Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cthulhu]

One of the heads of the research center, and sender of the "hide the decline" email, admitted that the emails were real.

[Ampersand]

The broader point still stands, they are attempting to discredit something backed by evidence, not by attacking the evidence, not by offering evidence of their own, but by attacking a handful of scientists that may or may not be sleazy.

What this proves is that the handful of guys who sent the emails may have faked some data, and nothing more.

[nil]

I barely care whether or not global warming is real because limited oil supplies are undoubtedly real (you can debate how close we are to the peak, but you can't debate that it will come someday) and the solutions to climate change are mostly the same as the solutions to peak oil.

I guess there's coal to account for but there's plenty of good reasons to avoid that besides climate change as well.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

cmon people, get it.  think it through.  the CRU falsified the data, its in the CODE, not the emails, if you would acutally look into the scandal, not blather about it.  They THREW AWAY ALL the hard copy data collected from all over the world and then lost all the computerized data then MADE IT UP FROM SCRATCH.  The guys who wrote the code for the models spell it all out for ya.  The CRU model used by the IPCC for all current climate change politics is BUNK.  Its billion dollar BUNK.  Quite drinking the koolaid.

[Ampersand]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6703841/Climate-sceptics-get-it-wrong.html

Climate change skeptics faked data. Stop drinking the koolaid.

[kuro_suna]

Seriously, current climate science is a global endeavour that involves countless people around the world,  its not perfect and odd are a few people have acted unscrupulously but I don't know how people can simply dismiss the entire thing as a lie.

The fundamental difference between conspiracy theorist logic and normal logic is that a conspiracy theorist believes that as the number of people in a conspiracy increases so does its strength where as a normal person believes that if you have more than a room full of people in on it chances are someone will post all the details on their Facebook account before it can even take off.

EDIT:
On a side note a while back in the interest of being open minded I watched The Great Global Warming Swindle and my god was it loaded with the standard conspiracy theorist BS of appealing to the everyones against us angle. It did present one alternate scientific explanation for global temperature shifts that involved particle radiation seeding clouds but it didn't seem like they put a lot of effort into following up on it with any research or experimentation.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6703841/Climate-sceptics-get-it-wrong.html

Climate change skeptics faked data. Stop drinking the koolaid.

heh, it you think thats anything at all to use as a retort, i must say, thats weak.  i win.
AGW is a religious croc.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Global Warming or not, I don't see how it's a bad thing to have limits on how much we shit up the planet.

Oddly enough it seems like there's people who are arguing that it's perfectly fine to shit up the planet for ourselves and our children, which I find slightly distressing.

Also, I wish people would quit adding "gate" onto the end of whatever-new scandal. It sounds dumbass-tic.

[LegoLord]

Man that is long.  Not even entirely sure what it's saying about who or who is defending what side after that.

But the waning of the magnetic field causing ice to melt?  Doesn't work, according to our current knowledge.  The process that creates the magnetic field doesn't just stop and let the heat that powers it go else where.  The field wanes because, even though the field generating process is still going, the contents of the core are shifting to such an extent that as the liquid magnet reverses poles, the parts of it reverse in a way that cancels out some of the field.  Basically, since the magnet in the core is liquid, its field will turn in on itself as it flips, weakening the field.  The magnetic field doesn't just stop being made, as far as we can tell.  Unless they can develop and test a reason for why that would happen that also dispels the fairly strong hypothesis of magnetic flipping, that is not a feasible hypothesis.  Not one we should be betting our future on, anyway.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

for more about the magnetosphere - check this and follow the news - I heard there is a yearly giant whole now forming over the south atlantic that just keeps getting bigger, and scientists are stumped.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/16dec_giantbreach.htm

yeah, i would love to have a clean planet.  its a good idea to do what we can to keep it that way.  but you cannot force people to not be asshats.  thats called tyranny.  also, when someones need for a clean planet means destroying the livelihoods of others - thats tyranny.  theres a difference between being pro planet and a hateful luddite.  the kyoto treaty and the coming copenhagen treaty have thrown any semblance of common sense outta the window.  basicly, someone is stating "we cant ever let the weather change! - stop the change!  no to Change!"  I do not believe we will ever in our existence as humans be able to thwart mother earth in her decisions on wether or not to heat up or cool down, and if we could, isnt that what were supposed to be against?  the whole thing is backasswards goofy.

time to go sort my recyclables......oh wait....crap!
http://www.gormogons.com/2009/11/czar-q-truth-of-recycling.html   

[G-Flex]

but you cannot force people to not be asshats.  thats called tyranny.

Depending on how you define "asshats", this is the purpose of the majority of law ever drafted. It's not "tyranny" to decide, as a society, to stop doing something harmful and to stop individuals from doing the same. It's "law", and we do it all the time and have been, in some form or another, since the inception of complex social structures.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

True G-Fles, but you know thats not what is happening here.  Lets not confuse universally accepted criminal acts dating back thousands of years with regulating how much you are allowed to say, travel, based on how many carbon credits you can purchase.  That simply creates tyranny upon the poor and frees the rich elite to excessively dominate the world.  its not the same.

[G-Flex]

Since when are "carbon credits" the only way to help the environment? I never said that and don't even think it's a particularly good idea.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

thats what i mean by stopping people from doing whatever they are gonna do and have done for 1000+ years that was never criminal before.  I dont think i am stating that clearly tho.

[Aqizzar]

Enslaving people was perfectly acceptable for thousands of years.

I urge you, drop the rightness-of-history argument now while you still can.  It's only going to get worse.