Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 55

Thread: The "Climate Gate" conspiracy theory: Game Over

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    46,183
    Thanks
    26,354
    Thanked 36,870 Times in 19,408 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 2,669 Times in 2,406 Posts

    Default The "Climate Gate" conspiracy theory: Game Over

    As predicted long ago by people with a rudimentary understanding of science, the “Climate Gate Conspiracy” finally merits is rightful place….aka, in the JPP.com Conspiracy Thread files.



    A lot could be said here; the Climate scientists that were under “suspicion” have been thoroughly and completely exonerated (*see links below); two-time Bush voters, Tea Bag partiers, and Fox News fans have become inextricably ensconsed in an self-imposed alternate universe – an echo chamber free of facts and built on the foundations of half-truths, lies, and dubious “factoids” as published on Matt Drudge and the Sarah Palin facebook page; and that the lines of communication and consensus agreement between the real universe where normal people live and the universe of the rightwing echo chamber have been permanently severed.

    In some of the more intellectual corners of the interwebs (which I typically avoid, preferring to troll internet porn – just kidding) a raging debate has been occurring on whether conservatives have reached “epistemic closure”; i.e., some fancy-pants philosophical psychobabble which I will defer to Bruce Bartlett to explain:

    A Data Point on "Epistemic Closure"

    Bruce Bartlett
    Former Reagan Administration Undersecretary of the Treasury

    There has been a bit of a debate going on in the blogosphere the last few days on whether conservatives have achieved "epistemic closure." (Links and commentary here.) I won't get into the deep philosophical meaning the term. What it seems to mean in terms of the current discussion is that conservatives live in a cocoon or echo chamber in which they only read conservative magazines like National Review and the Weekly Standard, only listen to conservative talk radio, only watch Fox News and only visit conservative web sites. It's a closed loop in which any opinions or facts that conflict with the conservative worldview are either avoided, ignored or automatically dismissed on the grounds that they must be liberal or come from liberals.

    I believe this view of how conservatives think is correct and want to pass along the moment when I first realized it in 2004….(continued)……….

    http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog...stemic-closure
    If you really want to see conservative “epistemic closure” in action, check out Lord Monckton – a major celebrity of the righting Climate Denialist jihad. The dude is now claiming that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. Hilarious!

    Yes, fellow denizens of the interwebs: a major star of the climate denier circuit not only clings with a death grip to a ridiculous and fantastical conspiracy theory of a global network of lying climate scientists; but also thinks the President of the United States is a fifth columnist who was secretly born in Kenya.

    There you have it, folks. Conservative “epistemic closure” indeed, Mr. Bartlett…..well played, sir.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/rig...oning_the.html




    *”Climate Gate” Inquires:

    http://www.realclimate.org/docs/387.pdf
    http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/...sessment+Panel
    http://www.factcheck.org/2010/04/som...e-conclusions/
    http://factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/


    "We saw no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit and had it been there we believe that it is likely that we would have detected it.”

    --Report of the International Panel set up by the University of East Anglia to
    examine the research of the Climatic Research Unit

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    39,053
    Thanks
    3,463
    Thanked 1,324 Times in 1,188 Posts
    Groans
    1,184
    Groaned 693 Times in 631 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    ...the Climate scientists that were under “suspicion” have been thoroughly and completely exonerated ....
    You sound like Al Gore: 'the debate is over'.

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    106,374
    Thanks
    58,912
    Thanked 34,272 Times in 25,956 Posts
    Groans
    46,541
    Groaned 4,632 Times in 4,413 Posts
    Blog Entries
    58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    As predicted long ago by people with a rudimentary understanding of science, the “Climate Gate Conspiracy” finally merits is rightful place….aka, in the JPP.com Conspiracy Thread files.



