Sheffield Forum
Your message here

Am I still allowed to question climate change?

Home > General > General Discussions

Reply To Topic
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
20-11-2009, 15:13   #21
Kingmaker2
Registered User
Kingmaker2's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 5,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by peak oil View Post
the world is going to end its just a matter of when,
Wow, that's profound!

Besides what's this got to do with climate change?

Even if the climate does change drastically, it's not going to end the world, it will just make some human populations less comfortable than they previously were.
I don't think even the most ardent climate change advocate thinks that man induced climate change is an extinction event.

Last edited by Kingmaker2; 20-11-2009 at 15:16.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:14   #22
f0rd
Registered User
f0rd's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Location: Millhouses
Total Posts: 1,841
I think this has the potential to be pretty big.

Also BBC reports a breach but no information on the contents of the e-mails Link.

Wonder when some mainstream media will get wind of the contents, FOX is going to be over it like a rabbid dog.
_______
Men are equal; it is not birth but virtue that makes the difference - Voltaire

Last edited by f0rd; 20-11-2009 at 15:16.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:19   #23
JIbbo
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Broomhill
Total Posts: 522
Quote:
Originally Posted by f0rd View Post
I think this has the potential to be pretty big.

Also BBC reports a breach but no information on the contents of the e-mails Link.

Wonder when some mainstream media will get wind of the contents, FOX is going to be over it like a rabbid dog.
Yep as it doesn't sit very well with their general 'left leaning' ideology
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:21   #24
Kingmaker2
Registered User
Kingmaker2's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 5,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by f0rd View Post
I think this has the potential to be pretty big.

Also BBC reports a breach but no information on the contents of the e-mails Link.

Wonder when some mainstream media will get wind of the contents, FOX is going to be over it like a rabbid dog.
I doubt it.

Lower temperatures have already been predicted by others and Fox is Fox, only Fox viewers will get excited over anything that appears to support their "global warming is a conspiracy" argument.
Just like their support for Palin's statement that "Obama was "palling around with terrorists"....even though they neglected to report that some leading Republicans had also been "palling around "with the same terrorist!

Last edited by Kingmaker2; 20-11-2009 at 15:24.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:28   #25
Grandad.Malky
Registered User
Grandad.Malky's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Total Posts: 18,875
No Evidence for Global Warming !

You don’t say:-

Apologies greatly received from all those that have shot me down on this subject in the past.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:30   #26
f0rd
Registered User
f0rd's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Location: Millhouses
Total Posts: 1,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingmaker2 View Post
I doubt it.

Lower temperatures have already been predicted by others and Fox is Fox, only Fox viewers will get excited over anything that appears to support their "global warming is a conspiracy" argument.
It's not the temperature I give a damn about, it's the collusion to modify data and delete incriminating e-mails, so they can't be read under a freedom of information request.

Quote:
Mike,

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!
And

Quote:
“I did get an email from the FOI person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn’t be deleting emails unless this was ‘normal’ deleting to keep emails manageable!"
Quote:
"Yes, I am aware of the confusion surrounding what the Hadley Centre did and why. It is even messier than you realize. I have forcing data sets (more than one!) from Jonathon Gregory that differ from the numbers yougave in your email!!"
Quote:
"Ed to be really honest, I don’t see how this was ever accepted for publication in Nature."

reply...

"Mike,I’d rather you didn’t. I think it should be sufficient to forward the para from Andrew Conrie’s email that says the paper has been rejected by all 3 reviewers. You can say that the paper was an extended and updated version of that which appeared in CR.Obviously, under no circumstances should any of this get back to Pielke.Cheers"
Don't get me wrong, I was (still am) no global warming denier, but if these emails are legit, and it looks increasingly like they are, then it's some pretty damaging stuff.
_______
Men are equal; it is not birth but virtue that makes the difference - Voltaire
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:33   #27
convert
Registered User
convert's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Total Posts: 2,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingmaker2 View Post
I doubt it.

Lower temperatures have already been predicted by others and Fox is Fox, only Fox viewers will get excited over anything that appears to support their "global warming is a conspiracy" argument.
Just like their support for Palin's statement that "Obama was "palling around with terrorists"....even though they neglected to report that some leading Republicans had also been "palling around "with the same terrorist!
Here, Have a straw... Just make sure you clutch it tightly...

Here are a few extracts of some of the alleged email content. (So far, we can only refer to them as alleged emails because – though Hadley CRU’s director Phil Jones has confirmed the break-in to Ian Wishart at the Briefing Room – he has yet to fess up to any specific contents.) But if genuine, they suggest dubious practices such as:

Manipulation of evidence: re the famed hockey stick

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Suppression of evidence:

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:

Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….

And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.
“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.” “It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:39   #28
Kingmaker2
Registered User
Kingmaker2's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 5,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malky View Post
No Evidence for Global Warming !

