Soy Chicano Forums

Go Back   Soy Chicano Forums > Current Events > Environment and Environmental Issues

Environment and Environmental Issues Topics about our environment and environmental issues such as global warming, environmental racism, corporate corruption that is involved with the air/water/ground pollution and destruction of the world. A section devoted to this crucial topic that deserves to stand out where we can share our concerns and issues that affect Grand Mother Earth and Grand Father Sky.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-20-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Recently the dumb ass rats at CRU were hacked. Emails leaked, documents leaked, the whole shabang. I lol'd heartily at how you people clinged so dearly to , what is now proved to be a GIANT M
YTH. You know who you are.


Email exerpts:

Quote:
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
Quote:
Manipulation of evidence:
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.
Quote:
Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:
Next
time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
the crap out of him. Very tempted.


Goes to show how much of sheeple you guys are

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ja...lobal-warming/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11..._climate_hack/
__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #2  
Old 11-21-2009
firin ma laser's Avatar
firin ma laser firin ma laser is offline
Chicle
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 134
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Mulder and Scully are on it.
__________________
If ya think I'm ugly, look at you after this.
  #3  
Old 11-21-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Funny how soy's global warming fanatics haven't posted anything. Probably swallowing their tongues.
__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #4  
Old 11-21-2009
Bsanchez25's Avatar
Bsanchez25 Bsanchez25 is offline
Chicle
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 148
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

you just posted it about 9 hours ago...maybe theyre still sleeping from a night out?
  #5  
Old 11-21-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Niyorco is known to be on these forums at 3am
__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #6  
Old 11-21-2009
Bsanchez25's Avatar
Bsanchez25 Bsanchez25 is offline
Chicle
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 148
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio View Post
Niyorco is known to be on these forums at 3am
who?
  #7  
Old 11-21-2009
SJ's Avatar
SJ SJ is offline
Site Admin
Presidente
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: L.A.
Posts: 18,479
Send a message via Yahoo to SJ
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

interesting. I'll have to read some of that when I get the chance.

I am just glad they didn't misuse the term like many people here.
  #8  
Old 11-21-2009
tecpaocelotl's Avatar
tecpaocelotl tecpaocelotl is offline
The one and only
Presidente
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 27,690
Send a message via AIM to tecpaocelotl Send a message via MSN to tecpaocelotl Send a message via Yahoo to tecpaocelotl Send a message via Skype™ to tecpaocelotl
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsanchez25 View Post
you just posted it about 9 hours ago...maybe theyre still sleeping from a night out?
I just woke up just 6 hours ago. LOL.

I would like to see the real files. Will take me some time to do my own investigation to figure out whether it's real or not.
__________________
"Don't Demonstrate, Infiltrate! From within you can help those without." -Jorge Le Rand

"Tehan tohtocazqueh to tamatcayotl can cachi chicahuac." - David Vazquez
  #9  
Old 11-21-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Lmfao, whether it's real or not? They haven't denied anything. If it wad fake, they would have done so already.
__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #10  
Old 11-21-2009
tecpaocelotl's Avatar
tecpaocelotl tecpaocelotl is offline
The one and only
Presidente
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 27,690
Send a message via AIM to tecpaocelotl Send a message via MSN to tecpaocelotl Send a message via Yahoo to tecpaocelotl Send a message via Skype™ to tecpaocelotl
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio View Post
Lmfao, whether it's real or not? They haven't denied anything. If it wad fake, they would have done so already.
The reason why they haven't done so already is probably bc of security. There's a chance that the hackers actually went into a honeypot. Usually honeypot has fake data that would get the hacker's attention. If CRU said it was a fake right now, then the hackers were try to find a way to hack into their systems again. The CRU are probably doing security things to make sure they when they say it's fake or not that they will be ready for the next attack.
__________________
"Don't Demonstrate, Infiltrate! From within you can help those without." -Jorge Le Rand

