Comments on: ClimateGate

By: Peter

Peter — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:25:26 +0000

Climate change deniers represent this age’s anti-evolutionists. Not that they’re mutually exclusive. You couldn’t believe that climate change was a farce without the internet and all the non-expert wacko voices it gives an audience. If you think climate change is some sort of orchestrated conspiracy you should feel the same way about all science based advancements in this world. Plasma TVs, modern medicine, nuclear energy, modern chemistry (industry) and your quality of life. If you had the same skepticism of every other type of science that you do for climate change you would be living in a self imposed dark age. You are all a bunch of hypocrites.

By: David Ash

David Ash — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:05:03 +0000

I understand that “tricks” can mean technique and “real temps”can mean something innocuous (although I don’t think so) , but “hide the decline” means what it means. He saw that there was a decline and wanted to hide it. Not correct for it, but HIDE it. The language used throughout the emails is telling. While explanations for a phrase or one email can be explained, the whole tenor of the emails is to hide, obfuscate, lie, and intimidate. Looking at the whole thing, you must work very hard to explain away.

By: hANOVER fIST

hANOVER fIST — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:46:22 +0000

“Here is yet another example of the ignorant left; listening only to the propaganda.”

You ARE kidding, yes?

PROPAGANDA is what Mann, Jones, et. al. have released to us under the cover of climate research.

THE BITTER TRUTH is what you have received from McIntyre, McKitrick, Costella and the many scrupulous researchers who smelled a rat and called the scumbags out on their lies.

Deal with it – “Global Warming” is as real as the Tooth Fairy.

By: hANOVER fIST

hANOVER fIST — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:34:19 +0000

It’s back!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77PDVqC84VA

By: hANOVER fIST

hANOVER fIST — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:32:42 +0000

Why bother to give Mann any credit, when by his words and deeds he strangles himself?

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:10:29 +0000

Yes, they’re quite fond of that sort of thing.

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:24:56 +0000

FORTRAN like any other programming language is only as good as the algorithm and especially the data. Models are very subjective and not objective. They all have something called initial conditions which can be tweaked to get the outcome desired.

By: Hunter Campbell

Hunter Campbell — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:05:07 +0000

It looks like YOutube deleted Stuart Varney’s interview with Sen. Inhofe

By: Rick Price

Rick Price — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:41:58 +0000

I can understand poking and prodding (manipulating) the data. These guys aren’t the first scientists to be aware that their funding and reputations depend on being right. What strikes me is that when challenged, they stopped acting like scientists and started acting like politicians. Read the emails… Deny, parse, mislead, intimidate, discredit, lie and cover up. It’s right out of the political dirty tricks handbook. That’s not the behavior of scientists. Mann et. al. have lost objectivity and their results can’t be trusted.

By: Dan McGrath

Dan McGrath — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:20:53 +0000

That’s a lot of words to say absolutely nothing pertinent to the situation.

The tree ring data you call “highly problematic” is the whole point! The paleoclimate model that’s used to “prove” that it’s warmer than ever before is based on that “highly problematic” tree ring data. Michael Mann’s hockey stick chart is based on it, until the data didn’t agree with what he was trying to say, or OBSERVABLE REALITY (actual measured temps).

Nobody suggsested that the climate models are wrong because they are written in FORTRAN. What matters is what the FORTRAN code DOES, with subroutines called “Apply a very artificial correction” and the like. Inputting random strings of numbers into the program will 9 times in 10 produce a hockey-stick result.

Try again.