Climate Gate 2.00 : Shocking Corruption Revealed in Emails!

page: 5
179
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


Sorry, but I'm not really sure that makes any sense at all.

1) There is plenty of actual evidence, sure there's some issues, but there's more evidence for global warming than things like gravity. And no, that's not hyperbole. The issues come in when you start to define how much is caused by humanity, is it all just part of natural cycles, can we affect changes by moderating our behaviour etc.

2) Getting humanity to switch to alternative fuels, or to moderate consumption isn't about top down control, it's about self-control. Humanity, esp in the West, has long had issues with self-destruction. Trying to find a way o avoid collapse through moderating our activity is simply one way to try and prevent collapse. Is that a "lie"...well... maybe, just maybe it's "environmental paranoia"; more akin to the Obama is a secret-Kenyan hysteria than to a top-down desire to control.

3) Finally, as far as "faith" is concerned, both sides are going on faith that their belief is correct. As I said in point one, there's a lot of evidence of actual change, but we have to decide how to interpret that evidence and what our belief is, regarding the evidence and how we should react to it, if at all. No one is free from that; not those on the left, or the right or the politically and socially agnostic.


Sorry, but you've missed the point of the debate entirely.

No one claims the climate is NOT changing.
No one claims that CO2 emissions have grown tremedously since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

The AGW debate is whether "the science is settled" that man is the greater cause of the observed changes.

The simple fact is that even Phil Jones' and the IPCC's best argument in favor of AGW is: "we don't know what else it could be, so it must be us."

This is the heart of the debate.

That makes their manipulation of data, refusal to disclose, destruction of information and outright lying a relevant, even vital, element of the final analysis.

If you do not understand this yet, you need to start over from the beginning.

jw


People claim ALL the time that climate change is not happening. FWIW. There's dozens of web sites dedicated to it and many ATSers state this all the time. So...

As for the "why issue," the post you're responding to says almost exactly what you're saying:

Why? What percentage is human? What percentage is something else? Can we do anything to stop/change it? Should we? What would work if we wanted to?

FTR, I personally think cap and trade is a scam. I also think that any system that tries to engage the business community will be gamed by business folks. In fact, of all the parties effected by this the group we collectively call, "climate scientists" actually are he least corrupt in this, compared to corporations and politicians.

Who'd I rather trust:

1) Corporations
2) Politicians
3) Scientists

-- to me that's easy: scientists.




posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


The simple fact is that even Phil Jones' and the IPCC's best argument in favor of AGW is: "we don't know what else it could be, so it must be us."

This is the heart of the debate.



Really? Are you showing up at the Advanced Physics seminars, Cancer Research, or how about lectures on a loss of Amphibians in the upper reaches of the Amazon?

Get this right; You ARE NOT PART OF THE DEBATE. You are not the science peer group. Human's are outputting over 100 times what natural sources like Volcanos are on a yearly basis. Phil Jones saying "we don't know what else it could be" is called; being overly charitable to the debate.


Science is not a debate that is held on the Jerry Springer show -- and people have forgotten that REAL debates are not the clown contests that we seen the Republican presidential candidates engaged in.

AGW is not some unquestionable faith-based truth -- it is scientific theory. If you've got some data you think wasn't in the model, or can explain acidification of the oceans, or why we've got over 350 PPM of CO2 that the earth hasn't seen since humans have been around -- well, COME FORTH WITH IT.

But please, don't submit your paper with the drivel that fools people who don't get science -- you know, like ClimateGate 2.0. More nonsense from the hired goods who brought you the discredited ClimateGate 1.0 -- as if there were any credibility here.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by donhuangenaro


zooming out of the Hockey stick:
a very simple natural climate cycles explanation...

edit on 25-11-2011 by donhuangenaro because: (no reason given)


Zoom out and we can see the - big picture -. The Truth

However, if someone had a sneaky agenda all you have to do is - zoom in - at .....just
the right spots and - abracadabra - look what we have! OMG! It's a hockey stick!
Run for your lives! We are all going to die!



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Climate change exists, the climate is changing all the time both because of man made contraptions, and because of nature...However nature still dictates all changes either way.....This whole taxation is fraudulent and even if they wanted to cut down on some man made gasses there not going to do it that way. Because there taxing all the wrong people and groups.

