On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:47:48 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


I'm not saying that pollution isn't an issue, that eco systems don't
need to be protected, fish stocks replenished, research done on
non-fossil fuel energy delivery, etc. These are important issues, but
they've been lost in the great Global Warming Wars which, as it is
turning out, is a bogus crisis.

How do you jibe this, with your following statement? I mean, how do you
know it's a "bogus crisis", when there is no "real research and science"?

Hopefully we can start doing real research and science once this blows
over.

Isn't that exactly what is happening right now, albeit more publicly than
is normal for most science? The process is, by nature, ugly, but science
*is* doing it's job.

For those flat earthers, those that think these emails are some sort of
smoking gun, you may want to consider:

"More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no
evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros
nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the
MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the
falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/
vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the
hackers also being in on the plot though."

From:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php.../the-cru-hack/

On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:22:16 -0600, thunder
wrote:

On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:47:48 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


I'm not saying that pollution isn't an issue, that eco systems don't
need to be protected, fish stocks replenished, research done on
non-fossil fuel energy delivery, etc. These are important issues, but
they've been lost in the great Global Warming Wars which, as it is
turning out, is a bogus crisis.

How do you jibe this, with your following statement? I mean, how do you
know it's a "bogus crisis", when there is no "real research and science"?

Hopefully we can start doing real research and science once this blows
over.

Isn't that exactly what is happening right now, albeit more publicly than
is normal for most science? The process is, by nature, ugly, but science
*is* doing it's job.

It's not if data sets are hidden and results are not properly analyzed
and/or included to advance a public policy agenda.

For those flat earthers, those that think these emails are some sort of
smoking gun, you may want to consider:

"More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no
evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros
nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the
MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the
falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/
vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the
hackers also being in on the plot though."

From:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php.../the-cru-hack/

Oh please - here's the "directorship" of RealClimate.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...tributor-bios/

Notice a prominent name there? And Schmidt isn't exaclty an objective
observer - he's participated in this data fraud and is a prominent
eco-warrior.

I don't know a lot about Dr. Ammann but I noticed a couple of
interesting things in his CV - most notably this: IPCC AR4 Reviewer
Synthesis Report, Chapter 9 and contributing author.

Think they might have something to protect here?

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:47:48 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


I'm not saying that pollution isn't an issue, that eco systems don't
need to be protected, fish stocks replenished, research done on
non-fossil fuel energy delivery, etc. These are important issues, but
they've been lost in the great Global Warming Wars which, as it is
turning out, is a bogus crisis.

How do you jibe this, with your following statement? I mean, how do you
know it's a "bogus crisis", when there is no "real research and science"?

Hopefully we can start doing real research and science once this blows
over.

Isn't that exactly what is happening right now, albeit more publicly than
is normal for most science? The process is, by nature, ugly, but science
*is* doing it's job.

For those flat earthers, those that think these emails are some sort of
smoking gun, you may want to consider:

"More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no
evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros
nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ?get rid of the
MWP?, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the
falsifying of data, and no ?marching orders? from our socialist/communist/
vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the
hackers also being in on the plot though."

From:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php.../the-cru-hack/

Your attempt to minimalize the information brought into the public
domain by stating that it can't be a world-wide conspiracy because
George Soros isn't involved is a nice try at deflection.

What we have is a collection of "scientists" from around the world who
saw global warming as a way to fatten their research budgets, bring them
national and international prominence and pad their CV's. The part that
is really nefarious is that they are trying with every "trick" they know
to beat their critics into submission by calling the global warming
deniers at the least and idiots at the most.

Keep pushing the it can't be a conspiracy because George Soros isn't
behind it line of crap if you want.

On 11/23/09 8:18 AM, BAR wrote:
In inet,
says...

On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:47:48 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


I'm not saying that pollution isn't an issue, that eco systems don't
need to be protected, fish stocks replenished, research done on
non-fossil fuel energy delivery, etc. These are important issues, but
they've been lost in the great Global Warming Wars which, as it is
turning out, is a bogus crisis.

How do you jibe this, with your following statement? I mean, how do you
know it's a "bogus crisis", when there is no "real research and science"?

Hopefully we can start doing real research and science once this blows
over.

Isn't that exactly what is happening right now, albeit more publicly than
is normal for most science? The process is, by nature, ugly, but science
*is* doing it's job.

For those flat earthers, those that think these emails are some sort of
smoking gun, you may want to consider:

"More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no
evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros
nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ?get rid of the
MWP?, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the
falsifying of data, and no ?marching orders? from our socialist/communist/
vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the
hackers also being in on the plot though."

From:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php.../the-cru-hack/

Your attempt to minimalize the information brought into the public
domain by stating that it can't be a world-wide conspiracy because
George Soros isn't involved is a nice try at deflection.

What we have is a collection of "scientists" from around the world who
saw global warming as a way to fatten their research budgets, bring them
national and international prominence and pad their CV's. The part that
is really nefarious is that they are trying with every "trick" they know
to beat their critics into submission by calling the global warming
deniers at the least and idiots at the most.

Keep pushing the it can't be a conspiracy because George Soros isn't
behind it line of crap if you want.




Crikey...BAR is another "scientist" who barely completed high school.

--
If you are flajim, herring, loogy, GC boater, johnson, topbassdog, rob,
achmed the sock puppet, or one of a half dozen others, you're wasting
your time by trying to *communicate* with me through rec.boats, because,
well, you are among the permanent members of my dumbfoch dumpster, and I
don't read the vomit you post, except by accident on occasion. As
always, have a nice, simple-minded day.

On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:22:16 -0600, thunder
wrote:

On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:47:48 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


I'm not saying that pollution isn't an issue, that eco systems don't
need to be protected, fish stocks replenished, research done on
non-fossil fuel energy delivery, etc. These are important issues, but
they've been lost in the great Global Warming Wars which, as it is
turning out, is a bogus crisis.

How do you jibe this, with your following statement? I mean, how do you
know it's a "bogus crisis", when there is no "real research and science"?

Hopefully we can start doing real research and science once this blows
over.

Isn't that exactly what is happening right now, albeit more publicly than
is normal for most science? The process is, by nature, ugly, but science
*is* doing it's job.

For those flat earthers, those that think these emails are some sort of
smoking gun, you may want to consider:

"More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no
evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros
nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the
MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the
falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/
vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the
hackers also being in on the plot though."

From:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php.../the-cru-hack/

How do you know what was or wasn't said? According to your site,

"Update: The official UEA statement is as follows:

“We are aware that information from a server used for research
information
in one area of the university has been made available on public
websites,”
the spokesman stated.

“Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently
confirm
that all of this material is genuine.”"

Hell, even the UEA cannot confirm what is or is not in the material.
Perhaps the folks you quoted don't know what they're talking about?

Perhaps you're a little quick to quote?
--

John H