"Tehan tohtocazqueh to tamatcayotl can cachi chicahuac." - David Vazquez
  #11  
Old 11-21-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Lucky for us, those smoking guns were actual emails.
__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #12  
Old 11-24-2009
Americano's Avatar
Americano Americano is offline
Gunner
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,285
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

we need some warming.... days are getting colder...
  #13  
Old 11-24-2009
LaChavela's Avatar
LaChavela LaChavela is offline
Veterano
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: where flowers grow
Posts: 11,464
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

whatever is happening.....its seems really weird
__________________
'Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand -chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO HOO, What a Ride'
  #14  
Old 11-24-2009
miguelito21's Avatar
miguelito21 miguelito21 is offline
Maestro
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Posts: 3,249
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio
what is now proved to be a GIANT MYTH.
And the proof is ... where exactly?


From your own link:

"Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently confirm that all of this material is genuine."

"It would be premature to comment further on the contents of the archive without establishing its authenticity. Some emails contain curious idioms and spelling - but perhaps that's what years of dendroclimatology do to the brain."

"These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists"


--------------------------------------


But anyway, a couple of articles commenting on the subject:

The CRU Hack

Nonetheless, these emails (a presumably careful selection of (possibly edited?) correspondence dating back to 1996 and as recently as Nov 12) are being widely circulated, and therefore require some comment. Some of them involve people here (and the archive includes the first RealClimate email we ever sent out to colleagues) and include discussions we’ve had with the CRU folk on topics related to the surface temperature record and some paleo-related issues, mainly to ensure that posting were accurate.

Since emails are normally intended to be private, people writing them are, shall we say, somewhat freer in expressing themselves than they would in a public statement. For instance, we are sure it comes as no shock to know that many scientists do not hold Steve McIntyre in high regard. Nor that a large group of them thought that the Soon and Baliunas (2003), Douglass et al (2008 ) or McClean et al (2009) papers were not very good (to say the least) and should not have been published. These sentiments have been made abundantly clear in the literature (though possibly less bluntly).

More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the hackers also being in on the plot though.

Instead, there is a peek into how scientists actually interact and the conflicts show that the community is a far cry from the monolith that is sometimes imagined. 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.

[...]

No doubt, instances of cherry-picked and poorly-worded “gotcha” phrases will be pulled out of context. One example is worth mentioning quickly. 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.” The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (199 Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction, and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to a “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem”–see e.g. the recent discussion in this paper) and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post 1960 part of their reconstruction, and so while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens.

The timing of this particular episode is probably not coincidental [note: the coming Copenhagen conference]. But if cherry-picked out-of-context phrases from stolen personal emails is the only response to the weight of the scientific evidence for the human influence on climate change, then there probably isn’t much to it.




The CRU hack: the context

The emails cover a 13 year period in which many things happened, and very few people are up to speed on some of the long-buried issues. So to save some time, I’ve pulled a few bits out of the comment thread that shed some light on some of the context which is missing in some of the discussion of various emails.

Trenberth: You need to read his recent paper on quantifying the current changes in the Earth’s energy budget to realise why he is concerned about our inability currently to track small year-to-year variations in the radiative fluxes.

Wigley: The concern with sea surface temperatures in the 1940s stems from the paper by Thompson et al (2007) which identified a spurious discontinuity in ocean temperatures. The impact of this has not yet been fully corrected for in the HadSST data set, but people still want to assess what impact it might have on any work that used the original data.

Climate Research and peer-review: You should read about the issues from the editors (Claire Goodess, Hans von Storch) who resigned because of a breakdown of the peer review process at that journal, that came to light with the particularly egregious (and well-publicised) paper by Soon and Baliunas (2003). The publisher’s assessment is here.




-----------------


What do the hacked CRU emails tell us?


