Media Ignores Michael Mann’s Court Loss — It Doesn’t Fit The Warmist Agenda

originally posted by: TritonTaranis

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: TritonTaranis

Your data point would qualify under anecdotal data and not consensus.

No it would qualify as bigger picture which shows Blatantly obvious warning cycles none of which man or Co2 we’re responsible LINK

Yours would qualify as hugely debatable, highly questionable & provenly fudged

Co2 is no more of a greenhouse gas as water vapour you lot are acting as if it’s methane 😂

An interesting paragraph from your source, I thought was worth sharing here. It adds credence to the interpretation of ice-the core data.

This method provides detailed records of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide going back over 650,000 years[6]. Ice core records globally agree on these levels, and they match instrumented measurements from the 1950s onwards, confirming their reliability. Carbon dioxide measurements from older ice in Greenland is less reliable, as meltwater layers have elevated carbon dioxide (CO2 is highly soluble in water). Older records of carbon dioxide are therefore best taken from Antarctic ice cores.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: TritonTaranis

Just making sure you understand that a libel case has nothing to do with science.

I can’t believe you’d say that while ignoring the man refuses to release the data he used

Is this not a huge problem for you?

a reply to: Krakatoa

Ah , What are you , some Kind of Lord Monckton ? Ah , Oh Wait ..........

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Krakatoa

Ah , What are you , some Kind of Lord Monckton ? Ah , Oh Wait ..........

Again, another deflector. That has nothing to do with the topic of the thread does it? My point being the falsifying of data, or the refusal to produce said data or methods that allow peer review and free and open replication of the result.

THAT is science.

Scare tactics and hyperbole is NOT science.

a reply to: dfnj2015

 So all that matters to scientists is their reputations. So most scientist would never dare to lie about data.

If all that matters to a scientist is his/her reputation, then lying about data is more likely rather than less likely. Conformity is driven by a need to secure funding. Everyone who has ever tried to break the mould, so to speak, -- any mould -- has had their reputation drug through the mud, and their reputation (and funding) suffers for it.

originally posted by: TritonTaranis

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: TritonTaranis

Just making sure you understand that a libel case has nothing to do with science.

I can’t believe you’d say that while ignoring the man refuses to release the data he used

Is this not a huge problem for you?

It is a dead horse. It has been debated on here ad nauseam. The OP hasn't added anything to the debate.

Title of the OP

Media Ignores Michael Mann’s Court Loss — It Doesn’t Fit The Warmist Agenda

The media ignored it because it is a libel case.

a reply to: dfnj2015

You're still deflecting.
A key artifact in the AGW hoax is fraudulent.
That would cause even an idiot to stop and think some more.

There's big a lot talk by science deniers

Proof they are denying science rather than using it...
A "science" (bogus at that) less than 50 years old cannot compete with true science that has been around for thousand(s) of years.
You knew that.
I hope

a reply to: Grimpachi

Scopes lost his trial, therefore evolution must a hoax too.

It's sad that we live in an age where all the information we need is at our fingertips yet so many refuse to accept science yet will blindly accept a YouTube video as true if it aligns with their confirmation bias.

The past decade or two, especially in the US we have a sect of the population that has been conditioned to reject anything that is considered 'liberal'. Man-made climate change is one of those 'liberal' issues.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

But again, I must ask you. Why do you care? What difference does it make?

now I ask you, why do you care? You already stated it doesn't matter, yet you rail on and on. Why?

a reply to: dfnj2015

m still just amazed why you think scientists are connected to "asinine ideology that isn't even about climate change.. it's about redistribution of wealth." Wow! That's amazing. I don't think the scientist care much about public policies

UN

Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of UNFCCC, warns that the fight against climate change is a process and that the necessary transformation of the world economy will not be decided at one conference or in one agreement.

Canada is very much in on the UN Agenda 2030 bandwagon. We even donated 2.65 billion dollars to the Green Climate Slush fund. Money that goes to third world countries under the guise of environmentalism
Scientist will write for whom ever is paying them Even JAMA AMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association is looking for articles that only corroborate this view.

JAMA Network Open is particularly interested in examining how climate change affects people most susceptible to environmental degradation: people at the extremes of age, those with chronic illness, those performing physical work in the heat, and those living with homelessness, poverty, food insecurity, and discrimination.

Notice they don't mention far more die of the cold due to fuel poverty. Climate changes causes discrimination? You have to be inventive to cram in all the social policies of Agenda 2030

a reply to: dfnj2015

What does that have to do with refusing to make data public so it can be reviewed. THAT is science.

well Gosh, I thought scientists worked for free?


Don't Climate change scientists do this work for the betterment of Gaia? 🌎🌏🗺


I thought this was for the children?? 😲👶👰

I went to one of the links and looked around on the website 💻

talk about facist, I was seriously stunnned reading some of the exchanges.

and that was the staff. 👩‍🎓👩‍🎓👩‍🎓

it was scary, 🎵do this don't do that, can't you read the sign..🎵 see it's not new, thats a song from the 60's

I remember in the 70's we had hippie tree huggers (while nixon got impeached for real crimes) 🕵️‍♀️🕵️‍♀️🕵️‍♀️


now we have yuppy climate changers making millions 👨‍🏫👩‍🏫👨‍🏫👩‍🏫

and the song remains the same

🎶🎵🎼 .. "thank you lord for thinking bout me, I'm alive and doing fine"...🎼🎵🎶

a reply to: Krakatoa

"THAT is science. "


Fair Enough . So where is the Undisputed Scientific " DATA " to Support such a Claim > ? Fact is , there Is NONE . Global Warming is a " Theory " , and like Ahassholes , Everyone Has one Mate .......

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

What does that have to do with refusing to make data public so it can be reviewed.

Why would the data be required for a libel case? Do you have the transcripts? Did the judge ask for it?

In any case:
www.meteo.psu.edu...

a reply to: Phage

Checks and Balances . Everyone on the Same Page Concerning what has been Verified and Recorded . 8 Billion Humans on Planet Earth All Can't be Right or Wrong about ANYTHING . Consensus Of Opinion then Rules .......

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Fine.
Please review the data and code and offer your criticism. I'll wait.

a reply to: fernalley

Notice they don't mention far more die of the cold due to fuel poverty.

So you want the Journal of the American Medical Association to write articles promoting Socialism?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Fine.
Please review the data and code and offer your criticism. I'll wait.

That's OK , I will just Wait for the Released "Findings " of EXPERT Independent Scientists Around the World Before I Commit to Any Personal " Belief " in said " Theories " Sir /Madam/ Whatever ...

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I figured as much.