More Climate Fraud Uncovered

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by endisnighe

 

Really puts the "context" to "Hide the decline" doesn't it?

It's funny all the e-mails were taken out of context, yet no scientific analysis of how the e-mails were taken out of context, just a bunch more of "trust me, we're scientist!".

You would think with them being scientist they would back up their points with actually science. Nope they are acting more like activist politicians.

For eternal funding sourcing from governments, the "scientists" created a parasitic "country" atop all the worlds countries. An exto-leach that that lays atop the world like the sky itself so you don't really notice or pay attention to it.

Either that or they are something far worse than socialists, NWO Rothchild conspirators, or the Nazi movement.

reply to post by OzWeatherman


expecting questions? Don't count on it, especially if you can interpret the data & have a logical explanation that doesn't include icebergs forming in Alice Springs!!!



( sorry, couldn't help meself! )

there suggesting introducing a worldwide tax on bank transactions....this is getting really too much....you get paid..you pay tax on getting your money..you pay your rent..you get taxed on paying...you buy a car..you get taxed on the car and on paying for it....and where does this tax go...to the IMF....the banks.....

stop using banks is the only way to show them we have had enough.

Originally posted by MessOnTheFED!
I sure do wish someone would let all these crooked politicians know that we are not morons and we know the whole GW is a total fraud.

At your service...

Huffington Post

Stephen Schneider harassed, verbally attacked

I'm tired hearing about all this allegedly fraud when it comes to climate changes.

While you are talking about these frauds VAST areas of the Amazonas is disappearing every day. Amazonas forest is often called the Earth's lungs. This forest eats enormous quantities of CO2.

The real problem here is people treating Earth like their own toilet, not some faked scientific datasets.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by DwaynetheSpecious]

As with the previous poster, I do agree that we are extraordinarily quiet when it comes to the actual destruction of habitats, by human beings. This is what we should all be screaming about, at the top of our lungs.

I also wanted to add that it is rather amusing, and very suspicious that the pro-global warming lobbyists, aren't here demanding that we remove this thread. Would it be because the data speaks for itself, and there is no way to defend it?

I am tired too of all those denying. I don't care about the data. All I see is glaciers here in Europe melting away, the same in china and elsewhere, the problems with the permafrost in the northern countries. Some people can no more live like their ancestors because the weather and temperatures have changed. Change is normal, but the rate is speeding up. And there are a lot of people, old people who can testify, they don't need a weather station.

Originally posted by looofo
I am tired too of all those denying. I don't care about the data. All I see is glaciers here in Europe melting away, the same in china and elsewhere, the problems with the permafrost in the northern countries. Some people can no more live like their ancestors because the weather and temperatures have changed. Change is normal, but the rate is speeding up. And there are a lot of people, old people who can testify, they don't need a weather station.

The glaciers aren't melting.


Greenland's aren't in any real threat either.




[edit on 11-12-2009 by mnemeth1]

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by looofo
I am tired too of all those denying. I don't care about the data. All I see is glaciers here in Europe melting away, the same in china and elsewhere, the problems with the permafrost in the northern countries. Some people can no more live like their ancestors because the weather and temperatures have changed. Change is normal, but the rate is speeding up. And there are a lot of people, old people who can testify, they don't need a weather station.

The glaciers aren't melting.


Greenland's aren't in any real threat either.




[edit on 11-12-2009 by mnemeth1]

and even if they are..theres nothing paying billions FOREVER to the world bank and the IMF will ever change about it....rockefeller said 20 years ago that they want a world government run by bankers....hes getting it...his plan is working...

Originally posted by DwaynetheSpecious
I'm tired hearing about all this allegedly fraud when it comes to climate changes.

While you are talking about these frauds VAST areas of the Amazonas is disappearing every day. Amazonas forest is often called the Earth's lungs. This forest eats enormous quantities of CO2.

The real problem here is people treating Earth like their own toilet, not some faked scientific datasets.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by DwaynetheSpecious]

I think you are confusing the issues. I think we all agree that the destruction of the rainforests & the pollution of the environment is a horrible thing.