Some of the emails must be embarrassing for the authors. One email responds in poor taste to the death of a well known skeptic. There's scathing discussion of skeptics such as Steve McIntyre and Roger Pielke, including imaginings of violence. However, the crucial question is whether these emails reveal that climate data has been falsified. The most quoted email is from Phil Jones in 1999 discussing paleo-data used to reconstruct past temperatures (emphasis mine):

"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."

What do the suggestive "tricks" and "hiding the decline" mean? Is this evidence of a nefarious climate conspiracy? "Mike's Nature trick" refers to the paper Global-scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries (Mann 1998 ), published in Nature by lead author Michael Mann. The "trick" is the technique of plotting recent instrumental data along with the reconstructed data. This places recent global warming trends in the context of temperature changes over longer time scales.

The "decline" refers to the "divergence problem". This is where tree ring proxies diverge from modern instrumental temperature records after 1960. The divergence problem is discussed as early as 1998, suggesting a change in the sensitivity of tree growth to temperature in recent decades (Briffa 1998). It is also examined more recently in Wilmking 2008 which explores techniques in eliminating the divergence problem. So when you look at Phil Jone's email in the context of the science discussed, it is not the schemings of a climate conspiracy but technical discussions of data handling techniques available in the peer reviewed literature.

In the skeptic blogosphere, there is a disproportionate preoccupation with one small aspect of climate science - proxy record reconstructions of past climate (or even worse, ad hominem attacks on the scientists who perform these proxy reconstructions). This serves to distract from the physical realities currently being observed. Humans are raising CO2 levels. We're observing an enhanced greenhouse effect. The planet is still accumulating heat. What are the consequences of our climate's energy imbalance? Sea levels rise is accelerating. Greenland ice loss is accelerating. Arctic ice loss is accelerating. Globally, glacier ice loss is accelerating. Antarctic ice loss is accelerating.

When you read through the many global warming skeptic arguments, a pattern emerges. Each skeptic argument misleads by focusing on one small piece of the puzzle while ignoring the broader picture. To focus on a few suggestive emails while ignoring the wealth of empirical evidence for manmade global warming is yet another repeat of this tactic.
__________________
"Advertising has us working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need." - Tyler Durden

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell (copied from the most honorable KA)
  #15  
Old 11-24-2009
Bsanchez25's Avatar
Bsanchez25 Bsanchez25 is offline
Chicle
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 148
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio View Post
Funny how soy's global warming fanatics haven't posted anything. Probably swallowing their tongues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by miguelito21 View Post
And the proof is ... where exactly?


From your own link:

"Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently confirm that all of this material is genuine."

"It would be premature to comment further on the contents of the archive without establishing its authenticity. Some emails contain curious idioms and spelling - but perhaps that's what years of dendroclimatology do to the brain."

"These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists"


--------------------------------------


But anyway, a couple of articles commenting on the subject:

The CRU Hack

Nonetheless, these emails (a presumably careful selection of (possibly edited?) correspondence dating back to 1996 and as recently as Nov 12) are being widely circulated, and therefore require some comment. Some of them involve people here (and the archive includes the first RealClimate email we ever sent out to colleagues) and include discussions we’ve had with the CRU folk on topics related to the surface temperature record and some paleo-related issues, mainly to ensure that posting were accurate.

Since emails are normally intended to be private, people writing them are, shall we say, somewhat freer in expressing themselves than they would in a public statement. For instance, we are sure it comes as no shock to know that many scientists do not hold Steve McIntyre in high regard. Nor that a large group of them thought that the Soon and Baliunas (2003), Douglass et al (2008 ) or McClean et al (2009) papers were not very good (to say the least) and should not have been published. These sentiments have been made abundantly clear in the literature (though possibly less bluntly).

More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the hackers also being in on the plot though.

Instead, there is a peek into how scientists actually interact and the conflicts show that the community is a far cry from the monolith that is sometimes imagined. 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.

[...]

