with ramifications for all of us. Which bit of that is hard to comprehend?

Actually, I think it could be argued that Watts and McIntyre are, politically at least, pretty damn influential. I think we should know what they've been saying in private as well. Why not? Sauce, geese and all that.

[Boar Wrinklestorm]

Look guys, I've been pretty indeterminate in this debate, and I think, rightly so.

Evidence is evidence. CRU and NASA are guilty of failing to adhere to the scientific method. This cannot be denied, their output, now, cannot be recreated because an awful lot of data was deleted in the 1980's. This is probably the reason why they've been so closed about what is going on. Embarrasement.

BUT, you have to remember the state of computing in the 1980's. Storing data of this magnitude would have cost £millions, and climate science would not have been in it's infancy, it would have been a core kernel of an idea, with abstract researchers doing a job that, probably, no-one would see any value in it.

My opinion, which I am sure is just about to ridiculed 4e4, is that these guys are being scapegoats. Other independent researchers have come to the same conclusion, I can correlate sunspot data with their output, the list goes on ....

This does NOT mean that I agree with the underlying opinion of the most fervent AGW supporters, here. I strongly do not; but there is a standard of evidence that must be adhered too.

My feelings go out to those researchers who, now, and their families, are going to have a terrible Christmas whilst the worst of humanity fires upon their white hump the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by some people; and then, as if their chests had been a mortar, they burst their hot heart's shell upon it

Edited by VillagePlank, 04 December 2009 - 14:56 .