But noone at Cop15 is addressing these issues.

there it's all about how many percentages of carbon has to be cut by whom & who has to pay for what.
My biggest beef with the whole Co2 farce is that it detracts attention from the REAL environmental issues, of which there are plenty.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by MrVertigo]

Originally posted by expat2368
People need to be prosecuted for this. There was no science involved in what they did, it was pure out and out fraud. They got so wrapped up in trying to "save the Earth" they threw any ethics they had out the window and cooked the numbers no matter what the data really told them.

The truth of the matter is what they did was ignore the fact that we are on a descent into a new ice age, courtesy of the Sun entering the now famous "Gore Minimum"

Maybe we could get them a nice hot jail someplace equatorial with no A/C and a lot of mosquitoes.

It's a clear case of fraud and collusion.
Throw them in prison.
Where will Al Gore hide now?

Originally posted by mnemeth1

The glaciers aren't melting.

It is not what people living next to them say.

Grosser Aletschgletscher 1900-2004

Originally posted by looofo

Originally posted by mnemeth1

The glaciers aren't melting.

It is not what people living next to them say.

Grosser Aletschgletscher 1900-2004

Looks like some are retreating and some are expanding to me.

Therefore we must implement a global 2% tax on GDP paid to the private unelected IMF World bank in order to save ourselves from cow farts.

We must also severely restrict the industrialization of the 3rd world and keep them impoverished for all time. - before we kill them through starvation due to putting all our grain into our gas tanks.



[edit on 11-12-2009 by mnemeth1]

Originally posted by dampnickers
I also wanted to add that it is rather amusing, and very suspicious that the pro-global warming lobbyists, aren't here demanding that we remove this thread. Would it be because the data speaks for itself, and there is no way to defend it?

Nope. We're not answering because you are boring. You don't understand the science at the most basic level, and if you did, you would distort it to suit your pre-conceptions.

What's the point "debating" with you? It's like debating with a neo-Christian.

reply to post by mnemeth1



Wow if this is true and can be demonstrated to happen in other places, then it's a pretty tight case that a "fix" is in to manipulate data to achieve a desired result.

reply to post by spinkyboo


I think Copenhagen was a done deal before it started. The NWO is here, baby and we should be- I think anyway- turning inward right now. Liberty doesn't come from a piece of paper no matter the language on its face. I sincerely hope that all my fellow ATSers are remain safe and near loving families. ;o)

shoot, trying to add this fun song

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 12/11/2009 by libertarianlady]

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by fleabit
Look, regardless of data...

WHAT? Are you actually saying that we should put aside data, to make a scientific point? How can you say "regardless of data" then say we are the ones that are guessing? Get real!

Other then keeping the politicians paid and fat why are we even attempting to solve a problem that may or may not even exist. Its not that the earth isnt our mother not what i mean. Its just i have zero faith that even if these supposed world leaders find the cause it would take such mass coordination by all countries that its proly not resonable to think it would be anything short of a miracle to reverse the situation. I dunno kind of a quagmire. We cant do nothing and allow the earth to die but we are also not able to work together towards a common goal without conflict and self obsorbed governments trying to project their agenda on to the climate emergency our planet may be heading towards. It is all over the media the climate summit but are we really making any progress at all. Short of turning all power stations, factorys and cars off how could we ever reverse a situation that was caused over hundreds of years in just a few years if we even have that much time work with. Its ashame we waited till the 11th hour now it may just be too late.
P.S. Is anyone else sick of hearing about Al gore?

Two pages ranting about scientific fraud with a graph that few people understand presented as truth...

A poster on page one explains that they literally worked at the very temperature station in Australia that was cited in the graph, recording the actual temperatures used in the graph and asks if there are any questions!!

And...crickets...silence...not one question for him...Just continued railing on about how scientists are hoaxing us...

Agenda much folks? Get to the bottom of it, rather than simply consume what someone tells you because it fit's your opinion/worldview/politics etc.

Think.

Just an idea.

Weather Or Not

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Anyone want any other information on Darwin Met Office, let me know, I was there for 3 and a half years

Excellent! Maybe you can help resolve some of the questions I have:

1. Is the data presented by the OP correct?

2. Is there any reason to make significant upward adjustments to the raw data over time?

3. Is there anything incorrect about the data, analysis or conclusions in the OP?

Any information you can offer would be greatly appreciated.