Fox News: 120% Of The Public Thinks Scientists May Falsify GW Data

[Gertch]

Just my opinion, but it seems like one would have to be remarkedly uninformed OR simply pressing a political point, in order to consider the issue "exposed".

OR having the reason data that 'scientists' refused to released suddenly brought into the open.

Excellent interview. It's 10.5 minutes in length but is a great science-y moment.

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN6_RYAP8WA[/yt]

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Excellent interview. It's 10.5 minutes in length but is a great science-y moment.

Sciency? It's a woman from Greenpeace who was clearly a layman and not a scientist of any sort (much less a climatologist) being grilled on climate change questions for 10 & 1/2 minutes (actually longer, since some was cut out where she said she had already answered his questions before) until she said something he could use against her by a guy who had practiced making that interview repeatedly. What exactly does any of that prove? How does that support your position?

If I walked up to some random guy protesting man-made climate change on the street outside this event and started questioning him for ten minutes from prepared questions would that mean I had discredited your whole argument as well?

I'm on the Greenpeace mailing list and have donated to them. I guess that makes my opinion equal to that of a climatologist with reams of peer-reviewed research according to your metric.

 

[TheBrew]

I think I figured out the problem. Some people can't differentiate between scientists and non-scientists.

Scientists wear the white lab coats.

 

[Guartho]

Scientists wear the white lab coats.

 

[John Picard]

Hmmmm. What do they have to hide?

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/11/un-security-stops-journalists-questions-about-climategate/

However as the press conference drew to a close Professor Schneider’s assistant called armed UN security guards to the room. They held McAleer and aggressively ordered cameraman Ian Foster to stop filming. The guard threatened to take away the camera and expel the film crew from the conference if they did not obey his instructions to stop filming Professor Schneider.
The guard demanded to look at the film crews press credentials and refused to allow them to film until Professor Schneider left the room.
McAleer said he was disappointed by Professor Schneider’s behaviour.
“It was a press conference. Climategate is a major story – it goes to the heart of the Global Warming debate by calling into question the scientific data and the integrity of many scientists involved.”
“These questions should be answered. The attempts by UN officials and Professor Schneider’s assistant to remove my microphone were hamfisted but events took a more sinister turn when they called an armed UN security officer to silence a journalist.”

Nope. Just shut up and drink the Kool-Aid.

 

[Roger Wilco]

Hmmmm. What do they have to hide?

A biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig, global conspiracy obviously. Thank God for American Conservatives who exposed this awful plot.

 

[TheBrew]

The guy asked his question and got an answer. He was probably kicked out because he was pulling a paparazzi tactic and just repeating the same question over and over.

Usually nerds are defenseless against bullies, so I am not surprised that they overreacted when having actually guards to remove the annoyance.

 

[Lindley]

They played up the fact that the guards were "armed", but I don't see any obvious indication that they threatened to use weapons. Therefore the inclusion of the word "armed" in the article appears to be journalistic sensationalism. The guards for that particular event just happened to be the type to be armed, as police officers always are.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Personally, I'm glad that this conspiracy has been exposed. Now the Antarctic ice shelf will stop collapsing.

 

[Squiggy]

The ice shelves are known liberals. They'll carry on the act until the bitter end.

 

[ST-One]

The ice shelves are known liberals. They'll carry on the act until the bitter end.

Yeah, like fat cows they just keep calving and calving...

 

[Squiggy]

Cow...and fat people are known to be somewhat gassy. I'm sure all that methane released by the both of them has something to do with all this.

Somehow, I blame Peter Jackson.

 

[ST-One]

Cow...and fat people are known to be somewhat gassy. I'm sure all that methane released by the both of them has something to do with all this.

Somehow, I blame Peter Jackson.

Didn't he lose like 600 kg of body-fat?

But I guess all that liposuction-ed fat that needs to be burned isn't helping the climate either...

 

[Gertch]

Excellent interview. It's 10.5 minutes in length but is a great science-y moment.

Sciency? It's a woman from Greenpeace who was clearly a layman and not a scientist of any sort (much less a climatologist) being grilled on climate change questions for 10 & 1/2 minutes (actually longer, since some was cut out where she said she had already answered his questions before) until she said something he could use against her by a guy who had practiced making that interview repeatedly. What exactly does any of that prove? How does that support your position?

He factually countered the propaganda points she was parroting from the Warmers.


Here's some more info on the reviewing process from Dr Philip Lloyd Pr Eng. (That Dr probably just means like dentist or something.)

The IPCC claims that it has thousands of scientists and almost as many reviewers of the scientists' work to produce their reports. There are two problems, however. In the scientific world I move in, “review” means that your work is scrutinised by several independent, anonymous reviewers chosen by the editor.


However, when I entered the IPCC world, the reviewers were there at the worktable, criticising our drafts, and finally meeting with all us c o-ordinators and many of the IPCC functionaries in a draftfest.


The process is so flawed that the result is tantamount to fraud. As an authority, the IPCC should be consigned to the scrapheap without delay.

Ouch.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

He factually countered the propaganda points she was parroting from the Warmers.

Which would be great if anyone had argued that one random layperson couldn't be wrong or out-debated on climate change.

Here's some more info on the reviewing process from Dr Philip Lloyd Pr Eng. (That Dr probably just means like dentist or something.)

The Pr Eng means he's a professional engineer. While engineers certainly can contribute positively to finding practical technical solutions to fight global warming, they're not who you would go to for a perspective on the history and causes of climate change.

Which is the problem. When not putting up layman's opinions, you guys are putting up scientists and professionals from unrelated or minimally related fields while completely dismissing all of the people who actually live and breath climate science on a daily basis.

 

[ALF]

There's no scum of the earth lower than scientists.

[/sarcasm], to be crystal clear.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Bill Cosby, you hold several honorary doctorates, played Dr. Cliff Huxtable on TV for eight years, and are an expert on frozen pudding pops, so TLS and Gertch would appreciate it if you could give your expert opinion on climate change.

If you could condense it down to nonsensical "razzum spazzm zassm gassmm" form or turn it into a humorous anecdote about your kids that would be delightful as well.

 

[Squiggy]

I'm an Audio Engineer...at NASA. So since my title has the word "engineer" and the fact that I work in the NASA HQ building means I'm more than capable to determine that climate change is NOT happening. The ice caps are melting because they support the terrorists, or are gay. Could be anything...except climate change.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Well, I'm not an engineer or a climatologist, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so clearly I'm an expert too.

 

[John Picard]

Oops! Inconvenient BS!
Inconvenient truth for Al Gore as his North Pole sums don't add up

Mr Gore, speaking at the Copenhagen climate change summit, stated the latest research showed that the Arctic could be completely ice-free in five years.
In his speech, Mr Gore told the conference: “These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.”


However, the climatologist whose work Mr Gore was relying upon dropped the former Vice-President in the water with an icy blast.
“It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,” Dr Maslowski said. “I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”
Mr Gore’s office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a “ballpark figure” several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.


The embarrassing error cast another shadow over the conference after the controversy over the hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, which appeared to suggest that scientists had manipulated data to strengthen their argument that human activities were causing global warming.

I've said it many times before and I'll keep saying it -- AlGore is a damned liar, a fearmonger, and an opportunist trying to bully people with his "green" initiatives.



I am in no way for pollution of any type and believe in conscious environmental care; however, I the Global Climate Change crowd are no different than any other nutty religious following.