    A lot could be said here; the Climate scientists that were under “suspicion” have been thoroughly and completely exonerated (*see links below); two-time Bush voters, Tea Bag partiers, and Fox News fans have become inextricably ensconsed in an self-imposed alternate universe – an echo chamber free of facts and built on the foundations of half-truths, lies, and dubious “factoids” as published on Matt Drudge and the Sarah Palin facebook page; and that the lines of communication and consensus agreement between the real universe where normal people live and the universe of the rightwing echo chamber have been permanently severed.

    In some of the more intellectual corners of the interwebs (which I typically avoid, preferring to troll internet porn – just kidding) a raging debate has been occurring on whether conservatives have reached “epistemic closure”; i.e., some fancy-pants philosophical psychobabble which I will defer to Bruce Bartlett to explain:



    If you really want to see conservative “epistemic closure” in action, check out Lord Monckton – a major celebrity of the righting Climate Denialist jihad. The dude is now claiming that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. Hilarious!

    Yes, fellow denizens of the interwebs: a major star of the climate denier circuit not only clings with a death grip to a ridiculous and fantastical conspiracy theory of a global network of lying climate scientists; but also thinks the President of the United States is a fifth columnist who was secretly born in Kenya.

    There you have it, folks. Conservative “epistemic closure” indeed, Mr. Bartlett…..well played, sir.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/rig...oning_the.html




    *”Climate Gate” Inquires:

    http://www.realclimate.org/docs/387.pdf
    http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/...sessment+Panel
    http://www.factcheck.org/2010/04/som...e-conclusions/
    http://factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/
    You need to read this from Climate Audit.

    http://climateaudit.org/2010/04/18/l...ghs-interview/
    As Gustave Le Bo lamented: “The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduces them. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.”

  4. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    As predicted before... fear mongering flat earth morons will continue to cling to the belief that they weren't 'lied' to by their beloved masters. Cypress continues to drive home the point of how much of a brain dead lemming he truly is... he continues posting these idiotic 'we did no wrong' pieces and continues to fail to address any of the following.....

    1) No statistically significant warming in the past 15 years - phil jones

    2) No evidence to support that we are warmer today than during the medieval period. The data that does exist supports the contrary... though not enough data for the globe to be conclusive.

    3) Again... the data being 'lost' or deleted because it was 'too hard to store' is a sign of bad science.

    4) Again... Cypress will continue to ignore all of the data and instead cling to his 'u guyz should stop reading right wing blogs' line of bullshit.

    5) Again.... when the 'reports' as to what occurred are done by the very organizations/groups that have a vested interest in their global warming fear mongering, I would say only a completely brain dead moron would believe the very people who lied to us in the first place.

    6) Again... Cypress will continue to ignore the benefit these governments, government agencies and groups funded by the BILLIONS of dollars have by being the global warming fear mongering that they are. The governments gain more control over lemmings like Cypress, the Government agencies get more control and the groups like East Anglia get billions to continue the myth of AGW.

    7) Again, brain dead flat earth fear mongers like Cypress will ignore the facts. Instead he will champion the Fox's report of the Fox's activities in the hen house and proclaim that 'The FOX IS INNOCENT!!!'
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  5. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Tell us Cypress...

    Why did the so called 'scientists' and your beloved 'government agencies' shut down so many weather stations throughout the world?

    Why did the stations shut down just happen to be disproportionately furthest from the equator and/or higher altitudes?

    Explain that to us Cypress, since you have a 'rudimentary' understanding of science (which must of course translate to.... 'I repeat what my masters tell me to say')
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  6. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    60,700
    Thanks
    4,973
    Thanked 9,694 Times in 7,664 Posts
    Groans
    12
    Groaned 419 Times in 396 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    And we have just seen in real time how the population bifurcates.

    We see that the entire statist military industrial complex of all nations are just going to keep going along with the plot to marketize the very right to use energy, with all the manipulative bubble and bust making to do their social engineering.

    And we who lived through it now and can be honest see it's all based on bad data, but only a few us will even have the balls to discuss the truth 30 years from now, as we take belabored breaths from our state controlled oxygen tubes.
    "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." — Benito Mussolini

    Internationalist Fascism is fascism on an international scale, with multinational corporations achieving state capture over several states.

