IPCC Scientists Caught Producing False Data To Push Global Warming

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by melatonin

 

You may have outlined the timelines, but I haven't seen any links to sources - let alone a source more credible than the telegraph.

And so the dance begins

Sorry, I thought you knew where to find Watts' blog and RealClimate...

Mardi Gras at Watts' Place!

I had to act like on online dating agency, and so I matched you up with your optimal partner blog.

reply to post by melatonin


I do know where it is - I just wanted you to link it for other readers so that they can see you are comparing a blog with a well respected news source.

A blog that addresses a particular time line but nothing else.

In other words, a cop out.

Originally posted by budski
I do know where it is - I just wanted you to link it for other readers so that they can see you are comparing a blog with a well respected news source.

A blog that addresses a particular time line but nothing else.

In other words, a cop out.

Watt! Watt! Watt!

It was people on the Watt blog who found and pointed out the problem, and Gavin Schmidt at Realclimate works at GISS with Hansen.

I see 'Watt' you meant by the dancing begins. But you have two left feet and poor timing.

Have fun.

(p.s. the Telegraph is not a very respectable paper on this issue, being the home of Monckton, Bob Carter, and a whole canard of deniers).

[edit on 17-11-2008 by melatonin]

reply to post by melatonin


I see.

So your perception of how good a source is depends on whether or not they say what you want to hear.

A lot more suddenly makes sense

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by melatonin

 

I see.

So your perception of how good a source is depends on whether or not they say what you want to hear.

A lot more suddenly makes sense

Oh jeez. The daily Telegraph publishes all sorts of tripe on this issue. It's not about what I want to hear, it's about journalistic integrity. They haz none on this issue.

Anthony Watt is no friend of the people at GISS. Yet both Gavin Schmidt and Watt have no major issues on what happened. They were both close to the issue. If Watt was unhappy, he would certainly make an issue of any supposed GISS lies.

See ya latte.

reply to post by melatonin

I would beg to differ, and stand by my assertion.

One mans tripe is another mans tasty treat.

If you have real, substantial evidence that they are lying, then by all means post it.

Other than that, it's all just hot cyber air.



[edit on 17/11/2008 by budski]

Originally posted by budski
I would beg to differ, and stand by my assertion.

One mans tripe is another mans tasty treat.

If you have real, substantial evidence that they are lying, then by all means post it.

Other than that, it's all just hot cyber air.

Budski, I don't need to. You see, it's your claim. All you have is a couple of articles from the same source making an unsupported claim. When you have evidence that NASA made such a statement after notice of the issue, which should be easy enough - they have a big website with news releases - then we'll have something to discuss.

I'm not even saying they are lying. I'm would say they appear to be mistaken. Don't project your methods.

At this point. We have two direct sources. One from inside NASA. Another who were involved in discovering and raising the issue. Both are satisfied that at around 7pm, GISS were informed. But the scientists had gone home. The very next morning at around 8am, the scientists removed the data. Again, if NASA GISS had made a barefaced lie, it would be being paraded around the blogosphere like a head on stick and victory cheered.

So, you suggest some midnight NASA phantom between 7pm and 8am released a lie suggesting the unexpected data was caused by a hotspot. A point which no-one directly involved (Watt, McIntyre, or Schmidt) mention, but the Daily Telegraph opinion article does without any evidence or source.

OK.

Perhaps the Telegraph is messing up their whines. Not for me to work out. It's not the only BS claim in the article (e.g., GISS made no announcements that October was warmest etc).

www.giss.nasa.gov...

reply to post by melatonin

Pretty easy to pull the release andmake like it never happened.

LikeI've said before, wouldn't be the first time.

Despite our little meander away from the main topic, the FACT remains that they got it wrong AGAIN, and if they hadn't been called on it, would have run with this.

How long did it take them to admit their mistakes last time?

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by melatonin

 

Pretty easy to pull the release andmake like it never happened.

LikeI've said before, wouldn't be the first time.

So we move to other hidden actions of hidden actors and subterfuge.

'Those nasty, nasty scientists might have removed something I have no evidence actually existed to hide some big conspiracy about which I have no evidence'

Despite our little meander away from the main topic, the FACT remains that they got it wrong AGAIN, and if they hadn't been called on it, would have run with this.

How long did it take them to admit their mistakes last time?

For the US data? Didn't take that long. McIntyre reported it, not long after it was corrected. The mistake went unnoticed for a few years, but that doesn't suggest dishonesty. I would hate to see the world like you, do you fear scary monsters under ya bed?

Have you ever thought of trying to view people with a little less suspicion? Perhaps you should keep claims of dishonesty to when it can at least be justified. People do make mistakes. They happen all the time.

I love this debate. I thought it would happen with GM embryo type stuff. Now either,

1. The 'scientists' made a genuine error in month, or
2. They deliberately lied.

This leads us to 'scientists.'

1. They were sincerely scientists.
2. They were paid by someone to lie in the name of science.

Science faces peril everywhere and it is not just a volcano blowing up in your face, but religious oil baron controlled extremism is not the way forward either.

statistics can go this way or that way depending on which side of the coin is paying for them but the fact of the matter is if you want evidence of global warming just look at the enviroments around us coral bleeching rise in ocean tempreatures, increase in marine jelly balls (sounds funny but google it)

nature is telling us something is wrong,maybe humans arnt soley responsible but i doubt we have helped the situation, however we are the only creatures on this planet able to intervene and if not reverse the problem then to at least slow it down.

reply to post by budski


Great post, star & flagged.

This is the new scam for the 21st century. There is nothing wrong with reducing out footprint on this planet. Just being aware of our impact goes along way, but when data is being falsified to justify government investment into this new industry and to scare people into this sense of impending doom is wrong. Its such a PC topic that even questioning data gets you labeled a crazy....

I think anyone involved in lying about this information should lose thier jobs and possibly face some kind of charges.

When it comes to the environment I believe people and business can get big results by doing very little. We don't have to all switch to driving hybrids tommorow. ( The toyota prius has actually one of the worst impacts on the environment of all cars due to its construction process )

For Example:
From the Nov 08 Road & Track, pg 40.

"UPS redesigned its routes so drivers would make the minimum amount of left turns"

Now what kind of effect do you think little change has?

"As a result, the company trimmed 30 MILLION MILES off its deliveries in 2007 and saved the cost of 3 MILLION GALLONS of gas. It reduced truck emissions by 32,000 METRIC TONS equivalent to the emissions of 5300 passanger cars."

All that from just not turning left!

[edit on 18-11-2008 by drock905]

For what its worth Fox News is reporting this story.

I imagine the other news networks are probably reporting it also.

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by melatonin

Well, hello again mel. You do seem to like these Global Warming threads.

Yeah, I sort of got into it 20 years ago. Followed the issue ever since.

I guess then you were a big fan of the (human induced) Global Cooling that was all the rage back then? In fact the same 'humans are creating this disaster' proponents, were being wheeled out to tell us of our wrong doings in the name of Science. Grants were being given to ANY scientist or research mercenary that was happy to back this, WRONG claim. Then when that ‘theory’ was looking untenable all goes quiet for several years as the NWO elite start to steer the funding towards – Global warming. Having learnt from their mistakes they get a Global body of ‘well funded’ career scientists ( queue the IPCC) to hammer home the data, any data that will convince the sheeple, that once again mother earth is in danger from………………… us!

I’d have thought you could have connected the dots on this one?

reply to post by melatonin


Sorry, but it wasn't "swiftly corrected." Hansen and his lackies did nothing, and in fact continue to follow this data in their arguments. The error ws brought out by the same guys who pointed out the false claims that supported the "hockey stick" graph that everyone now acknowledges is false.

GISS and the IPCC have been given a "ticket to lie" that will not be voided until enough people with money at stake, me and you and a dog named Boo, step up and say something. MSM and the environment drones will never admit the facts.

reply to post by melatonin


Nope, I don't look for monsters under my bed - I do however have a deep mistrust of agencies which have government ties, have a vested interest and bias in what they are reporting, and have individuals on board who stand to make money from what they say.

I especially have a deep mistrust of anyone connected with the charlatan that is Al Gore.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me given his track record and his history of lies and manipulation.

We have a case where Al Gore has stated a theory as fact, and because of the massive amounts of money involved, various agencies and individuals are trying to make facts fit into a theory which is simply wrong.

Can you show me ANYTHING from AIT that is proven beyond doubt?

Because that's what these guys are saying - and it's simply not true.

An error? I'm sorry but to believe that without considering that the data was manipulated to support further funding sounds a little desperate to me, and perhaps a little naive. History is abound with both corporate and corporate scientific institutions manipulating the truth (lying) for the sake of money.

When you hear the word GLOBAL warming, GLOBAL terorism, GLOBAL financial crysis, GLOBAL change, be sure its a GLOBAL SCAM!!!!!! They made this false GLOBAL THREATS, so they can find a new GLOBAL SOLUTION to this GLOBAL CRYSIS, so then they find the answer and say, that we must work together GLOBALY and make a NEW WORLD ORDER.

Did you noticed how many times i repeated the word GLOBAL, thats what they are doing for washing your brains and to familiarize with thi world and to ACCEPT the new GLOBAL SOLUTON, the NEW GLOBAL WORLD ORDER. I think the same trick was used to make ellected BARAK OSAMA bin laden HUSSEIN sadam.

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by melatonin

 

I especially have a deep mistrust of anyone connected with the charlatan that is Al Gore.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me given his track record and his history of lies and manipulation.

We have a case where Al Gore has stated a theory as fact, and because of the massive amounts of money involved, various agencies and individuals are trying to make facts fit into a theory which is simply wrong.

IPCC scientists did not go: "Oh that Al Gore invented this global warming thing, lets go study it and make money!" Gore is just a spokesperson, not a scientist!

Now some people go and personify global warming to Al Gore. That is wrong. IPCC consists of hundreds of scientists from all over the world. They are the "real Al Gores".

....But I give you this:

Many of those scientists think about their careers. Global warming is a sexy research topic and easy to get grants. So to keep your job, it is easier to just agree with rest of the scientific community that global warming is real.

As a side note, IPCC (and other) reports have made me to believe GW is very real. Ofcourse everybody is entitled make their own mind after reading about this subject.

Guess we'll see in few decades what actually happens..

reply to post by budski


The global warming might be a bit of a FUD, but there is still the small
matter of extreem weather changes. Smoking one day and freezing the
next. I'm not that concerned the World temp has gone .1 deg, it's the
freaky extreem weather changes.