5K emails were published in Climategate 2.0. It seems the rumors that the 20K or so emails still hidden with encryption may indeed contain proof of U.S. and U.K. government cooperation in publishing shoddy research, keeping skeptic research from being published, and disallowing sharing of data and algorithms developed using U.S. taxpayer funding.
Me thinks the One doth protest too much…
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
Holidays + family “Warming” debates.
Ugh.
The feeling.
freaking Obama! is there no evil in this world he doesn’t have his filthy paws all over?!
so much money, so many liars, so many reputations at stake. Two options: get to the bottom of the story and reallocate resources and make lives better or option two: hunt down the “whislteblower”, send him to court and sick Patrick “i am a crminal” Fitzpatrick on him with 50 000 stupid charges to make one stick……
Obamas platform is based on ths false premise that the world is warming due to f 150s and cow farts….this might end up being….perhaps a little embarrassing.
Global Warming deniers are all asshats.
Nuff Said.
Cant argue with them. I’ve tried, it’s not worth it. I too, do not look forward to having to listen to what my republican flag waving(not american flag) propoganda spewing uncle has to say. This guy sits at lunch in his car listening to Rush Limbaughs garbage.
Then regurgitates that bullshit verbatim.
Can’t argue with many global warming believers, likewise. It’s like a faith-based religion to them. They are immune to objective climate data and detailed information about who is funding the pro-climate warming movement, and why.
Pete, the earth has not warmed on the last decade (even a bot more than that) while CO2 has risen constantly.
it’s not “deniers” that are ignoring evidence.
all your climate warmists base everything on computer models which predicted in the mid 90s that the earth would warm. but it has not.
computer model vs actual evidence over the last decade
whoever still believes models that have been shown as biased beyond belief and as false and contrary to empirical data is a fanatic
“it doesn’t work it reality, but does it work in theory?”
that’s your mantra
add to that that NASA has distorted climate data, that other universities have deleted real temperature measurements and only kept the modeled data and you’ve got a government funded criminal organization bent on leeching tax dollars for their mansions and carbon credit profits
People don’t like their private shit released. Same as the Wiki-leaks deal, just other side of the coin. If it’s your side releasing the other guys stuff, it’s an heroic act. If the other guys are getting into your shit it’s just not right, illegal, and dude should be in prison.
If you control the central banks, the military industrial complex, and the mainstream media, chances are that you will go down in history as the “victim” who became a “hero” in the face of hostile enemies.
all these emails were public domain under the freedom of information act.
calling it “hacking” to release documents the public has a right to see is dishonest.
that both governments who have billions to lose in tax funded green energy schemes want to stop the truth coming out, is only natural.
it is however also criminal
While trying to objectively figure out the global warming debate, I felt the “bums rush” moves by Al Gore and his ilk. The way they wanted to jam down everyone’s throat the total game change in the way America powers the grid was crazy. Carbon fuels are cheap and very abundant in the US. My view is to spend billions on ways to make them cleaner instead of the way they are going.
We need to tap the heat from deep in the interior of the planet and construct gigantic thermal power plants to harness this endless and clean source of energy.
All the energy requirements on earth could be met, free of harmful substances and byproducts. No dangerous waste products of any kind.
It’s there for the taking.
what you’d do is taking heat trapped under the earth’s crust and releasing it into the atmosphere. wouldn’t that warm the planet? 😉
just kidding
but seriously, I doubt that there would be no side effects. after all, if you cool magma, it becomes hard. if it is done on a large scale, it might have real world implications…
even if it doesn’t, the climate/gaia/earth=god idiots would oppose it with similar arguments.
they are not concerned with actual, real side effects, just theoretical ones or made up ones.
e.g. coal power plants release (plenty of) radiation, while nuclear power plants don’t release any (that is measurable beyond background radiation).
‘save the earth’ believers don’t know anything about physics, that’s the real problem.
no side effects
http://dtenergy.org/index.php?id=276
http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2077
and since you understand german
http://dtenergy.org/fileadmin/dateiliste/Dokumente/DTE_Engineering/Medienberichte/St.Tagblatt_24.03.2011.pdf
I believe you. my point was more that there could be made an argument that resonates with the earth crowd.
it would not matter if it was a false or dishonest argument.
and on a serious note: if we go large scale, really large scale, and replace nuclear and coal with thermo power, I’m really not sure if that would not have some long term consequences.
but small or medium scale, you’re probably right
und ich habe so einen Artikel schon vor ein paar Jahren gelesen. die Frage ist nur, wer will in Europa bleiben, bei allem was hier so abgeht 😉
yet we physicists are the ones who look at you and shake our heads yeoman… oh the beautiful irony :). continue on with your prestidigitations and intellectual legerdemain… as pete said.. arguing with your ilk over anything remotely regarding the scientific method is a fruitless endeavour indeed…