Climategate Leaker: Our Civilization Is Being Killed By Lying 'Science' Elitists

in a way i think he's taking his own popularity and name and using it to push his own beliefs.. but i also think 'climate-gate' is very possible.. and theres already astounding evidence the elite have found a way to control and cause 'natural' disasters. mother nature cant be very happy.

This "leak" by some "alleged" whistleblower is incredibly stupid and that's quite an achievement to stand out with so many stupid things that get posted.

#1:
This is not a whistleblower -- just by definition. What is he in danger of? A bunch of PhD's who threaten NOT to invite him to a lecture? It's insulting to pretend there is some cabal here, or that anyone who spoke out about researchers at a University need fear the wrath of "them man". Someone might throw a read sock in his white wash laundry -- but that's about the only thing I could think of. A "Whistleblower" is someone who speaks up when a group has power.

#2:
You CAN'T KILL US with a revelation that "nothing bad is happening to the climate" -- it's like screaming; "The sky isn't falling -- the sky isn't falling." So way to kill any credibility with hyperbole right out the gate.

#3:
The "Climategate" didn't prove ANY shenanigans -- other than people with little grasp of science declaring victory and going back to tell each other of like minds how they won a victory. The emails that "showed a smoking gun" were talking about removing "outlier data" -- and if I have to explain that, then it's quite likely you weren't qualified to form an opinion in the first place.

Originally posted by WontBeFooled
in a way i think he's taking his own popularity and name and using it to push his own beliefs.. but i also think 'climate-gate' is very possible.. and theres already astounding evidence the elite have found a way to control and cause 'natural' disasters. mother nature cant be very happy.

So an ignorant twit who spied on researchers emails (likely he's a network admin at the college) -- who is too stupid to understand that outliers are often removed in statistics if you don't have enough SAMPLE DATA,... starts using his fame to blather more ignorant nonsense.

It's as if he was in a thriller novel, only no crime was committed and the hero only embarrassed themselves, and there were no repercussions, no danger, and well -- I didn't say it was a GOOD thriller novel.

Originally posted by grey580
Certainly more gas on the fire of the GW is fake camp.

So the science is in question.
I'd like for someone to look into it and double check the science.

It's been done, There have been multiple independent investigations of the so-called Climategate emails. No scientific misconduct was found. The only way to come up with the "no warming in 15 years" conclusion is to ignore the oceans, which make up 2/3 of the planet and retain 90% of it's heat. The oceans are still warming, therefore so is the planet. I'm not sure why I bother, since it's obvious how this website is slanted for the most part. "Deny Ignorance" is a complete joke.

reply to post by ObservingYou


They are comin out of the woodwork on this one ...
Thats when you know you have struck a nerve.

Warmists Display Cowardice and Hypocrisy In Avoiding Global Warming Debate
www.forbes.com...

. late last month global warming alarmist Bill Nye – who proclaims himself “The Science Guy” – was scheduled to debate skeptic Marc Morano on a nationally televised segment on CNN. One would expect that a person who believes the science is on his side would relish the opportunity to participate in, and decisively win, a nationally televised debate. At the last minute, however, Nye cowardly backed out. Nye didn’t even give Morano the courtesy of advance notice of his cowardice, with the CNN producer giving Morano only six minutes advance notice that Nye would not participate.

Similarly, prominent global warming alarmist Michael Mann gave a presentation last month at publicly-funded Valencia College near Orlando, Florida. Although Mann has repeatedly chickened out of appearing in venues in which alarmists and skeptics can examine and question each other’s assertions, Mann was all too happy to travel to Florida (presumably at Florida taxpayers’ expense) to speak at an event in which he alone controlled the message

reply to post by burntheships


Actually it's called amusement at how some people fail to understand basic scientific concepts.

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
is it not possible that the Global Climate Change people just might have a point?

Sigh....there you go again, Global Climate Change does not equal
Anthropogenic Global Warming.