Once again its finding a cure for the symptoms and taxing the symptoms as a way to cure the cause.
Ya me thinks that's not going to work....Might want to find a cure for the cause, or better yet find the whole cause and a way more complete picture of it then the one they have now, I mean come on are they even trying?

The whole things stinks no doubt, but as always there is some truth in with a whole lot of untruth, half-truths, miss-truths, ignorance, and plain ol lying out there asses, otherwise known as bull#.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


I think you have been brainwashed.

Just look at the video.


The truth is that the Earth is ALWAYS warming and cooling.




posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Climate Gate 2.00 : Shocking Corruption Revealed in Emails!


Not so shocking really. More like ... expected. We've got so much evidence of corruption .... "Hide the decline" ... the players with their big $$ invested in so called 'green technology' .... Gores carbon credit scam ... This is one more thing to add to the growing list showing a 'green' conspiracy ...

S&F



You have NO EVIDENCE of corruption -- not one single bit, or you'd have raised it up a flag pole. "Hide the decline?" -- if you bother to research ClimateGate 1.0, you will know that is NOT what happened, and the entire email exchange was innocent and normal.

Evidence is;
1) Legally obtained.
2) Revealed in context.
3) Not brought forth by felons and hackers.
4) Has a chain of evidence -- meaning, you know how you got it, and who brought it forth.
5) Is in context. You have to look at all emails of everyone involved.

6) ONE situation, is not evidence of "widespread fraud" -- and you first have to have EVIDENCE of fraud.


If you have evidence that Al Gore has committed fraud with his Carbon Credits "Scam" -- by all means, get a court to issue a court order based on EVIDENCE you bring forth. It's not like he is protected like all the scumbags who get America involved in wars to procure Oil.

With or without Al Gore -- there would be people raising the Alarm Bells on AGW. In Europe, AGW is accepted and changes are being made.


You want EVIDENCE of Fraud -- there is a lot more evidence of fraud amongst the Climate Deniers -- which I can find in abundance and track the money getting paid to produce bogus data. But here is just NEWS about the first Climategate 1.0;
New York Times
Johns Stewart on the MEDIA ignoring ClimateGate being debunked
ClimateGate debunked the undebunking of a Koch study -- noting that they paid for the original fraud

>> Evidence requires more however, than a link to a blog. But it seems to me, that the CREDIBILITY gap, is on one side there are people who engage in science, facts, and calling truth to power, and the other side are a bunch of astro-turf, Freepers, and oil company robber barons with shell companies and think tanks like "Americans for Prosperity" and the like.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


If Al Gore gives back his ill-gotten gains then he will probably just get community service
punishment. His excuse will be "Hey, i'm just a politician. I guess i was given some
bad information. OOPS!"
edit on 25-11-2011 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


The scientists care about 1 thing. --- Funding ---
----------
Do you want more $$$ billions? Then start cherry picking!


After that just explain it to them in a way that they can't even understand it.

- That's an old progressive trick. -



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


It is a good point that "zooming in a hockey stick graph" will show radical shifts. But why do you come here acting like Scientists don't understand graphs or TREND ANALYSIS? You take an obvious fact, that nobody with sense would disagree with -- and you construe that as evidence of Climatologists making such a rookie mistake? What sort of fallacy are you projecting here? That because YOU might make such a mistake, the professionals would as well?


The "global cooling" that was proclaimed by the deniers a couple years ago, was based on looking at 5 years of the hottest ten years of the hottest 50 years of the hottest trend in a millennia. So for 5 years, the temperature was cooling just a tad -- likely because of all the ice dropping into the ocean.

The "earth climate fluctuates all the time" -- amazing deduction. Amazing assumption that arm chair bloggers and oil funded hacks in lab coats can notice something like that.

>> I just ask that YOU and people who want to "wait for the evidence" write your real names down somewhere. So in 50 years, people can know who the jerks were that stood in the way of progress while we had a chance to turn things around.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


That is, again, glib.

Scientists care a lot less about funding, as a group, than corporations do about profits. In many instances the debate has fallen along the scientists v. corporations line and I'll always trust scientists, as a group, over corporations.