No doubt, instances of cherry-picked and poorly-worded “gotcha” phrases will be pulled out of context. One example is worth mentioning quickly. 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.” The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (199 Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction, and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to a “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem”–see e.g. the recent discussion in this paper) and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post 1960 part of their reconstruction, and so while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens.

The timing of this particular episode is probably not coincidental [note: the coming Copenhagen conference]. But if cherry-picked out-of-context phrases from stolen personal emails is the only response to the weight of the scientific evidence for the human influence on climate change, then there probably isn’t much to it.




The CRU hack: the context

The emails cover a 13 year period in which many things happened, and very few people are up to speed on some of the long-buried issues. So to save some time, I’ve pulled a few bits out of the comment thread that shed some light on some of the context which is missing in some of the discussion of various emails.

Trenberth: You need to read his recent paper on quantifying the current changes in the Earth’s energy budget to realise why he is concerned about our inability currently to track small year-to-year variations in the radiative fluxes.

Wigley: The concern with sea surface temperatures in the 1940s stems from the paper by Thompson et al (2007) which identified a spurious discontinuity in ocean temperatures. The impact of this has not yet been fully corrected for in the HadSST data set, but people still want to assess what impact it might have on any work that used the original data.

Climate Research and peer-review: You should read about the issues from the editors (Claire Goodess, Hans von Storch) who resigned because of a breakdown of the peer review process at that journal, that came to light with the particularly egregious (and well-publicised) paper by Soon and Baliunas (2003). The publisher’s assessment is here.




-----------------


What do the hacked CRU emails tell us?


Some of the emails must be embarrassing for the authors. One email responds in poor taste to the death of a well known skeptic. There's scathing discussion of skeptics such as Steve McIntyre and Roger Pielke, including imaginings of violence. However, the crucial question is whether these emails reveal that climate data has been falsified. The most quoted email is from Phil Jones in 1999 discussing paleo-data used to reconstruct past temperatures (emphasis mine):

"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."

What do the suggestive "tricks" and "hiding the decline" mean? Is this evidence of a nefarious climate conspiracy? "Mike's Nature trick" refers to the paper Global-scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries (Mann 1998 ), published in Nature by lead author Michael Mann. The "trick" is the technique of plotting recent instrumental data along with the reconstructed data. This places recent global warming trends in the context of temperature changes over longer time scales.

The "decline" refers to the "divergence problem". This is where tree ring proxies diverge from modern instrumental temperature records after 1960. The divergence problem is discussed as early as 1998, suggesting a change in the sensitivity of tree growth to temperature in recent decades (Briffa 1998). It is also examined more recently in Wilmking 2008 which explores techniques in eliminating the divergence problem. So when you look at Phil Jone's email in the context of the science discussed, it is not the schemings of a climate conspiracy but technical discussions of data handling techniques available in the peer reviewed literature.

In the skeptic blogosphere, there is a disproportionate preoccupation with one small aspect of climate science - proxy record reconstructions of past climate (or even worse, ad hominem attacks on the scientists who perform these proxy reconstructions). This serves to distract from the physical realities currently being observed. Humans are raising CO2 levels. We're observing an enhanced greenhouse effect. The planet is still accumulating heat. What are the consequences of our climate's energy imbalance? Sea levels rise is accelerating. Greenland ice loss is accelerating. Arctic ice loss is accelerating. Globally, glacier ice loss is accelerating. Antarctic ice loss is accelerating.

When you read through the many global warming skeptic arguments, a pattern emerges. Each skeptic argument misleads by focusing on one small piece of the puzzle while ignoring the broader picture. To focus on a few suggestive emails while ignoring the wealth of empirical evidence for manmade global warming is yet another repeat of this tactic.
interesting
  #16  
Old 11-24-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

The proof is yet to be released, but it seems a bunch of people are going to hell in a hand basket in the climate change debate for manipulating and forging data
__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #17  
Old 11-24-2009
Bsanchez25's Avatar
Bsanchez25 Bsanchez25 is offline
Chicle
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 148
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

so if you dont have proff how can you say it's a lie?
  #18  
Old 11-24-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

The only things available to us are the emails that were exchanged. There are no specifics at this point.