How many times do we need to cover this?

Global warming is the biggest fraud since social security.
Its an excuse for taxes that would fund a military for the globalist agenda.
Like the ozone scare, which was an AL gore scam to outlaw freon because the patent was running out for Dupont,
outlawing freon allowed Dupont to come out with a slightly different version, main difference was Dupont hjad a patent on it.
New cash cow for Dupont!!!
Enviromental causes have been the biggest source of various cons since the stock market.
We are actually going into a new ice age, and when the glaciers are marching down from the north,
con artists will be blaming it on "global warming", just like they are blaming the current freakishly cold weather

Originally posted by steven2977
Global warming is the biggest fraud since social security.
Its an excuse for taxes that would fund a military for the globalist agenda.
Like the ozone scare, which was an AL gore scam to outlaw freon because the patent was running out for Dupont,
outlawing freon allowed Dupont to come out with a slightly different version, main difference was Dupont hjad a patent on it.
New cash cow for Dupont!!!
Enviromental causes have been the biggest source of various cons since the stock market.
We are actually going into a new ice age, and when the glaciers are marching down from the north,
con artists will be blaming it on "global warming", just like they are blaming the current freakishly cold weather

??? Erm, there's a continent called Australia that begs to differ with you. The Aussies have been banging the drum on skin cancer as a result of the ozone hole for decades now.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by JrDavis

 

4PPM is toxic to human consumption.

A blood level of 4ppm is toxic. That doesn't mean that drinking water with 4 ppm is. Unless you drink a whole lot of it.

If someone would of drank that water, It would of been toxic.

But that test isn't for water, is it? It says "Pond Sediment". It says "Sludge". I wouldn't be drinking that if I were you. But maybe if you ate a lot of it, it would be poisonous. I doubt the aluminum would be your biggest problem though.

There's no debate man. It's no good for you and there's no excuse for putting it in the atmosphere.

You can't avoid it. It composes 7% of the Earth's crust.

edit on 3/28/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

You're not understanding something.

Solid Aluminum, Such as ones you drink Soda out of. Are a lot different than oxidize particles.

I keep repeating myself and it seems you pick a sentence out but disregard the rest of the post.

Nano size aluminum particles are oxidize. Combined with Oxygen and can have respiratory effects on human life.

Whether you believe that or not, It's science. Instead of taking this sentence and asking me to prove it to continue the troll you should look it up yourself.

Or common sense tells someone something of sub micron size can be inhaled. Which means if you make aluminum submicron, oxidized, nano particle etc. You can inhale it.

Now take into account they discussed releasing 10-20 megatons. That's a lot of aluminum.

10000 Megaton [Mt] = 10000000000000 Kilogram [kg]


Now back to the topic at hand.

It's the same thing if you read the rest of the results. This is why your thread is wrong. Also Bias.



As you can see there was 2 samples done. From a Well, And also from a pond.

3710 Ug/L - 3.71mg

Well PPM - 0

Pond PPM of aluminum - 3.71 PPM

So this sample would technically be under the 4PPM toxicity to cause coagulation in the blood of a human that drank a liter of the pond water.

Just a liter....




1260 mg/kg
23.8 mg/kg
Unlined Pond - 1260 PPM of Aluminum

Also found Barium.

Because of its high chemical reactivity barium is never found in nature as a free element

9200 mg/kg
74.6

Lined Pond - 9200 PPM of Aluminum.

I think it's safe to say that sampling was way above the 4ppm of aluminum...



Last but not least the Air Sample.



1010 mg/kg
25.00

From a filter outside of the home.

1010ppm of Aluminum. Way beyond the limit 4ppm.

With that being said. It's safe to say your thread is biased and misleading in the least. You are spreading nonfactual information and not in the best interest of the reader..

None of those amounts should be found in pond water or in air quality tests like this.

1000PPM does not just show up. The air flow throughout this part of town. The water sampling. There are more results on that page.

