Are Climatologists Stupid?

Bowerbird · Jan 5, 2013

Grokmaster said: ↑

Please provide the desperately alluded to context that chanhges what the emails ACTUALLY SAY, that ALTERS THE MEANING OF THEIR WORDS, the way E.Anglia ALTERED THE EMPIRICAL DATA.....
Click to expand...

Your allegation - you provide the proof - until then I am happy there is no case to answer in the East Anglia emails except perhaps the illegal method by which they were obtained

Meanwhile though "denialgate" looks juicier and juicier

The Heartland Institute, a conservative advocacy group, is threatening to sue journalists, bloggers, and activists who reported on internal documents that detail the group's fundraising efforts and lay out a new program to replace climate change education in schools with curriculum meant to instill doubt on climate science.

The threat was spelled out in an email sent to media outlets (including mongabay.com) by Jim Lakely, Communications Director at the Heartland Institute. The group said it will "pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation" from "individuals who have commented so far on these documents", prior to the Heartland Institute's official response. It also states that one of the documents is "a total fake."

Released yesterday by DeSmogBlog, the documents are causing a media firestorm that has already been dubbed 'Denial Gate'. Although the Heartland Institute has yet to fully confirm the authenticity of the documents, it only denies that one of several documents is not real, "Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy." The Heartland Institute has spent years trying to spread skepticism about climate change, although climatologists worldwide overwhelmingly agree that the world is warming and human activities, such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation, are playing a major role.
Read more at http://news.mongabay.com/2012/0215-heartland_to_sue_journalists.html#Co3eHAZbqVfIQKwZ.99
Click to expand...

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/mass-shootings-investigation

Bowerbird · Jan 5, 2013

gingern42 said: ↑

Scientifically, warming is real, we can measure it. Mans contribution is unknown, we can't measure it. I'm a skeptic of the first order on everything, but the science here is better than most will give credit.
Click to expand...

Oh! Really?? http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm

Sorry but it CAN and has been measured

Additional confirmation that rising CO2 levels are due to human activity comes from examining the ratio of carbon isotopes (eg ? carbon atoms with differing numbers of neutrons) found in the atmosphere. Carbon 12 has 6 neutrons, carbon 13 has 7 neutrons. Plants have a lower C13/C12 ratio than in the atmosphere. If rising atmospheric CO2 comes from fossil fuels, the C13/C12 should be falling. Indeed this is what is occurring (Ghosh 2003). The C13/C12 ratio correlates with the trend in global emissions.
Click to expand...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions-intermediate.htm

Bowerbird · Jan 5, 2013

Radio Refugee said: ↑

So...really...it's just one spoonful of dog poop added to a liter of vanilla ice cream. Whadda ya think that tastes like?

And...it's clear you lack the curiosity to ask the follow-up question. If one incident is discovered despite the best efforts of the miscreants to hide it, how many more were they able to successfully hide?
Click to expand...

Meanwhile at Heartland institute

Bowerbird · Jan 5, 2013

PrometheusBound said: ↑

Data collecting is not science, it is just arithmetic. These Zero-Growth academic gurus are incapable of connecting the dots; they can only collect the dots. This clique of scientists forms a peer group of B students jealous of A students. Their IQs weren't high enough to invent anything useful, so they concentrated on dissing superior minds, starting with the great Elizabethan, Francis Bacon.

Their education turns them into childish escapists. They latch on to climatology because it is one of those Majors for Dummies. Still being childish after they graduate, they fantasize about being comic-book superheroes out to save the world. Social outcasts and losers, they also are in desperate need of friends and a cult that welcomes them despite the fact that they are goofy nerd dorks. Also, because there's a lot of funding money available in alarmist power plays. Another motivation for indulging in alarmist fantasies is that these flowerchildren superheroes can become advisors to scare movies and might get dates with girls they'd never have a chance with otherwise. After all, actresses have something in common with pompous idiots pretending to be scientists by acting the way the gullible public thinks scientists act. Like any other performers, Warmies draw big audiences.
Click to expand...

So this applies to all climate scientists. atmospheric chemists, atmospheric physicists, Oceanographers, astronomers, and a whole host of other scientists in a multitude of disciplines all across the world

Ever heard the sound of a conspiracy theory deflating??

Bowerbird · Jan 5, 2013

Stagnant said: ↑

Yes. Potentially. Context. Maybe. I know that Context is a four-letter word for most republicans (see also: "you didn't build that" as the slogan of the RNC). What we're looking at here is the lead of a group of scientists hiding data (which was later released anyways, and then backed up by other, independent sources). Why? We don't know! We might never know! But what we do know is that these same scientists have been struggling to simply do their work without getting harassed by Inhofe, McIntyre, and company. Maybe that would explain the odd behavior? Maybe they're unwilling to produce unfinished work because they know that the fake skeptics will take that unfinished research and use it to misrepresent the science? Who knows? It's something worth investigating. Err, correction, something that was investigated. Jones was reprimanded on poor conduct due to his hesitance to release the files, but there was no fraud found, neither in the various scientific investigations nor the cases brought before the house of lords or Inhofe's fraud case.

Good riddance to bad rubbish. The very best you could present was a tenuous link that might imply some manner of fraud (which was cleared by multiple sources anyways) that would implicate one data source, and one group of scientists publishing paper. And that's your big case for "Peer review in Global Warming is corrupted"? That's kinda sad, when you think about it.
Click to expand...

Actually the simplest and most often conveniently "forgotten" fact was that the data was not theirs to release

gingern42 · Jan 5, 2013

Oh! Really?? http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm

Sorry but it CAN and has been measured

http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions-intermediate.htm
Click to expand...

That is a measure of CO2. It is not a measure of how much actual temp change results from it.

Jiyuu-Freedom · Jan 5, 2013

This thread has exceeded the maximum post limit and has drifted off topic.

There are too many violations to address so this thread is now closed.

Thank all of you who participated in a respectful debate.

Sincerely,

Jiyuu-Freedom
Site Moderator

Log in or Sign up

Are Climatologists Stupid?

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

gingern42 Banned

Jiyuu-Freedom Keep the peace Past Donor

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Are Climatologists Stupid?

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

Bowerbird Well-Known Member

gingern42 Banned

Jiyuu-Freedom Keep the peace Past Donor

Share This Page

Useful Searches