Every time.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


Yes, but again, those trends are not enough to explain everything. I'm not brainwashed. I think you've assumed you KNOW something you don't.

The only thing close to a consensus in the scientific community is that AGW is real. A lot of money has been paid by corporations to confuse the issue, but if you pat enough attention you'll see that what I'm saying is true.

As another poster said, outside of the US there's very little scepticism about the science, and that's not because Americans (I'm a US ex-pat before you get riled up) are smarter, it's because the solutions, at leas the ones anyone can imagine, fall opposite the interest of some of America's largest corporate interests and they spend millions to confuse the issue.

Their willingness to lie through their teeth to keep their profit margin intact is much more well documented than any supposed scientific conspiracy.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


The scientists care about 1 thing. --- Funding ---
----------
Do you want more $$$ billions? Then start cherry picking!


After that just explain it to them in a way that they can't even understand it.

- That's an old progressive trick. -


question for mods:
Now that this thread has suffered the same fate as Climategate 1.00 in being completely debunked, and has wandered away to off-topic fairyland as evidenced by the above quote, is the quoted posters bronze recognition based on quality or quantity?



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


No funding = unemployment

--------------
If you bribe the scientists they will tell you whatever you want to hear.
A good example would be a PHD applying for a government grant for a study
on _____________? Just fill in the blank.

Throw $500,000 at them and they will connect the dots on anything you want.
Look everybody! Scientist XYZ has shown a -clear- relationship on this and that.

That's why we see conflicting studies on everything.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
I'm glad the rest of the world are finally catching on to this global scheme. But if you guys will notices, once again it is government that is the underlining cause for corruption in this scientific field. Either your a conservative small government Republican, or you are ruining America.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Henry Kissingers policy to kill the people using the weather to freeze them off the face of the planet is not possible without two things.
Owning the weather by 2025 would need a reason for "Geo-Engineering" to take place, this reason is global warming, the money required to implement the "Geo-Engineering" has to come from somewhere, a transnational tax for direct to purpose usage is a necessity.
The Taxes being raised from the AGW scam is being used to directly try and implement global cooling,
The "Scientists" cherry picking their data to fit a political climate model that furthers agendas and aims rather than the attempt to provide a best estimate based on fact,Their BS is the first line in indoctrinating the public into the belief that the carbon tax is neccessary to combat warming, and without this data no agenda driven ideologue can be satisfied.
Check out what kissingers report stated, it seems so bloody credible, best way to kill massive numbers of people is to use the weather, who can blame the weather?.
The government didn't do it, right. sure they didn't.

"Geo-Engineering" AKA "Chemtrailing" how else could you bring a fundamental change in the ice cycle of planet earth, it's obvious they know the sun is responsible for the warming and cooling trends, why else would they be trying to reflect so much back into space across many continents.
16 years this has been going on and we are now in a maunder minimum, this started en masse in 1995 half way through the last cycle, the effect of cooling the planet all the way through the cycle can only help to reduce global temps, it only takes a global decrease of a couple of degrees to begin the icing in the higher lattitudes, if the maunder minimum guarantees cooler temps because the sun is quiet, then "Geo-Engineering" for weapons effect during this period will also reflect the suns rays back into space causing temp decrease, perfect opportunity for an attempt, this is impossible without the illusitory hogwash the scientists produce to sway public opinion into, effectively, making an attempt on their own lives.
be funny if it wasn't so serious.

I'm not at all surprised that their are a bunch of scientists on their knees providing statistical fellatio to their political buddies, they seem to be willing to do anything to ensure their future careers and positions, these are guaranteed in one way or another by their political masters who see them as willing tools that can be shoe-horned into whatever project they require a pre defined outcome from, no matter what the truth is.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


If Al Gore gives back his ill-gotten gains then he will probably just get community service
punishment. His excuse will be "Hey, i'm just a politician. I guess i was given some
bad information. OOPS!"
edit on 25-11-2011 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



Al Gore is probably a great man who cares about our people -- but someone like YOU would never be able to tell a good person from a bad one, because you don't seem to recognize WHAT the source of truth might look like.