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.
Good example. Regardless, these people are in deep shit.
__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #19  
Old 11-24-2009
Bsanchez25's Avatar
Bsanchez25 Bsanchez25 is offline
Chicle
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 148
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

regardless of what?
  #20  
Old 11-24-2009
Californio's Avatar
Californio Californio is offline
Director
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: California
Posts: 6,700
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

__________________
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” - Plato

" What is past and cannot be prevented should not be grieved for" - American Indian Proverb

nighter1 debunks his own post

nighter1 cannot answer my question - OWNED.

nighter1's display of stupidity: Calls Black Taco's 'Racist'
  #21  
Old 11-24-2009
Bsanchez25's Avatar
Bsanchez25 Bsanchez25 is offline
Chicle
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 148
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

regardless if you theres proof or not? lol if there's no proof then it's not a lie
  #22  
Old 11-25-2009
Nelio's Avatar
Nelio Nelio is offline
Presidente
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,152
Send a message via AIM to Nelio Send a message via Yahoo to Nelio
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

lol@ Bsanchez owning Californio without any effort at all.
__________________
“When history calls your name, how will you answer?"
  #23  
Old 11-25-2009
miguelito21's Avatar
miguelito21 miguelito21 is offline
Maestro
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Posts: 3,249
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio
what is now proved to be a GIANT MYTH
Quote:
Originally Posted by miguelito21
And the proof is ... where exactly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio
The proof is yet to be released
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsanchez25
so if you dont have proff how can you say it's a lie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio
Regardless, these people are in deep shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsanchez
regardless if you theres proof or not? lol if there's no proof then it's not a lie




---------------------


Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio
for manipulating and forging data
Any evidence of that?


As for your "good example", it's been commented already:


"No doubt, instances of cherry-picked and poorly-worded “gotcha” phrases will be pulled out of context. One example is worth mentioning quickly. 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.” The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (199 Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction, and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to a “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem”–see e.g. the recent discussion in this paper) and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post 1960 part of their reconstruction, and so while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens."


"if cherry-picked out-of-context phrases from stolen personal emails is the only response to the weight of the scientific evidence for the human influence on climate change, then there probably isn’t much to it"
__________________
"Advertising has us working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need." - Tyler Durden

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell (copied from the most honorable KA)
  #24  
Old 11-25-2009
Observer Observer is offline
Banned User
Presidente
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 17,072
Send a message via Yahoo to Observer
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Californio View Post
Funny how soy's global warming fanatics haven't posted anything. Probably swallowing their tongues.
funny how soy's schlong nose hasn't posted a response. Probably
still pulling his head out of his ass--his nose prolly stuck on something
  #25  
Old 11-25-2009
godisred's Avatar
godisred godisred is offline
Maestro
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ya'agna
Posts: 3,286
Default Re: CRU Hacked: Global Warming IS A LIE

Quote:
Originally Posted by tecpaocelotl View Post
The reason why they haven't done so already is probably bc of security. There's a chance that the hackers actually went into a honeypot. Usually honeypot has fake data that would get the hacker's attention. If CRU said it was a fake right now, then the hackers were try to find a way to hack into their systems again. The CRU are probably doing security things to make sure they when they say it's fake or not that they will be ready for the next attack.
They were hacked it is just a simple fact. If you would like a copy of the emails let me know.

Also I don't look at this as anything new, my belief is that science lies when it suits their needs.
__________________
We don\'t want power over white institutions; we want white institutions to disappear. That\'s revolution. ~Russell Means

The function of the law is not to provide justice or to preserve freedom. The function of the law is to keep those who hold power, in power. ~Gerry Spence
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:12 AM.


All the comments are property of their posters. Images, logo, content and design are © copyright by SoyChicano.com. All Rights Reserved.