If you want to put your money where your mouth is. Record yourself doing air quality samples and see what you get for numbers.

If you get lower than 4 PPM in rain water or a legitimate sampling I'll shut up and you can even post to get the kudos.

But to blame it on factories is hardly an excuse. Something is up with those numbers.

It's very hazardous to human health.

ihost.nu...

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by CommanderCraCra
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

He's not hated here, he's a well respected member to most people.

Your petty arguments have been hashed out time and time again. They are weak and not well thought out.

Is there anything that shouldn't be taxed?

I guess anyone that has objections to man made global warming is making arguements in vain. I might as well not have posted anything. There is no conspiracy.

Now that's about the smartest thing you have posted

As I suggested before, watch Xray Earth, a National Geographic show (unless you think nat geo are also part of ........... wait for it ........ (drum roll and fireworks) ............. "the reat conspiracy" ) and maybe, just maybe, you might see that your arguments are incorrect. But then again, your ego might get in the way of seeing the facts

Originally posted by steven2977
Global warming is the biggest fraud since social security.
Its an excuse for taxes that would fund a military for the globalist agenda.
Like the ozone scare, which was an AL gore scam to outlaw freon because the patent was running out for Dupont,
outlawing freon allowed Dupont to come out with a slightly different version, main difference was Dupont hjad a patent on it.
New cash cow for Dupont!!!
Enviromental causes have been the biggest source of various cons since the stock market.
We are actually going into a new ice age, and when the glaciers are marching down from the north,
con artists will be blaming it on "global warming", just like they are blaming the current freakishly cold weather

You have absolutely no idea on the science of climate change do you.

reply to post by JrDavis

Pond PPM of aluminum - 3.71 PPM

So this sample would technically be under the 4PPM toxicity to cause coagulation in the blood of a human that drank a liter of the pond water.

That 4 ppm is blood concentration not water concentration.
Tell me, if a water concentration of only 4 ppm is deadly, why is aluminum not regulated in drinking water by the EPA?

Unlined Pond - 1260 PPM of Aluminum

In the mud at the bottom of the pond (solid).

1010ppm of Aluminum. Way beyond the limit 4ppm.

1010 ppm of what? Dust captured by an air filter? That's 0.1%. Pretty low actually, I would expect higher since aluminum makes up 7% of the Earth's crust. And why do you keep bringing up the blood concentration?

None of those amounts should be found in pond water or in air quality tests like this.

Why not? Aluminum makes up 7% of the Earth's crust. The Earth's crust turns into dust and blows around. The Earth's crust gets washed into ponds and streams.
In that thread I reference a book from 1920. In it there are some charts. Did you look at those charts? No? Maybe you should.

Here are some interesting test results:
www.mtshastanews.com...

It's very hazardous to human health.

No it isn't.

Originally posted by greatfriendbadfoe

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by CommanderCraCra
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

He's not hated here, he's a well respected member to most people.

Your petty arguments have been hashed out time and time again. They are weak and not well thought out.

Is there anything that shouldn't be taxed?

I guess anyone that has objections to man made global warming is making arguements in vain. I might as well not have posted anything. There is no conspiracy.

Now that's about the smartest thing you have posted

As I suggested before, watch Xray Earth, a National Geographic show (unless you think nat geo are also part of ........... wait for it ........ (drum roll and fireworks) ............. "the reat conspiracy" ) and maybe, just maybe, you might see that your arguments are incorrect. But then again, your ego might get in the way of seeing the facts

They should have discredited themselves from the beginning when they said.......

In 1988 Atmospheric Physicist Dr. James Hansen, now head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, testified at a US Senate Committee hearing that:

"it was 99 percent certain that the warming trend was not a natural variation but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere

They were 99% certain. Not 58%, not 75% or 82%. It became a religion instantaneously without people suspecting any foul play till later on. It kind of struck me as odd when scientists seemed desperate and at first I believed them. Then I hear "carbon credits" will solve everything. I did some research and low and behold it turned out to be a purposely over-hyped SCAM!!!!