    Morality is a set of attitudes and behaviors which facilitate voluntary, cooperative and mutually beneficial relationships. --Asshatzombie

  7. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    15,288
    Thanks
    3,870
    Thanked 5,011 Times in 3,467 Posts
    Groans
    1,286
    Groaned 494 Times in 452 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    It's hard to believe cypress can't prove all our points wrong with links to scientifc studies.
    The links at climate audit are all backed up with links to data, and the original study.

    Climate audit performs the needed statistical analysis that the good scientists have called for--AND he does it for free. Steve is a hero to mankind, and I'm not kidding when I say that. I believe he should get an award of some sort some day. He uncovered the fraud though careful examination.

  8. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    46,183
    Thanks
    26,354
    Thanked 36,870 Times in 19,408 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 2,669 Times in 2,406 Posts

    Default

    Here we have two opposing sets of views. One claims climate change science is a fraud, perpetrated by lying liberal scientists….the other side doesn’t.

    On the one hand, the Climate Denialist Jihad:

    Tinfoil, Asshatzombie, Superfreak, Dixie, Damocles, Meme, Bravo, et al.
    Status: Anonymous and Obscure Message Board Posters
    Scientific Qualifications: None

    On the other hand, the Nation’s most Brilliant Scientific Minds:

    Massachusets Institute of Technology, U.S. National Academy of Sciences, NASA, NOAA, et al.:
    Status: Scientific experts qualified to evaluate climate science.
    Scientific Qualifications: Impeccable and unimpeachable.

    The climate denialist Jihadists provide links to rightwing blogs, to British tabloids, or they don’t provide links at all and bray like donkeys and demand answers to “questions” that undoubtedly they did not come up with on their own… their “questions” are no doubt paraphrased from something they read on a partisan rightwing site.


    In contrast, The Worlds most Brilliant Scientific Minds make these conclusions:

    How do we know that the CO2 increase is caused by human activities?

    The Massachusets Institute of Technology
    Joint Program on Climate Change

    Industry data provides detailed figures of fossil fuels used in various sectors. This data can be used to calculate the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere by combustion of the fuels. The emissions are more than sufficient to explain the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 Careful analysis of the atmospheric CO2 data collected by Scripps and other organizations shows that CO2 is increasing at a rate that is about 44% slower than would be expected if all the CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels stayed in the air. The real puzzle is to explain where the missing 44% of the emissions have gone. The answer is that this "missing" CO2 is absorbed by both the oceans and the terrestrial biosphere. On average over the last 50 years the oceans and the terrestrial biosphere have continued to "mop up" this amount of CO2. Whether they will continue to do this as atmospheric CO2 concentrations continue to increase is a critical question and the subject of intense international research.

    Other evidence for a human cause: 1) There are no known natural sources of CO2 sufficient to account for the recent increase. 2) There are no known sinks of CO2 sufficient to have absorbed all the CO2 from fossil-fuel burning. 3) For more than 10,000 years prior to the Industrial Revolution, atmospheric CO2 levels were essentially constant, which shows that the recent increase is not natural. 4) The increase in CO2 has been accompanied by a decrease in O2 and by changes in the ratios of the isotopes of carbon in the CO2. The O2 and isotopes changes indicate that the CO2 increase was derived from the oxidation of old organic matter – consistent with burning fossil fuel. 5) The pattern of CO2 increase since 1958 has closely mirrored that of fossil-fuel burning.

    Much of the relatively small climate variability over the last 1,000 years, but before industrialisation, can be explained by changes in solar output and occasional cooling due to major volcanic eruptions. Since industrialisation, CO2 has increased significantly. We now know that man-made CO2 is the likely cause of most of the warming over the last 50 years.

    http://globalchange.mit.edu/resources/topten.html

    The climate denialist Jihadists cling like a drowning man to a piece of flotsam, and continue to blather that “Climate Gate” was perpetrated by lying liberal scientists bent on committing scientific fraud and deception of the public.