If Al Gore were to lobby for the oil industry right now -- he could make ten times what he has made in his "ill gotten gains." Seems to me, that he's either a bad crook, or a good man trying to find a "capitalist solution." Everyone promoting Carbon Credits knows it's a flawed system -- but it's a STEP to trying to monetize pollution. The same can be said for Climatologists; they could be making ten times more sucking profits from the public as hedge fund managers. Why did they get 10 extra years of college to make less than a middle manager? Yes, we have had some Lung Doctors lie to us -- but that is because the Tobacco industry spent decades helping pay for college tuitions, and a good portion of all Lung experts were on their payroll.

Can anyone POINT to a decade of some private funding cabal for Climatology? Where are the BIG BUCKS on this debate? You have to accuse every intern, math geek, and PhD in the Climatology system, because they are ALL IN ON IT. And every single one of them knows a hockey stick chart from a TREND LINE.

... I have to take a breath now and then, and not get too angry when replying to pure nonsense -- the rules here REQUIRE a civil debate. But what to do about the "death of the planet due to gibbering idiots?" It's hard not to take it personally.

>> In my mind, Al Gore is way too optimistic and charitable to the opposition. I don't think MERELY INFORMING the public, like Captain Planet, is going to work. I do NOT think that our current system can "be reformed" -- It is like negotiating with a bridge troll for safe passage -- eventually, that troll is going to eat someone. Eventually, a hundred and one robber barons like the Koch brothers, are going to EDUCATE more fools than the GOOD GUYS with PowerPoints are. A system that DEMANDS constant growth and profits, either has to devour healthy industries or grow unchecked -- which on a finite planet with nearly 8 Billion people means that it will kill us all off.

>> People like yourself, with your immature arguments and weak grasp of science, are the REASON that Capitalism is going to kill us. The number of people who understand technology, and who can have the insight to blame their own employers for being part of the problem, are outnumbered by people who believe in anything that accepts or feeds them, without questioning the bigger picture.

I have no greater proof that Al Gore is on a fools mission -- than the people who criticize him for being a crook, while they do a fools mission for earth devouring crooks.

And i'll add some emoticons to strengthen my argument


The planet is still getting destroyed, even if a thousand monkeys jump on this idiot and call Al Gore a crook.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


No funding = unemployment

--------------
If you bribe the scientists they will tell you whatever you want to hear.
A good example would be a PHD applying for a government grant for a study
on _____________? Just fill in the blank.

Throw $500,000 at them and they will connect the dots on anything you want.
Look everybody! Scientist XYZ has shown a -clear- relationship on this and that.

That's why we see conflicting studies on everything.



Maybe YOU would betray humanity for $500,000 -- but I can tell you -- our world would be a lot worse off right now if the average Scientist were as corrupt as you suggest.

People go into science, for the most part, because they are curious -- and they don't often dream of "lots of money" they dream of helping make the world a better place or discovering the unknown.

If you want to find people who will say anything for a Buck -- go find a church somewhere, or watch the TV. Maybe look at the opening bell ring on Wall Street. These are all professions where Big Bucks for Big Bull are part of the job requirement.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious

Who'd I rather trust:

1) Corporations
2) Politicians
3) Scientists

-- to me that's easy: scientists.



You fail seeing the obvious because there
is nothing to trust if
1.
2.
are paying
3.
to say what 1. and 2. want them to say...

Which is that we need a cap and trade carbon tax
because *there data* shows we are heating up the earth..

Actually, I think the world would be a better place if it was all tropical
again..

Might need to move a few major cities ect. over time but
I am all for it being a constant 70-75 degrees in the winter in Canada... eh



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


Yes, but again, those trends are not enough to explain everything. I'm not brainwashed. I think you've assumed you KNOW something you don't.

The only thing close to a consensus in the scientific community is that AGW is real. A lot of money has been paid by corporations to confuse the issue, but if you pat enough attention you'll see that what I'm saying is true.

As another poster said, outside of the US there's very little scepticism about the science, and that's not because Americans (I'm a US ex-pat before you get riled up) are smarter, it's because the solutions, at leas the ones anyone can imagine, fall opposite the interest of some of America's largest corporate interests and they spend millions to confuse the issue.

