Russians confirm that UK climate scientists manipulated data to exaggerate global

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jficquette:

Your attachment is a "red x".

In this case the global warming crowd are the tobacco advocates because they are lying just to sell their ideas.

So the tobacco advocates are advocating against people who think like tobacco advocates.

You won't understand this because you can't read his link, but it's entertaining me.

The government wants more money. They give money out to scientists who are on the government research grant tit with the implicit understanding that they want certain results.

Government this uses the maniplated data to push its cap and trade to create revenues that they can use to expand government which give the Socialists more control.

Its pretty simple.

That's a good example of "following the money" while ignoring where the money is in this issue.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

Yea sure - I don't really understand but you do. Luckily - I know bias when I see it.

So I asked for your best evidence and you gave me a graph of CO2 measured from the side of a volcano.

Actually I gave you two items to research, the Keeling curve + isotope measurements. You didn't understand that the Keeling curve had a baseline CO2 measurement, and the isotope measurements are difficult to understand.

Now I am not saying your assumption is incorrect. I am saying you have not shown me anything which rises to the level of proof of man made global warming.

Exactly.

Information that is difficult is easy to exclude as unimportant, doubly so when it disagrees with preconceived ideas.

Thus making it almost impossible for the trader/individual to change their direction.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from jem:

...we have emails from the lead researchers showing they manipulated data...

Try to watch this whole video. You will emerge better educated in under 8 minutes:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5IdFVTTq8hc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5IdFVTTq8hc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

 

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from Gabfly1:

Try to watch this whole video. You will emerge better educated in under 8 minutes:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5IdFVTTq8hc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5IdFVTTq8hc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

How nice of you to post something which makes my point. There were lots and lots of question marks and we don't know in that vid. It's not the fact that there is some SLIGHT warming going on, there is. What's in question is the why of it all. That's where the leftist spin machine comes in play. They act as if people are in denial about the SLIGHT warming trend we happen to be in, when the reality is that's not the issue at all. WHY are we in this SLIGHT warming trend is the issue. For all of your man made evidence, there is just as much evidence, and frankly better evidence, that friggin sun spots are the root cause. Shall we call up the Sun president and tell him to cease all that sun spot activity? Ooops! Can't do that, now can we? Doesn't quite fit the agenda, now does it? No, it must be man made, right here on earth, and of course the fault of the evil capitalists.
Here's a suggestion. If you're looking for someone to believe this conjecture of yours, you might want to get another pitch man. Al Gore has all the credibility of a carnival barker.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

How nice of you to post something which makes my point...

Martingale?

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

How nice of you to post something which makes my point. There were lots and lots of question marks and we don't know in that vid. It's not the fact that there is some SLIGHT warming going on, there is.

You're right about there being question marks about warming and cooling in the short term (ie. weather), however in the long term there are no question marks about the current trend in climate.

And "slight" is a relative word which all depends on whether it's your house that's being flooded out.

 

[drjekyllus]

Quote from bigdavediode:

You're right about there being question marks about warming and cooling in the short term (ie. weather), however in the long term there are no question marks about the current trend in climate.

And "slight" is a relative word which all depends on whether it's your house that's being flooded out.

What does trend prove? Nothing. It proves that the Earth's climate is not static. No one is arguing that the Earth's climate is static.

What we do know is data has been manipulated and dumped in order to bolster the case that the changes are man-made. If MMGW was such a slam-dunk case, why all the deceit?

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from drjekyllus:

...What we do know is data has been manipulated and dumped in order to bolster the case that the changes are man-made. If MMGW was such a slam-dunk case, why all the deceit?

Judging by your ignorant response, I surmise that you have not taken the 8 minutes or so to get yourself educated:

Quote from Gabfly1:

Try to watch this whole video. You will emerge better educated in under 8 minutes:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5IdFVTTq8hc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5IdFVTTq8hc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

In your defense, learning is not for everyone.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from bigdavediode:

You're right about there being question marks about warming and cooling in the short term (ie. weather), however in the long term there are no question marks about the current trend in climate.

And "slight" is a relative word which all depends on whether it's your house that's being flooded out.

And "long term" is relative as well. I wouldn't call 150 years of data exactly long term in the overall scheme of things. It's like your using a 150 year chart when 150,000 would be more appropriate, and some would argue that 150,000,000 would be better yet, and still others would say we need a multi billion year chart to determine a meaningful trend. I'd just like to see a wee bit more data before we bet the farm.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

...I'd just like to see a wee bit more data before we bet the farm.

No you wouldn't. You're not interested in parting with your mushroom farm. However much evidence may be presented to you, it will invariably fall just short of enough.