    In contrast, qualified professional investigators came to the exact opposite conclusion as our hilarious band of Sherlock holmes climate denial dectectives:


    “We saw no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit and had it been there we believe that it is likely that we would have detected it,”

    -The Independent Panel Charged with Investigating the CRU – April 2010.

    Even if the data that CRU used were not publicly available—which they mostly are—or the methods not published—which they have been—its published results would still be credible: the results from CRU agree with those drawn from other international data sets; in other words, the analyses have been repeated and the conclusions have been verified.

    We therefore conclude that there is independent verification, through the use of other methodologies and other sources of data, of the results and conclusions of the Climate

    -British House of Commons, Science and Technology Committee


    P.S. LOL at "Climate Audit". A blog run by a dude with no qualifications, expertise, or his own legitimate research in climate.




    "Climate Gate!"

  9. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    60,700
    Thanks
    4,973
    Thanked 9,694 Times in 7,664 Posts
    Groans
    12
    Groaned 419 Times in 396 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Cypress is appealling to the logical fallacy called "appeal to authority". It's the main fallacy used by the estalishment in their "expertization" of all valid discourse.

    Cypress. Fake data is fake data, no matter how many fascist nazi scientists they pay off to lie about it.
    "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." — Benito Mussolini

    Internationalist Fascism is fascism on an international scale, with multinational corporations achieving state capture over several states.

    Morality is a set of attitudes and behaviors which facilitate voluntary, cooperative and mutually beneficial relationships. --Asshatzombie

  10. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    As predicted before... fear mongering flat earth morons will continue to cling to the belief that they weren't 'lied' to by their beloved masters. Cypress continues to drive home the point of how much of a brain dead lemming he truly is... he continues posting these idiotic 'we did no wrong' pieces and continues to fail to address any of the following.....

    1) No statistically significant warming in the past 15 years - phil jones (yes, this is one of those unimpeachable experts the idiot Cypress keeps talking about)

    2) No evidence to support that we are warmer today than during the medieval period. The data that does exist supports the contrary... though not enough data for the globe to be conclusive. (yes, this too was from Jones)

    3) Again... the data being 'lost' or deleted because it was 'too hard to store' is a sign of bad science. (yes... Cypress continues to ignore this)

    4) Again... Cypress will continue to ignore all of the data and instead cling to his 'u guyz should stop reading right wing blogs' line of bullshit.

    5) Again.... when the 'reports' as to what occurred are done by the very organizations/groups that have a vested interest in their global warming fear mongering, I would say only a completely brain dead moron would believe the very people who lied to us in the first place.

    6) Again... Cypress will continue to ignore the benefit these governments, government agencies and groups funded by the BILLIONS of dollars have by being the global warming fear mongering that they are. The governments gain more control over lemmings like Cypress, the Government agencies get more control and the groups like East Anglia get billions to continue the myth of AGW.

    7) Again, brain dead flat earth fear mongers like Cypress will ignore the facts. Instead he will champion the Fox's report of the Fox's activities in the hen house and proclaim that 'The FOX IS INNOCENT!!!'

    8) Why did the so called 'scientists' and your beloved 'government agencies' shut down so many weather stations throughout the world?

    9) Why did the stations shut down just happen to be disproportionately furthest from the equator and/or higher altitudes?

    Explain these to us Cypress, since you have a 'rudimentary' understanding of science (which must of course translate to.... 'I repeat what my masters tell me to say')

    WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO RESPOND CYPRESS? OH THAT'S RIGHT... BECAUSE YOU CAN'T.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  11. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    81,965
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 14,132 Times in 9,040 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 513 Times in 477 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Channeling Cypress:

    Scientists who are paid to produce evidence of Global Warming have told me that they have done nothing wrong! They are unimpeachable! Their Data are right, because they said so!

    Now, I'll proceed to ignore the fact that the data cannot be checked by anybody at all, because they were never stored, and start into the ad homs. It is always better to be on the attack than the defense.