I am not saying humans do not play some role in global warming, but the actual percentage of man made versus natural remains uncertain. The sun is said to be going through anomalies of late with solar flares and EMP activity. Why don't they give more mention of natural causes and explain what they may be?

And why do climate "scientists" more like paid off snakeoil salesmen, RUN OFF when challenged? Real men don't run they sit, listen and debate. Real men don't insult. Real men don't think oh lets tax some more. Real men solve problems.

My ego isn't getting in the way....YOURS IS!

Originally posted by burntheships

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
is it not possible that the Global Climate Change people just might have a point?

Sigh....there you go again, Global Climate Change does not equal
Anthropogenic Global Warming.

How many times do we need to cover this?

People have made up their minds thanks to the liberal emotional disease. Show cards, play trumpets, bring some guns, start accusing people of being stupid, callous, uncaring, etc......while never mentioning the taxation aspect of it.

And just to be clear I don't mind taxation with representation wherever it makes sense, but a tax on CO2 is a tax on life itself and the epitomy of gullibility and naivety by those that get taken in by bad science. Maybe they should pass that 1% wall street tax and do away with all this extra stuff. And disban that goddamm private federal reserve. That is where at least 50% of the problems originate from!

reply to post by mc_squared


They won't look.
They don't want to be exposed as hateful fools.
They won't ever look at the opposite side of anything. It's amazing what you can learn by doing so too, so sad.

I appreciate the knowledge you're sharing though.

New York based NASA scientist, Gavin Schmidt is allied to the UOEA, and is the one who discovered the hacking as it was ongoing. He relates that he knew it was a hack in a BBC programme, "Climategate revisited"

www.bbc.co.uk...

Compare his remarks to what he said to a blogger elsewhere, and bearing in mind he already knew it was a hack, He sent this e-mail to Lucia Liljegren as follows,

" Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:48:21 -0500
From: Gavin Schmidt
To: lucia liljegren
Subject: a word to the wise.
Lucia, As I am certain you are aware, hacking into private emails is very illegal. If legitimate, your scoop was therefore almost certainly obtained illegally (since how would you get 1000 emails otherwise). I don’t see any link on Jeff-id’s site, and so I’m not sure where mosher got this from, but you and he might end up being questioned as part of any investigation that might end up happening. I don’t think that bloggers are shielded under any press shield laws and so, if I were you, I would not post any content, nor allow anyone else to do so. Just my twopenny’s worth."

So his e-mail it is both a lie and and threat toward this person, since he already knew it was a hacking, and this is a person who is involved with the direct climate research.
Furthermore, at least one fellow of the UOEA believes that the original hacker, (not yet identified) belongs, or is affilated to the UOEA, and is not Lucia, mentioned in the e-mail.
Now,we need info like this to understand how far to go with the whole idea of AGW/CC/Acronyms blah blah, it is so easy to be misled, and to mislead especially on forums like this, as good as a deal of the info gleaned here is spot on. For this thread, the OP's link is clearly saying that the original whistleblower is from somewhere unrelated to the UOEA, that is not what I have picked up on, but could it also be just smoke and mirrors to deflect from whomever is the real whistleblower.
In edit, I urge everyone to listen to that BBC programme linked above.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by JrDavis

 

Pond PPM of aluminum - 3.71 PPM

So this sample would technically be under the 4PPM toxicity to cause coagulation in the blood of a human that drank a liter of the pond water.

That 4 ppm is blood concentration not water concentration.
Tell me, if a water concentration of only 4 ppm is deadly, why is aluminum not regulated in drinking water by the EPA?

Unlined Pond - 1260 PPM of Aluminum

In the mud at the bottom of the pond (solid).

1010ppm of Aluminum. Way beyond the limit 4ppm.

