Before I joined, I used to read this forum daily. There was at one point a really good debate going on about Global Warming. Well all of you who believe it's man made should look at what happened today...
The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them to an anonymous FTP server. Much of this information is damning, and shows the Centre involved in sharp practices.
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies you should start dumping them NOW.
The gist of what happened? The scientists on the "man made" global warming side have been screwing with the data and LYING TO THE WORLD.
OMG were all gonna die!!!!
If you actualyl went through and read that entire thing I feel sorry for you that you wasted that much time. Playing duck hunt would have been a much better use of your time.
Bad behaviour from a bunch of overzealous, ethically corrupt scientists doesn't completely invalidate the theory.
FTA:
Quote:
As embarrassing as the e-mails are, some of the documents are more embarrassing. They include a five-page PDF document titled The Rules of the Game, that appears to be a primer for propagating the AGW message to the average subject/resident of the United Kingdom. The document suggests that it is a precis of a longer document housed at the Web site of the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
This is HUGE. Some of the most celebrated scientists of the AWG model have LIED. That's a big deal.
From one of the emails...:
Quote:
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. Mike's series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
There's a lot of people who need to dine on some crow.
OMG were all gonna die!!!!
If you actualyl went through and read that entire thing I feel sorry for you that you wasted that much time. Playing duck hunt would have been a much better use of your time.
Where did it say that? If the TELEGRAPH in the UK is picking up the story, it's big news.
It still doesn't invalidate the theory. I mean, Leibnitz and Newton had some big kerfuffle over calculus - it didn't mean that one was right and one was wrong. There's contradictory data out there, and it's one of those things that science won't be able to definitively prove one way or the other in the near future.
Sadly this wouldn't surprise me. The funny thing is up to this point, its the skeptics who have been the sleazy ones, cherry-picking data and being manipulative. It is really too bad, because I really doubt this changes the science at all. It sounds like some people just got desperate because the skeptics are starting to win the pr campaign (they just released a poll in the UK showing that most people don't believe in agw).
But who really knows... there are a ton of shady people on the skeptics side. These e-mails could have been doctored. I'm sure they are at best taken out of context. And really, out of all those e-mails, if some of the worst ones include "I want to punch so and so in the face..."
You misunderstand. What I mean is you've given it permission to continue, when this thread is going the way of the Titanic on its maiden voyage.
I don't see a problem with it as long as it doesn't degrade into personal attacks or political discussion. Discussion about this issue on its own doesn't make it political, imo. If I snipped every thread that could potentially degrade into garbage, there wouldn't be a lot of threads on here.
I don't see a problem with it as long as it doesn't degrade into personal attacks or political discussion. Discussion about this issue on its own doesn't make it political, imo. If I snipped every thread that could potentially degrade into garbage, there wouldn't be a lot of threads on here.
It still doesn't invalidate the theory. I mean, Leibnitz and Newton had some big kerfuffle over calculus - it didn't mean that one was right and one was wrong. There's contradictory data out there, and it's one of those things that science won't be able to definitively prove one way or the other in the near future.
You're missing the point. The VERY scientists that have been ramming AWG global warming down our throats have been fudging their data. It's big because they've refused to disclose their data and now, it's been exposed (along with their emails), as a lie.
You're missing the point. The VERY scientists that have been ramming AWG global warming down our throats have been fudging their data. It's big because they've refused to disclose their data and now, it's been exposed (along with their emails), as a lie.
I wouldnt be surprised if both sides were fudging the data to be honest. Too much money at stake. Greed makes people compromise their principles. We all have our price.
I wouldnt be surprised if both sides were fudging the data to be honest. Too much money at stake. Greed makes people compromise their principles. We all have our price.
No denial here. It's just funny that all these prominent scientists (who also blackballed ANY scientists who disagreed with them) have now been exposed as FRAUDS.