    /Channel...
    Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but rather we have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
    - -- Aristotle

    Believe nothing on the faith of traditions, even though they have been held in honor for many generations and in diverse places. Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it. Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past. Do not believe what you yourself have imagined, persuading yourself that a God inspires you. Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests. After examination, believe what you yourself have tested and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.
    - -- The Buddha

  12. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    46,183
    Thanks
    26,354
    Thanked 36,870 Times in 19,408 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 2,669 Times in 2,406 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    As predicted before... fear mongering flat earth morons will continue to cling to the belief that they weren't 'lied' to by their beloved masters. Cypress continues to drive home the point of how much of a brain dead lemming he truly is... he continues posting these idiotic 'we did no wrong' pieces and continues to fail to address any of the following.....

    1) No statistically significant warming in the past 15 years - phil jones (yes, this is one of those unimpeachable experts the idiot Cypress keeps talking about)

    2) No evidence to support that we are warmer today than during the medieval period. The data that does exist supports the contrary... though not enough data for the globe to be conclusive. (yes, this too was from Jones)

    3) Again... the data being 'lost' or deleted because it was 'too hard to store' is a sign of bad science. (yes... Cypress continues to ignore this)

    4) Again... Cypress will continue to ignore all of the data and instead cling to his 'u guyz should stop reading right wing blogs' line of bullshit.

    5) Again.... when the 'reports' as to what occurred are done by the very organizations/groups that have a vested interest in their global warming fear mongering, I would say only a completely brain dead moron would believe the very people who lied to us in the first place.

    6) Again... Cypress will continue to ignore the benefit these governments, government agencies and groups funded by the BILLIONS of dollars have by being the global warming fear mongering that they are. The governments gain more control over lemmings like Cypress, the Government agencies get more control and the groups like East Anglia get billions to continue the myth of AGW.

    7) Again, brain dead flat earth fear mongers like Cypress will ignore the facts. Instead he will champion the Fox's report of the Fox's activities in the hen house and proclaim that 'The FOX IS INNOCENT!!!'

    8) Why did the so called 'scientists' and your beloved 'government agencies' shut down so many weather stations throughout the world?

    9) Why did the stations shut down just happen to be disproportionately furthest from the equator and/or higher altitudes?

    Explain these to us Cypress, since you have a 'rudimentary' understanding of science (which must of course translate to.... 'I repeat what my masters tell me to say')

    WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO RESPOND CYPRESS? OH THAT'S RIGHT... BECAUSE YOU CAN'T.

    Here’s the problem. You were wrong about your climate gate conspiracy theory. And nothing you post about this topic can be trusted to be credible or accurate without a link to a credible scientific source. You, Dixie, Asshatzombie, and Tinfoil spent months yucking it up that CRU lied, manipulated and committed scientific fraud. Every credible professional investigation came to the exact opposite conclusion that you and Dixie did. .

    So, just because you yell out a bunch of questions, please don’t expect me to accept the premise of your questions, unless you link me to the credible and recognized scientific source you got the information from. Just yelling out questions, without linking me up to doesn’t compel me to accept them as accurate, or to waste my time answering them. I nearly always provide links to reputable sources, since I’m not a climate scientist.

    To put it simply, I know you didn’t come up with those questions yourself. I’m sure you transcribed them or paraphrased them from rightwing blogs or british tabloids. And I don't accept questions from rightwing blogs as worthy of my time. So link me up to your source that cites your alleged problems and questions as it relates to debunking the climate science that NASA and the US National Academy of Sciences has deemed to be reputable.





    PS As for the Phil Jones stuff, I suggest you read the actual BBC interview he did. Because I’m pretty sure the stuff you are writing about Jones is from the UK Telegraph or from a rightwing blog.


  13. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Here’s the problem. You were wrong about your climate gate conspiracy theory. And nothing you post about this topic can be trusted to be credible or accurate without a link to a credible scientific source. You, Dixie, Asshatzombie, and Tinfoil spent months yucking it up that CRU lied, manipulated and committed scientific fraud. Every credible professional investigation came to the exact opposite conclusion that you and Dixie did.
    Funny how you continue to say I was 'wrong', yet you cannot come up with one single fucking answer to any of those questions. You continue to duck answering them, because you can't. Your masters haven't provided you with anything and thus you are lost.