1010 ppm of what? Dust captured by an air filter? That's 0.1%. Pretty low actually, I would expect higher since aluminum makes up 7% of the Earth's crust. And why do you keep bringing up the blood concentration?

None of those amounts should be found in pond water or in air quality tests like this.

Why not? Aluminum makes up 7% of the Earth's crust. The Earth's crust turns into dust and blows around. The Earth's crust gets washed into ponds and streams.
In that thread I reference a book from 1920. In it there are some charts. Did you look at those charts? No? Maybe you should.

Here are some interesting test results:
www.mtshastanews.com...

It's very hazardous to human health.

No it isn't.

edit on 3/28/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Do you get how anatomy works? If you pop a pill right now on an empty stomach it goes into your blood stream...

The same would happen with any substance you introduce into your digestive system.

Aluminum is known to inhibit cell division during the "S Phase" at levels less than 4 ppm.

Al = Aluminum - A Toxic Element

Just because a concentration is not deadly does not mean it is not toxic. People drink alcohol and this is toxic in every sip. They don't end up dying from moderate use. Some do some don't...

Depends on your liver.


You are trying to defend against what? The fact that aluminum is not toxic. The fact that since it is found in the earths crust means that it can be found in 1000ppm air samples? 1000ppm is what it is. 1,000parts per million of aluminum found in an air sample. It wasn't in the filter. Filters come clean so that they can do their job. Filter stuff out.

Did you liver come clogged with stones/cholesterol, etc, when you were born? No it was a clean filter.

I bring up blood concentration because that would be the effects on human health. When you inhale any substance, Especially foreign matter. It hits your lungs, then enters your blood stream. The same way smoking would do.

If you inhale aluminum. It has adverse health effects. There are many Americans that have hair tests showing increased levels of aluminum in their body.

It didn't come from a soda can.

Whether you want to sit, doubt and not answer any of my questions. Is on you. I have given more than enough proof to prove you wrong.

The aluminum is an issue, It is a problem to human health and putting it in the atmosphere is appalling.

To even try to debate the fact that the earths crust is blowing around causing 1,000ppm air samples of aluminum is kinda immature.

What else makes up the earths crust? Do you find those trace elements blowing around in those amounts?

Or maybe it's the scientists that said they wanted to dump 10-20k megatons of it in the atmosphere for research/money purposes.

reply to post by JrDavis

Do you get how anatomy works? If you pop a pill right now on an empty stomach it goes into your blood stream...

Do you know the absorption rate of aluminum?

The same would happen with any substance you introduce into your digestive system.

No it wouldn't. Pills are designed to maximize absorption

Hey! Look what your source says:

Aluminum is ubiquitous in our environment; it is the third most prevalent element in the earth's crust. The gastrointestinal tract is relatively impervious to aluminum, absorption normally being only about 2%.

Al = Aluminum - A Toxic Element But I think it's actually lower than that.

1000ppm is what it is. 1,000parts per million of aluminum found in an air sample.

1000ppm of what? 1000 parts aluminum to one million parts of what?
1000 parts of air? How did the testing lab know how much air went through the filter?
No. The lab tested the dust that came off of the filter. That's the only thing they could test because all they had was a filter. They took a wipe of dust from that filter. They tested dust.

There are many Americans that have hair tests showing increased levels of aluminum in their body.

Really? Increasing levels? I'd like to see the evidence for that.

What else makes up the earths crust? Do you find those trace elements blowing around in those amounts?

Yes, as a matter of fact you do.

reply to post by JrDavis


Without quoting your post, (in case I get a slap) I agree that Aluminum can become a hazard, There are concerns about the cumulative affects from different sources that we all might encounter during a lifetime, that is the catchpenny. At any given time there should be a need to know just how many actual applications that are deliberate for whatever reason, along with our natural environment. I don't know if that is realistically monitored all round, but I doubt it.