You don’t say:-

Apologies greatly received from all those that have shot me down on this subject in the past.
According Dr Mojib Latif, one of the world's top climate modellers you may still be wrong Malky.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...-predicts.html
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:41   #29
Grandad.Malky
Registered User
Grandad.Malky's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Total Posts: 18,875
we are all doomed I tell the.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:44   #30
Grandad.Malky
Registered User
Grandad.Malky's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Total Posts: 18,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingmaker2 View Post
According Dr Mojib Latif, one of the world's top climate modellers you may still be wrong Malky.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...-predicts.html
It could get hotter:……..it could get colder, I think that covers all bases…………no they forgot it could get wetter.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:49   #31
Kingmaker2
Registered User
Kingmaker2's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 5,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malky View Post
It could get hotter:……..it could get colder, I think that covers all bases…………no they forgot it could get wetter.
Yes that's true, but the main point being is that temperatures right now are no real indicator of whether man induced global warming is a lie or not.
It's too early to tell.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:53   #32
Grandad.Malky
Registered User
Grandad.Malky's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Total Posts: 18,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingmaker2 View Post
Yes that's true, but the main point being is that temperatures right now are no real indicator of whether man induced global warming is a lie or not.
It's too early to tell.
Well at least we are getting somewhere what happened to the idea it was man made.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:54   #33
Escafeldia
Registered User
Escafeldia's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Total Posts: 246
Sunspot activity has more to do with climate change than emissions of Carbon Dioxide or any other gases. Currently the amount of sunspot activity is nil. Have a look at this link: http://www.oneminuteastronomer.com/2...lobal-warming/

Climate change is happening all the time and has done so for thousands of years. We have had Ice Ages, periods of very warm weather and mini Ice Ages when the Thames has frozen over. The earths weather is a very complex thing and computer simulations of what is happening are very dodgy. The politicians of all parties are being misled, or maybe using climate change for increasing taxes. All the carbon capture or reducing Carbon Dioxide isn't going to make one iota of difference to climate change.
_______
Automatic intelligence can't compete with natural stupidity
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 15:58   #34
Kingmaker2
Registered User
Kingmaker2's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 5,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malky View Post
Well at least we are getting somewhere what happened to the idea it was man made.
Are we?

I simply stated that whether global warming is man made or not, it is too early to tell and those that say that climate change is a lie don't really know that to be true.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 16:00   #35
Grandad.Malky
Registered User
Grandad.Malky's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Total Posts: 18,875
Quote:
Climate change is happening all the time and has done so for thousands of years. We have had Ice Ages, periods of very warm weather and mini Ice Ages when the Thames has frozen over. The earths weather is a very complex thing and computer simulations of what is happening are very dodgy. The politicians of all parties are being misled, or maybe using climate change for increasing taxes. All the carbon capture or reducing Carbon Dioxide isn't going to make one iota of difference to climate change.
I was saying that 2 years ago, all we have to do now is convert the gullible.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 16:01   #36
convert
Registered User
convert's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Total Posts: 2,245
It would appear that the BBC are now reporting this, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8370282.stm , however they are taking a slightly more pro AGW slant; by only reporting that the hack took place, and not the aleged contents of the hacked data...

Sure thing beeb, this was just a hack like Watergate was just a burglary... Climategate anyone.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 16:02   #37
convert
Registered User
convert's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Total Posts: 2,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malky View Post
I was saying that 2 years ago, all we have to do now is convert the gullible.
I'm already a convert...
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 16:04   #38
Grandad.Malky
Registered User
Grandad.Malky's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Total Posts: 18,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingmaker2 View Post
Are we?

.
We are getting somewhere in that you stated we simply don’t know, it wasn’t long ago that the powers that be said that we were all to blame for the decline of those little furry polar bears.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 16:17   #39
Kingmaker2
Registered User
Kingmaker2's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 5,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malky View Post
We are getting somewhere in that you stated we simply don’t know, it wasn’t long ago that the powers that be said that we were all to blame for the decline of those little furry polar bears.
Essentially we are being told that man made climate change is taking place, but just because temperatures haven't risen doesn't mean that it's not taking place or will not manifest itself in the future.
Many here including yourself claim to know what's happening, and are taking a smug "I told you so" attitude, but the reality is you could still be wrong.
  Reply With Quote
20-11-2009, 16:24   #40
Gypsy Hack
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Gangway F, Sheffield.
Total Posts: 1,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by convert View Post
AGW is not science, it's politics.
"Science" in this case being "blog science", presumably. Since there's nothing in the real, peer-reviewed literature to support that statement you just made.

Quote:
PS where are all the supporters of AGW on this forum? They seem to be rather quiet at the moment...
At the moment, I personally am doing "science". Can't speak for the rest, but I'm guessing like me they're just tired of repeating the same old basic physics and statistics lessons to the same old idiots over and over again.

You guys are an irrelevence. Who am I to spoil your little fun?
  Reply With Quote
Reply To Topic

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:59.
POSTS ON THIS FORUM ARE NOT ACTIVELY MONITORED
Click "Report Post" under any post which may breach our terms of use.
©2002-2017 Sheffield Forum | Powered by vBulletin ©2017

Nimbus Server