Their willingness to lie through their teeth to keep their profit margin intact is much more well documented than any supposed scientific conspiracy.


To bolster your argument -- the Oil Industry in the USA makes something like $400 Million in profits EACH DAY. That's more than the entire budget for the "green movement", Al Gore, and the Climatologists who are getting accused of being "in this for the money."

When you've got people defending all the people with the money and power, by accusing scientists, do-gooder movements, and humanitarians by claiming "GREED" -- we need some actual PROOF.

Tomorrow and next week, we will hear MORE accusations -- and someone else will say; "Well, with all these accusations, something has to be WRONG!" Yes, it's called a SMEAR campaign -- and if someone is blogging these smears and NOT getting paid -- they are really selling themselves short. Ruining the earth and betraying humanity for FREE is just not that smart.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


If Al Gore gives back his ill-gotten gains then he will probably just get community service
punishment. His excuse will be "Hey, i'm just a politician. I guess i was given some
bad information. OOPS!"
edit on 25-11-2011 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



Al Gore is probably a great man who cares about our people -- but someone like YOU would never be able to tell a good person from a bad one, because you don't seem to recognize WHAT the source of truth might look like.

If Al Gore were to lobby for the oil industry right now -- he could make ten times what he has made in his "ill gotten gains." Seems to me, that he's either a bad crook, or a good man trying to find a "capitalist solution." Everyone promoting Carbon Credits knows it's a flawed system -- but it's a STEP to trying to monetize pollution. The same can be said for Climatologists; they could be making ten times more sucking profits from the public as hedge fund managers. Why did they get 10 extra years of college to make less than a middle manager? Yes, we have had some Lung Doctors lie to us -- but that is because the Tobacco industry spent decades helping pay for college tuitions, and a good portion of all Lung experts were on their payroll.

Can anyone POINT to a decade of some private funding cabal for Climatology? Where are the BIG BUCKS on this debate? You have to accuse every intern, math geek, and PhD in the Climatology system, because they are ALL IN ON IT. And every single one of them knows a hockey stick chart from a TREND LINE.

... I have to take a breath now and then, and not get too angry when replying to pure nonsense -- the rules here REQUIRE a civil debate. But what to do about the "death of the planet due to gibbering idiots?" It's hard not to take it personally.

>> In my mind, Al Gore is way too optimistic and charitable to the opposition. I don't think MERELY INFORMING the public, like Captain Planet, is going to work. I do NOT think that our current system can "be reformed" -- It is like negotiating with a bridge troll for safe passage -- eventually, that troll is going to eat someone. Eventually, a hundred and one robber barons like the Koch brothers, are going to EDUCATE more fools than the GOOD GUYS with PowerPoints are. A system that DEMANDS constant growth and profits, either has to devour healthy industries or grow unchecked -- which on a finite planet with nearly 8 Billion people means that it will kill us all off.

>> People like yourself, with your immature arguments and weak grasp of science, are the REASON that Capitalism is going to kill us. The number of people who understand technology, and who can have the insight to blame their own employers for being part of the problem, are outnumbered by people who believe in anything that accepts or feeds them, without questioning the bigger picture.

I have no greater proof that Al Gore is on a fools mission -- than the people who criticize him for being a crook, while they do a fools mission for earth devouring crooks.

And i'll add some emoticons to strengthen my argument


The planet is still getting destroyed, even if a thousand monkeys jump on this idiot and call Al Gore a crook.


OOPS! I think the truth just slipped out.
"Capitalism is going to kill us?" Oh, i get it. So the solution is to make George Soros the
king of the Earth and rule with an iron fist?


Capitalism will save us. Free Market Capitalism will create jobs and lower the unemployment
rate. Even the socialist Obama has agreed to stop the Cap & Tax regulation at the EPA.
His reasoning is that we need the jobs right now.

Turning the economies upside down all over the world in the name of a Global Warming Hoax
would only make everything worse.


ClimateGate 3.0 is on the way. More shocking emails revealing corruption will further
weaken the Global Warming Hoax. Jesse Ventura exposed the truth about this months ago.





new topics

top topics



 
179
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join