    "every credible professional investigation"???? Seriously... drink some more koolaid. Again... two investigations by the foxes about the foxes activities are hardly credible.

    So, just because you yell out a bunch of questions, please don’t expect me to accept the premise of your questions, unless you link me to the credible and recognized scientific source you got the information from. Just yelling out questions, without linking me up to doesn’t compel me to accept them as accurate, or to waste my time answering them. I nearly always provide links to reputable sources, since I’m not a climate scientist.
    Translation: "you are right... I can't answer any of these questions.[/quote]

    To put it simply, I know you didn’t come up with those questions yourself. I’m sure you transcribed them or paraphrased them from rightwing blogs or british tabloids. And I don't accept questions from rightwing blogs as worthy of my time. So link me up to your source that cites your alleged problems and questions as it relates to debunking the climate science that NASA and the US National Academy of Sciences has deemed to be reputable.
    Actually, once again you show that you don't know what you are talking about. I did indeed come up with all of those questions. Now, do try to answer them.


    PS As for the Phil Jones stuff, I suggest you read the actual BBC interview he did. Because I’m pretty sure the stuff you are writing about Jones is from the UK Telegraph or from a rightwing blog.
    Once again, I suggest you actually read the BBC interview he did. Because the quotes from Jones are from the BBC... no matter who else quoted the same interview.

    We have pointed this out to you on numerous other threads and you continue to ignore it. Because it refutes your idiocy.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  14. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    74,838
    Thanks
    15,266
    Thanked 14,432 Times in 12,044 Posts
    Groans
    18,546
    Groaned 1,699 Times in 1,647 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Damocles View Post
    Channeling Cypress:

    Scientists who are paid to produce evidence of Global Warming have told me that they have done nothing wrong! They are unimpeachable! Their Data are right, because they said so!

    Now, I'll proceed to ignore the fact that the data cannot be checked by anybody at all, because they were never stored, and start into the ad homs. It is always better to be on the attack than the defense.

    /Channel...

    I heard a Radio report today that said the Iceland volcano has put more Co2 into the atmosphere in one week, then all of humanity has in the past year.
    SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.


  15. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    15,288
    Thanks
    3,870
    Thanked 5,011 Times in 3,467 Posts
    Groans
    1,286
    Groaned 494 Times in 452 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    Funny how you continue to say I was 'wrong', yet you cannot come up with one single fucking answer to any of those questions. You continue to duck answering them, because you can't. Your masters haven't provided you with anything and thus you are lost.

    "every credible professional investigation"???? Seriously... drink some more koolaid. Again... two investigations by the foxes about the foxes activities are hardly credible.



    Translation: "you are right... I can't answer any of these questions.


    Actually, once again you show that you don't know what you are talking about. I did indeed come up with all of those questions. Now, do try to answer them.




    Once again, I suggest you actually read the BBC interview he did. Because the quotes from Jones are from the BBC... no matter who else quoted the same interview.

    We have pointed this out to you on numerous other threads and you continue to ignore it. Because it refutes your idiocy.[/QUOTE]

    LOL

    Cypress is amusing me. What a total believer. Seriously, what kind of moron can't see the conflict of interest. Thankfully, the idiots like cypress are no longer growing in number. the climate cult has at least peaked, like the 1998 el nino. LOL

Similar Threads

  1. "Climate Gate": The Lion that Squeaked Like a Mouse
    By Cypress in forum Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-17-2010, 02:50 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-20-2010, 10:15 PM
  3. "Sweetie-Gate"...
    By Damocles in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-16-2008, 06:58 AM
  4. Is it "global warming" now--or is it "climate change"?
    By theMAJORITY in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-01-2008, 07:13 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-01-2007, 12:45 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •