Oh, I have looked... its not supported by any evidence. Say whatever you like about Gore but i don't see any fraud on his part. Just capitalism. He is very american in that way.

Now the coal lobby, well that is confirmed and verified and backed up by sources. As it is for Exxon and all the groups they fund.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

Right now there is money to be made by saying that the Sky is falling, ie Global Warming.
It is more about control than any thing else.

Is the Planet Changing? YES.
Is Man the ONLY Reason? NO.

Ice comes and goes, always has and always will.

Why is it that when any one questions the Global warming idea they are thrown out with the bath water?

Which would kill people faster? Global Warming or Global Cooling?

But back to the question about the emails that the hack found... what happens if they are true?

__________________
Government Should Fear the People That Voted Them In!!

New Government=one that the President likes a GOP idea but then the Staff puts that Idea in a very DEEP HOLE.

Read HR143 get enlightment.

The Revolution Will not be Televised

Not all deniers make things up. For example, saying CO2 follows temperature in ice core data is true. It's also true that the sun plays a role. For example, I posted two very recent peer reviewed studies (don't know how Mann et al let them get published ) here that show a strong link between solar cycles, ocean cycles, and global temperatures. And two of those emails make reference to warmer times because of the coming sunspot cycle (and el-nino).



Fair enough.

Kramer

__________________
“We should never be more vigilant than at the moment a new dogma is being installed. … The left has been swept along, entranced by the allure of weather as revolutionary agent, naïvely conceiving of global warming as a crisis that will force radical social changes on capitalism.”

TheNation, June 7, 2007

You mean if a few scientist and/or researchers in one climate center were found to have altered some of the immense amounts of data present would it invalidate all the other scientist and all the other data? Absolutely not. You go back and correct the faulty data.

Here is what the deniers don't get. A couple of emails, and a few points of data, in the enormous collection of supporting data and research doesn't invalidate all the other results. It also doesn't mean that there is some immense conspiracy. It amazes me how much effort some people put into finding conspiracies to rail against.

__________________

I find it funny you want to jump on one little thing that did in fact happen, using propaganda (which that pdf is) as if I was on "the other side" of the global warming argument and all you can decide to do is call it a fucked up idea...notice how easy that is to come to emotionally?

Never mind I do think there is evidence for global warming just not "the world is going to end next year if we don't cripple our economy now" global warming.

plain and simple, scientists did propose there was a coming ice age previous to public awareness and concern for global warming. Was it all scientists? Certainly not, never claimed it was but anything that threatened your GW dogma just can't be left to stand.

And just How Much Data are they using to come to the Global Warming?
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000

how much?
How many to the power of ?

Remember Trig?
change one and what happens?

__________________
Government Should Fear the People That Voted Them In!!

New Government=one that the President likes a GOP idea but then the Staff puts that Idea in a very DEEP HOLE.

Read HR143 get enlightment.

The Revolution Will not be Televised

The global accumulation of atmospheric data alone is in the hundreds of Terabytes a day. Does that give you any idea about the amount of data that is being processed and has been processed to study global warming.

Unfortunately, its not trigonometry. It's calculus, probability and statistics. None of these maths rely on simple linear data.

__________________

Reams and reams of doctored data. Impressive.

"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."

from - Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’? – Telegraph Blogs

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher

So with ALL THAT information why is it that they Still can not get the weather forecast Right?

What is it that they are MISSING?

__________________
Government Should Fear the People That Voted Them In!!

New Government=one that the President likes a GOP idea but then the Staff puts that Idea in a very DEEP HOLE.

Read HR143 get enlightment.

The Revolution Will not be Televised

Out of how many emails. Out of how many scientist and researchers. Out of how much data.

__________________

I don't know where you live but the weather reports where I live tend to be pretty accurate.

__________________

Tend?

How many times do they get it right?

__________________
Government Should Fear the People That Voted Them In!!

New Government=one that the President likes a GOP idea but then the Staff puts that Idea in a very DEEP HOLE.

Read HR143 get enlightment.

The Revolution Will not be Televised

five days out ?

with radar anyone can get tomorrow close.

how many times have the gotten hurricane season predictions right ?

the Farmer's Almanac is more accurate.

__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

The problem is that they never acknowledge that CO2 also precedes temperature rises. And they never acknowledge that the CO2 is the required explanation for a deglaciation, and vice versa, a lack of CO2 is required for glaciation.

Yes the Sun plays a role, but they never ever acknowledge that the science indicates very strongly that radiative forcing from the sun does not explain the warming of the last 40 years or so. The movie the Great Global Warming Swindle is most famous for removing the years of data that diverges from solar forcing. More deliberate fraud and lies from the denialists.

Your comment about Mann is out of context. The Balunias and Soon paper was deeply flawed and never should have passed peer review. Six people resigned in protest from that journal over its publication. Why? The paper did not distinguish between regional and global temperature proxies and they based their conclusion on this. It should have been sent back to the authors for fixes, instead it was published. Researchers, including Mann, subsequently tried to reproduce their results and invalidated the Balunias and Soon conclusion. It was crap science that wasted everybody's time and it cheapened the peer review process.

http://web.archive.org/web/200707030...Forum20032.pdf

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

The point is that the argument "scientists predicted an Ice Age in the 70's" is not a true statement. A true statement would be "Scientists in the 70's were coming to a realization of the dangers of increased anthropogenic CO2 emissions".

Using the tired old "ice age" argument is just a canard.

The PDF i provided was not propaganda - it was a review of scientific publications meant to answer the bullshit allegations that scientists were predicting an ice age.

Who is saying that? All evidence and scientific publications shows that the most severe consequences of AGW are still decades off, and all investigations into the impact on the economy of mitigating these effects show quite clearly that the economic impact is pretty minimal. Contrast that to the damage done to the economy by not doing anything and its quite clear that spending some GDP to mitigate these effects is actually in everybody's best interest.

Combine that with the fact that carbon based fuels are a temporary subsidy to our economies anyway and it becomes clear that even without any such thing as anthropogenic global warming it remains in our best interest to phase out fossil fuels in the near term, particularly so that the economy does not suffer in the long term due to a delay in tackling the inevitable.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen