'New release' of climate emails

For scientists these guys are real morons.

You would think they would at least encrypt there emails after climategate 1

Want to bet there will be a climate gate 3 when they get mad about this latest release.

reply to post by SirMike


This latest release simply confirms that nothing has changed. The e-mails go to show that what ever is causing climate change the entire issue is being manipulated by bought off so called professionals and used for political gain. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this. The very people who claim they care so much about the plants and the animals .Are the very same people who profit the most money while destroying everything and anything that gets in the way of their turning a profit.

Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by SirMike

 

This latest release simply confirms that nothing has changed. The e-mails go to show that what ever is causing climate change the entire issue is being manipulated by bought off so called professionals and used for political gain. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this. The very people who claim they care so much about the plants and the animals .Are the very same people who profit the most money while destroying everything and anything that gets in the way of their turning a profit.

And there in lies the bees sting

reply to post by bulla

Thank you dear sir, for your 100% correct synopsis, of what is going on, and I am pleased to find, that I am not alone
in my views, however, I am somewhat pleased that you made this assertion, for fear that if I did, same, according to my statistics, I would be accused, of being involved, in major debate over the issue

Originally posted by spyder550
We have 5 years before the point of no return -- because of deniers and general malaise nothing will change. I'm really glad I'm old. I'll be dead within 15 years.

someone who has obviously never looked at the data, models or science themselves.

Good luck living in your depressed existence. In 5, 10, 15 years time maybe you'll understand the folly of your current thinking.

reply to post by zvezdar


And what folly would that be?

Like I said I am old - I have watched the environment change for the better, I have watched peak oil arrive and I have always heard the people with there heads in the sand spouting BS. Your agenda seems to be political and this is science.

Simplistic but representative of the view of the vast majority of climate scientists -

www.skepticalscience.com...

It is my belief that its allot bigger than just climate change,and its going in one direction only, I see as an
Atomic chain reaction, that I also see it cannot be stopped, given this is based upon Physics, I fail to see how any climate scientist, via there computer modeling, can get any where near the truth, given the modeling premise is totally floored,to this if one uses Magnetic anomalies from NASA Magnetosphere satellite, for both on ground data correlated with Ionosphere Data then one gets results that fit the climate change precisely,

And further I see it is directly correlated to the spilling oil, and compounded by use of of dispersant, that then puts this Atomic chain reaction into motion

reply to post by rebellender


Sorry about the late response. I know I can be verbose to a fault.

All I mean to say is that from the point of view of those who want to use this climate problem as a business opportunity; more confusion and friction is better. In their play-book the argument is important because it keeps us from asking ... "And how is paying a tax going to make it better?"

Money won't fix the environment. And changing the habits of industrial commerce is apparently not an option. So the new "carbon" economy will be a great windfall to them... while WE pay the taxes which will be concealed as an "increase in the cost of producing things."

Meanwhile our "representatives" are happily subjected to lobbying and "Nobel" prizes for not solving the problem, but figuring out how to make it part of the economic picture... which inevitably involves the supranational banking cartel... and wall street... and the political theater.

Some people even think this is a political or ideological thing, rather than nature. So I rant and rave about it... and sometimes my meaning may seem muddled.

Mars, truth at last, music to my ears, these people have successfully pushed there agenda, where by The Australian Parliament only 2 days ago, have committed us to this fraudulent, totally unsubstantiated,with no Empirical evidence for carbon release,to a carbon TAX this is a Scientific fraud, so much so that doctor David Evens the Federal government senor climate adviser, for some 10 years, who after fully investigating carbon as an issue re climate

Told the Federal Government that there was no correlation between the two, but funny thing, he is no longer employed by the Federal Government, I guess you could say, the price paid for denying Ignorance
www.sciencespeak.com.au this is doctor Evens web, I hope I have it correct , but he will leave you in no doubts to this fraud

reply to post by SirMike


This is the reason I have entirely given up on ATS.

You guys will just NEVER, ever learn I guess...


You have the whole "conspiracy" ass-backwards, but won't even so much as try to consider the other viewpoint:


Climategate, just like all the other anti-AGW propaganda on the internet, has been repeatedly debunked, and everyone involved with it is ALWAYS, easily, traced back to BS right-wing think tanks and Big Oil sock puppets and shills.


There is absolutely NOTHING incriminating in those emails when you read them in their full context. Just a bunch of desperate attempts to spin and scandalize everything, since the deniers know they can't win the scientific battle, so they have invested millions waging a PR one instead. A battle which they're apparently winning, thanks to all the naive, easily impressed "conspiracy theorists" who don't actually understand the first thing about how REAL conspiracies work.



Someone around here please just try using their own brain and look at the WHOLE issue thoughtfully and critically - you know, like a TRUE skeptic would - and you will see an entirely different (much more lucid, much more coherent) picture about the entire "global warming conspiracy", and who's really doing all the dirty work here.


Deny Ignorance.


I frickin dare you.



Climategate 2: More ado about nothing. Again.

The Fake Scandal of Climategate

What do the 'Climategate' hacked CRU emails tell us?

Clearing up misconceptions regarding 'hide the decline'

"Climategate" exposed: Conservative media distort stolen emails in latest attack on global warming consensus

"ClimateGate" Scientists Cleared Yet Again, Story Ignored by Media Yet Again




The real scam artists summed in 40 min:


*** THE DENIAL MACHINE ***

Google Video Link

reply to post by mc_squared


I think this one refutes everything you say quite nicely:

Although I agree that GHGs are important in the 19th/20th century (especially
since the 1970s), if the weighting of solar forcing was stronger in the models,
surely this would diminish the significance of GHGs.
[...] it seems to me that by weighting the solar irradiance more strongly in the
models, then much of the 19th to mid 20th century warming can be explained from
the sun alone.

Go on with your denial, it's quite amusing.

reply to post by pianopraze


Do you understand what that little snippet of science-speak is even saying?

It's quite apparent to me that you don't.


Try reading a little more slowly:

Although I agree that GHGs are important in the 19th/20th century (especially
since the 1970s)

Yup. Par for the course right there.

if the weighting of solar forcing was stronger in the models,
surely this would diminish the significance of GHGs.
[...] it seems to me that by weighting the solar irradiance more strongly in the
models, then much of the 19th to mid 20th century warming can be explained from
the sun alone.

Sooo... where's the beef?


Solar forcing *does* explain much of the warming up to the mid 20th century - but lately (especially since the 1970's) that relationship completely breaks down.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0943566b2fef.gif[/atsimg]

This statement is completely in line with what climate scientists have been saying for years now.


See for yourself:

Climate model simulations that consider only natural solar variability and volcanic aerosols since 1750—omitting observed increases in greenhouse gases—are able to fit the observations of global temperatures only up until about 1950. After that point, the decadal trend in global surface warming cannot be explained without including the contribution of the greenhouse gases added by humans.

Source: NASA




So EXACTLY like I said - there is absolutely NOTHING damning or incriminating in those emails.

But the problem is there are a lot of scientifically illiterate/careless/lazy/naive people out there who don't even know how to read them properly, who are instead going to just knee-jerk react to anything that sounds even remotely scandalous to them - without bothering to ever try and understand what they actually say.

This is exactly what you just did, and this is exactly how oil companies and other deniers have turned relatively harmless internet commenters like yourself into an unwitting army of sock puppet cheerleaders for their disinformation campaign.




Your cock-sure response only served to prove my point - so thanks for that

reply to post by mc_squared


You are wasting your time. Most of the people here do not understand how to read scientific literature, nor will they take the time to read every e-mail in it's context. I used to be like them too and one day i read it for myself and figured out I was wrong. The need to believe always trumps the need to know.

Climate debate reminds me of the ants in my backyard.

I flood one colony and they attack another ant colony as if it were their fault. Completely oblivious to the scope of the system they are involved in.

This applies to both sides of the debate.

To me those emails clearly reveal a cadre of people who have gone beyond just doing science, beyond just finding out what is true - they have become activists working for a cause, willing to bend, fudge and hide data.

That is what happens when things become political - truth takes a back seat, because the 'cause' is the important moral, right thing to secure!

The Club of Rome bred a whole generation of environmental truebeliever footsoldiers to fulfill thier agenda - who of course went on to study such things as climatology.

still to make sure there will be no more 'embarassments' - they are going to hide all their emails from you.

CEI has learned of a UN plan recently put in place to hide official correspondence on non-governmental accounts, which correspondence a federal inspector general has already confirmed are subject to FOIA. This ‘cloud’ serves as a dead-drop of sorts for discussions by U.S. government employees over the next report being produced by the scandal-plagued IPCC, which is funded with millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. rankexploits.com...

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by mc_squared

 

You are wasting your time. Most of the people here do not understand how to read scientific literature, nor will they take the time to read every e-mail in it's context. I used to be like them too and one day i read it for myself and figured out I was wrong. The need to believe always trumps the need to know.

Haha tell me about it.

I have wasted my time for 3 years on here trying to educate the tinfoil brigade on what actual skepticism and critical thinking looks like when it comes to disseminating the climate change issue.

I think when you take the time to genuinely dissect the full body of information here - the oil funded denial movement becomes one of the most blatantly obvious conspiracies ever exposed. But yeah, most people on ATS absolutely abhor doing their own research, or thinking outside the box, or even considering the possibility there might be more than meets the eye here - all the things ATS is supposed to be about (sigh).

You are an extremely rare case then of someone having enough scruples and enough courage to truly open their eyes and wake up to the stone-cold truth. Props for that

the oil funded denial movement becomes one of the most blatantly obvious conspiracies ever exposed.

Because as anyone knows if you don't want to 'save the planet' - you must either have a very good argument, worth listening to - or be evil, and in the pay of the super evil oil companies.

In an article titled, "Analysing the ‘900 papers supporting climate scepticism’: 9 out of top 10 authors linked to ExxonMobil" from the environmental activist website The Carbon Brief, former Greenpeace "researcher" Christian Hunt failed to do basic research.
He made no attempt to contact the scientists he unjustly attacked and instead used biased and corrupt websites like DeSmogBlog to smear them as "linked to" [funded by] ExxonMobil. To get to the truth, I emailed the scientists mentioned in the article the following questions;..................................................www.populartechnology.net...

It wouldn't be so sad, but the really really big money all hinges on the CoR's agenda going through, disguised as AGW remedies - being pushed by all the usual suspects.

Which ought to tell anyone with an ounce of common sense that when Politicians are fairly tripping over themselves to spend vast amounts of money, in the face of a sceptical public to remedy a distant supposed threat, whilst the media back them to the hilt with nary a murmur.................................................that there is something extremely fishy going on................................that these 'remedies' are exactly what the whole progressive establishment had in mind in the first place.

reply to post by JohhnyBGood


This is likely going to be the last time I respond in this thread, because I already know all too well from experience what's going to happen here, and I can't be bothered playing this pointless pissing contest for the 5,000th time.


Instead of taking anything I'm saying into any actual consideration - you guys are all just going to start circling the wagons and scouring the internet for any biased links you can find that help you blindly defend your position.


I've pretty much seen them all, and am confident I can debunk them all, but you...heheh...

...you happened to pick a really fun one.


*cracks knuckles*


So first off let's get this straight - you're rebutting my claim that "skeptic" global warming scientists are a bunch of lying, paid-off puppets for the fossil fuel industry...by?..pointing me to a blog where someone went and emailed them and asked em if they are?

How cute.

But also - what a happy coincidence! Because did you know the person behind that particular blog is an ATS member?


Poptech.


I haven't seen him though since he went running from this thread with his tail between his legs.


That's because myself and a few other members dealt out some very uncomfortable facts he clearly couldn't handle very well.



For example: I pointed out in this post how one of the skeptic science heroes he was advocating, Dr. Richard Lindzen, had repeatedly taken money from the fossil fuel lobby to promote anti-AGW propaganda.

Read the post - I didn't just google some blog that said he did this, I went and dug up the propaganda myself. I followed a story from 1995 in Harper's Magazine (reprinted here) that said he was funded by Western Fuels Association, a $400 million consortium of Coal suppliers and electric utilities. I then found a video he participated in, subtly titled "The Greening of The Planet Earth", on youtube. You can see Lindzen shilling away in it for yourself right here.
Then I went ahead and hunted down the DVD on Amazon, and lo and behold - look who it says it's produced by:

Producers: Inc. Western Fuels Association

So how much more obvious do you want it to be?

Like I said above - the connections to fossil fuels within the denialist movement are absolutely blatant, for anyone who just takes the time to actually LOOK.

But Poptech couldn't do that. Ironically I proclaimed in that post he was acting like the "Say it ain't so, Joe" kid - and now, thanks to your link - I see that's exactly what he did: he emailed Richard Lindzen and asked him to say it ain't so.


So you can go ahead and make all the lame excuses you want. But the evidence speaks for itself: This has nothing to do with who does or doesn't want to 'save the planet'. These people are under the pay of oil companies, not because I disagree with their ideology, but because they're very clearly under the pay of oil companies.

It is what it is, and it even says so right there on frickin' amazon.com for crying out loud! But you go ahead and believe the deniers over your own lying eyes I guess...

Meanwhile, Back At The Topic...

Folks, this business of knocking other members for holding different opinions, whether subtle or overt, is the opposite of what this community stands for.

To the extent it's deliberate, it's trolling, and whether deliberate or not, it's off-topic and irrelevant, so let's knock that off.

The topic of this thread is very specific. Here it is again for anyone who didn't bother to read it before posting:

'New release' of climate emails

Let's please stay on topic, discuss it politely, whatever our views may be, and leave the tedious, insulting dogma duels for any of the other threads they have already corrupted, and preferably somewhere other than ATS.

If anyone disagrees with this request, feel free to send me a message and I'm happy to talk about it, but don't argue about it here.

Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.