Global warming server was hacked. Global warming people are not happy that information, where discussions of data being changed so it looked like it supported global warming. This information was not intended to be made public on the Internet, even though it was on a secured part of a public University server.
There is much information. So I will only include a few details then give the link.
Statements from the supporters of global warming after the hack made their e-mails public:
"We are aware that information from a server used for research information
in one area of the university has been made available on public websites,"
the spokesman stated.
"Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently confirm
that all of this material is genuine." "This information has been obtained and published
without our permission and we took immediate action to remove the server in question from
operation." (they also canceled all passwords.
"We are undertaking a thorough internal investigation and we have involved
the police in this enquiry."
(It is apparent that the information was intended to remain hidden.)
Some of their additional comments, trying to explain some of the documents that were made public.
……People working constructively to improve joint publications; scientists who are friendly and agree on many of the big picture issues, disagreeing at times about details and engaging in ‘robust’ discussions; Scientists expressing frustration at the misrepresentation of their work in politicized arenas and complaining when media reports get it wrong; Scientists resenting the time they have to take out of their research to deal with over-hyped nonsense. None of this should be shocking……
Phil Jones in discussing the presentation of temperature reconstructions stated that "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) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."
TGIF asked Jones about the controversial email discussing "hiding the decline", and Jones explained what he was trying to say….
The following link is what was posted on the Internet. It is long but still only part of what the hack pulled out of the Universities server.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/b ... -released/
Global Warming or Cooling?
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Play 'Borduria after the war' and the answer is yours ...
There's no business like RT business ...
- nedfumpkin
- CEO
- Posts: 2163
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:16 pm
- Location: Hamilton - Canada
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Here's a picture from a recent protest about global warming....thousands gathered in support of Al Gore....
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Goodness me! What can we do?
There's no business like RT business ...
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
It is snowing on the global Warming people today.
I would have expected that area of the world to normally get snow.
The comment was made that snow is not normal during this time of the year???
I would have expected that area of the world to normally get snow.
The comment was made that snow is not normal during this time of the year???
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
For some reason, the answer appears to be "Send more money to develop the developing world." How this is suppose to curb pollution, I do not know. Unless we are talking about getting rid of all that dirty blood money in my wallet, that does not exist.Sugus wrote:Goodness me! What can we do?
Do not worry, it is only a momentary bout with the Albino Effect. I am sure you remember that. Based on that line, Ned was suppose to be covered in glaciers buy now. Then come to think of it, you were suppose to be also. Glad I never built that Ski resort in the mountains of Florida.Gwizz wrote:It is snowing on the global Warming people today.
I would have expected that area of the world to normally get snow.
The comment was made that snow is not normal during this time of the year???
By the way ned, Would that be a picture of the delegates to COP15?
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Ok, 2010 - let's look what we can do! You at your job and I in the same way.
There's no business like RT business ...
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Do about what? Dispel the global warming con?Sugus wrote:Ok, 2010 - let's look what we can do! You at your job and I in the same way.
Hawk
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
I'll try to simply sit at my desk and do really nothing! This way I do not at all produce any kind of heat ...
There's no business like RT business ...
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
The problem isn't doing anything. The problem is breathing. You exhale carbon dioxide.
Hawk
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
All animals exhale carbon dioxide.
All plants need carbon dioxide to live.
We can't have one without the other.
What we have are idiot profiteers trying to make a buck without thinking about consequences. If too many believe their lies and act on these lies, disastrous results are possible.
These global warming idiots must have been schooled under the new education programs that teach us to be good followers and not critical thinkers.
All plants need carbon dioxide to live.
We can't have one without the other.
What we have are idiot profiteers trying to make a buck without thinking about consequences. If too many believe their lies and act on these lies, disastrous results are possible.
These global warming idiots must have been schooled under the new education programs that teach us to be good followers and not critical thinkers.
- Beancounter
- Watchman
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:37 pm
- Location: New Hampshire
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
I always thought Gore was just riding the wave of environmental awareness (and profiting from it). But when I found out that he built a big house without any environment-friendly systems in it, I knew he didn't believe a word he was saying. Just a two-faced BSer.Gwizz wrote: What we have are idiot profiteers trying to make a buck without thinking about consequences. If too many believe their lies and act on these lies, disastrous results are possible.
These global warming idiots must have been schooled under the new education programs that teach us to be good followers and not critical thinkers.
In terms of environmentalist not having critical thinking skills... The same could be said for a lot of different groups and people out there who will always believe what they want to believe regardless of the evidence (or lack of evidence) available.
Here's a story I once heard.
A lab tech put a frog in a shallow pan of boiling water. the frog immediately jumped out.
The next day the tech put the same frog in a pan of cold water. He slowly increased the heat. Just a little a time over the course of the day. Oblivious to the small increases in temperature, the frog just sat there happily croaking away. Eventually the tech turned the heat to boiling and before the frog knew what was happening, he had been boiled to death.
In other words, just because you are not currently feeling the effects of something today, doesn't mean that nothing is happening. An obvious example would be smoking, but it can be applied to other things as well.
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Hawk wrote:The problem isn't doing anything. The problem is breathing. You exhale carbon dioxide.
Just for clarification purposes, I was being sarcastic.Gwizz wrote:All animals exhale carbon dioxide.
All plants need carbon dioxide to live.
We can't have one without the other.
Hawk
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Your sarcasm was correct, either way.
There has been talk about reducing the number of livestock world wide because they are a large polluter. Reduce the number of animals on the planet and plant production is also reduced.
This reduces our food supply, which I understand is in short supply world wide.
More people may starve to death, which further reduces the worlds population.
Mother nature has everything in a balance.
Reducing the worlds population is one of the goals of the New World Order.
Gore seems to violate all the rules that he says the average man must comply with.
Everything seems part of some master plan.
There has been talk about reducing the number of livestock world wide because they are a large polluter. Reduce the number of animals on the planet and plant production is also reduced.
This reduces our food supply, which I understand is in short supply world wide.
More people may starve to death, which further reduces the worlds population.
Mother nature has everything in a balance.
Reducing the worlds population is one of the goals of the New World Order.
Gore seems to violate all the rules that he says the average man must comply with.
Everything seems part of some master plan.
- Beancounter
- Watchman
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:37 pm
- Location: New Hampshire
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
Yes farm animals are large contributors to greenhouse gases.(Due to the methane gas in their feces). The earth was never ment to sustain that many cows/chickens/pigs to satisfy the diet of first world nations. Also, in the midwest/west US, the largest water table is depleting quickly primarily due to providing water for livestock (and keeping golf courses green, but that's another story)Gwizz wrote: Your sarcasm was correct, either way.
There has been talk about reducing the number of livestock world wide because they are a large polluter. Reduce the number of animals on the planet and plant production is also reduced.
This reduces our food supply, which I understand is in short supply world wide.
More people may starve to death, which further reduces the worlds population.
Mother nature has everything in a balance.
Reducing the worlds population is one of the goals of the New World Order.
Meat is not necessary for a healthy diet. (I've been a vegetarian for almost 20 years, and I'm not dead yet ) That is a falicy maintained by the corps that process meat. Also, tradition has a big hold on what people want to eat/believe they should eat.
In fact, if land was dedicated to growing crops vs. meat, more people around the world, not less could be fed.
IMO "the new world order" is just a scare tactic.
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
I believe that if you were to do a Google search on 'One World Government' you might find that it's a lot more than just a scare tactic.Beancounter wrote:IMO "the new world order" is just a scare tactic.
Of course that would oblige you to separate fact from fallacy - a daunting task at best.
Hawk
- Beancounter
- Watchman
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:37 pm
- Location: New Hampshire
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
One world gov't? Remember how long it took the Europeans to agree on a single currency? A single gov't would be a lot harder.Hawk wrote: I believe that if you were to do a Google search on 'One World Government' you might find that it's a lot more than just a scare tactic.
Of course that would oblige you to separate fact from fallacy - a daunting task at best.
Besides, we all know that the U.S. runs the world by default anyway
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
We may have at one time, but not anymore. This country is so far in debt it may never get out.Beancounter wrote:Besides, we all know that the U.S. runs the world by default anyway
He who controls the gold makes the rules. That's certainly not us anymore.
Hawk
Re: Global Warming or Cooling?
I'm not a 100% vegetarian; but getting closer.
I agree. If we plant more greenery we would not only be a healthier food, but we would have more oxygen to breath. I read some place that the percentage amount of atmospheric oxygen is slowly dropping each year. This is blamed on man for cutting down the Rain Forest.
On the grand scale of things:
If we succeed in reducing the world population of men and animals to equal the drop in oxygen, we should have enough Oxygen to go around. But if we increase the greenery we will eventually need more Co2 produced by the animals and not less, to keep the greenery healthy and provide us with food.
If environmentalist succeed in reducing the amount of atmospheric Co2, would that not starve some the greenery we now have, making it harder to grow more greenery?
It seems the balance is complicated. Maybe humans should stop trying to control Mother Nature as a means for making a profit.
Methane Gas:
Mother Nature stores a gigantic amount of methane at the bottom of the ocean.
Should the oceans ever heat up enough to release this methane, we definitely would have global warming on a very grand scale, should it ignite.
Mother Nature is in a marvelous balance. I'm often awed by the complexity if it.
I agree. If we plant more greenery we would not only be a healthier food, but we would have more oxygen to breath. I read some place that the percentage amount of atmospheric oxygen is slowly dropping each year. This is blamed on man for cutting down the Rain Forest.
On the grand scale of things:
If we succeed in reducing the world population of men and animals to equal the drop in oxygen, we should have enough Oxygen to go around. But if we increase the greenery we will eventually need more Co2 produced by the animals and not less, to keep the greenery healthy and provide us with food.
If environmentalist succeed in reducing the amount of atmospheric Co2, would that not starve some the greenery we now have, making it harder to grow more greenery?
It seems the balance is complicated. Maybe humans should stop trying to control Mother Nature as a means for making a profit.
Methane Gas:
Mother Nature stores a gigantic amount of methane at the bottom of the ocean.
Should the oceans ever heat up enough to release this methane, we definitely would have global warming on a very grand scale, should it ignite.
Mother Nature is in a marvelous balance. I'm often awed by the complexity if it.