SteelW0LF comments

The Huff n Puff post?

Realy?

You're serious arnt you?

I'm sorry, I didnt see your sign......

I'll close my time here: I go to different websites trying to spread the word on this scandal.

Closing Remarks: All climate data should now be subject to review. Not just review from a closed group. Much of the data out there now is questionable at best. Through hadley (Mann) and Jones, all data supplied by NASA, NOAA, and GISS is suspect to be fraudulent. It may not be fraudulent, but being as Jones is the go to man for the data from NASA, NOAA, and GISS....it needs to be looked at.

Even if it is proven to be faked:

-We still need to work on polution. Just because MMGW might not be real, does not mean that we as a species have the right to spew trash and garbage everywhere.

-We as a species still need to look to alternative forms of energy. Not because of some climate changing disaster, but because clenliness and efficiency is human nature. People are always looking for better, cheaper, and cleaner ways of doing things. AGW being fake wont change the fact that we need cleaner energy. Clean energy is a noble goal, regardless of AGW or no AGW.

-The tearing down of the forests needs to be looked at. Not because of climate change. But because our natural resources need to be managed wisely. Natural resources should be used, but the using of those resources should be done in a manner that does not destroy the resource in the process.

Just because AGW may be fake, does not mean that protecting out envoronment and ecolodgy is fruitless. To the contrary, immagine how much could be accomplished in other environmental endeavors if all the money being thrown at AGW was directed at other environmental sciences that actually may accomlish somthing.

Final though befor I go, and this is my oppinion. Climate Change is real, the planet does change always and often. My oppinion is that its the man caused portion of climate change that is false. But just because its false does not give us a free ticket to pollute and tear everything appart.

You all have a great life and take care.

So far I see I'm the only one providing data, and a whole lot of minions flapping gums in response.

Lie: Its never been this hot befor. Truth: at least 3 times in the last 1000 years, its been hotter than it is now. One such period reached 5c hotter than now (which by todays scientists is cataclismic), another of these times that it was hotter than now, it stayed hotter than it is now for over 100 years.

Lie: The artic ocean has never been this clear of Ice. Truth: As recent as during WW2 the artic ocean was MORE clear than it is now. Also dureing the holocean, Roman, and Medieval ages it was more free from ice than today.... Shouldnt we try to warm things up, scince we've obviosly caused cooling and frozen the artic?

Lie: Hummans cause a large percentage of CO2. Truth: Counting natural CO2 emmisions, the contributions of the human race is less than 1%

Here's one website I found raw data people were looking at.

http://www.climatescience.org.nz/images/PDFs/global_warming_nz2.pdf

It proves 2 things:

This data scandal is being done by mare than just those that were hacked.

When the raw data is graphed, there is little, if any, actual temperature rise.

Azrael,

You can downplay the emails as out of context all you want.. If you think the emails are the smoking gun in the room, your wrong.

The emails may be able to be written off or cherry picked, even with as damning as they are. The real fire you should worry about is the contents of the code.

The actual comuter code, which CANNOT be taken "out of context" is showing that the data for the temperature records from about 1960 onwards have been tampered with. The subroutines in the code go in and modify the temp reading.

What is really Ironic...one of the guys I work with fed the climate model a bunch of random numbers for its input.....the graph came out the same way each time. No matter what numbers were fed to the code, a sharply increasing trend at the end of the century showed up.

If the emails are a smoking gun, the code is a B-52.... I'll wait for your response after you get get your talking points from DU or Huff n Puff Post.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/11/26/skewed-science.aspx

I see the new deniers are still out... deniers in "Mann Made Global Warming"

The above link is a good read. Its on a group of scientists who requested data from Hadley, and were denied. So they had to go out and compile their own data, and it doest match Hadley.

sf2k,

You're right, a re-submit with orriginal, untampered data would be the telling factor. the odd thing is when people have been requesting it using FOIA its repoted as "missing" for some ODD reason....

ok vdpphd_qwest_net,

If you know so much, what is the temperature of the Earth "supposed" to be?

It should be a simple question to answer.

The fact of the matter is that global temperatures go up and down, all on their own, without any input from man. The simple fact that Mars polar frozen CO2, which has been melting as a mirror to ours, should tell you that the temperature swings are not caused by conditions on this planet.

Funy that you mention volcanos causing cooling though, 2 or so volcanic eruptions spew out more CO2 then all the automobiles on the planet.....funny that things get colder. Maybe CO2 is not a great leading factor.

OK, here's some breaking news I just learned: but first lets get some facts out of the way.

1: We know Hadley's data set has been tampered with. 2: The code in those emails appears, after reverse engineering, to be used to modify data files used to store the earths temperature data. 3: Here's the kicker... James Hansen is pretty much the climate go to guy for NASA, GISS, and GISS. So basically, who is left with credible data that didnt get their data from Hadley, NASA, or GISS......there's not alot left.

;

; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!

;

yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]

valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-

0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$

2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor

if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’

; yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)

**This is an array of temperature 'adjustments', added to each element of the array by year. If that was not already explicitly clear by the "fudge factor" comment at the end of the array.

If you are a computer researcher, maybe you should be doing a little less defending and deflecting, and dig into the "code" yourself.

People are reverse engineering the code, the emails may have been juicy, the code is downright criminal.

sf2k,

I have not seen anyone say the climate does not change. Heck a simple history book proves that.

Its the rate of change, and whether its man-caused, thats the issue. And thats what the data manipulation at hadley dealt with. It artificially inflated the temerature data in order to cause the sharp increase. The funny thing is if you take the real, raw, temperature data, it does not show an increase in temperature. The increasing temperatures dont show up until after they run the temp data through their computers to "correct all the variations".

The fact of the matter is that there are times in the past where CO2 has been much higher than now, yet been colder....and where CO2 has been lower, and temps been higher. Greenland was once green, and Iceland was once frosty......long befor humans started impacting thing.

Also sf2k,

your comparisons dont equate. Hadley was THE storage site for the most of the planets climate data. Almost anyone researching the climate goes to Hadley for the data....finding out they cooked their numbers does alot more than "prove a handful of scientists were bad".

It invalidates the vast majority of climate research done in the last 15 years, because they all used the corrupted data, so even honest scientists got burned in this.

Sorry about the Code, the paste ate the return lines

;

; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!

;

yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]

valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-

0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$

2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor

if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’ ;

yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)

People comlaining this is "out of context".... Please explain the code, taken from the hacked data files, that is listed below, also list what it does.

If you dont know what the code does, the programe remark that appears first is like the title for the subroutine that follows. Follow this link for a further breakdown: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1447

; ; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!! ; yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)5.+1904] valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,- 0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$ 2.6,2.6,2.6]0.75 ; fudge factor if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’ ; yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)