|
Author
|
Topic: our friend NASA is looking more stupid every day
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted November 21, 2009 09:52 AM
(or; I can't make it any simplier for ya)
The global warming scandal of the century
By Michelle Malkin • November 20, 2009 12:23 PM
Anthony Watts of Watt’s Up With That? and Stephen McIntrye of Climate Audit broke the story this morning of the hacking break-in at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU).
BBC confirms:
The e-mail system of one of the world’s leading climate research units has been breached by hackers.
E-mails reportedly from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), including personal exchanges, appeared on the internet on Thursday.
A university spokesman confirmed the email system had been hacked and that information was taken and published without permission.
An investigation was underway and the police had been informed, he added.
“We are aware that information from a server used for research information in one area of the university has been made available on public websites,” the spokesman stated.
“Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently confirm that all of this material is genuine.
“This information has been obtained and published without our permission and we took immediate action to remove the server in question from operation.
“We are undertaking a thorough internal investigation and we have involved the police in this enquiry.”
Researchers at CRU, one of the world’s leading research bodies on natural and human-induced climate change, played a key role in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report, which is considered to be the most authoritative report of its kind.
First things first: The alleged hackers need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
That said: The crimes revealed in the e-mails promise to be the global warming scandal of the century — and have massive bearing on the climate change legislation being considered by our lawmakers here at home.
Helpful rundowns of all the latest developments at Hot Air, Shout First, Andrew Bolt, and from James Delingpole at the Telegraph, who sums up some of the most damning e-mails:
When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change sceptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting:
“In an odd way this is cheering news.”
But perhaps the most damaging revelations – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.
Here are a few tasters. (So far, we can only refer to them as alleged emails because – though Hadley CRU’s director Phil Jones has confirmed the break-in to Ian Wishart at the Briefing Room – he has yet to fess up to any specific contents.) But if genuine, they suggest dubious practices such as:
Manipulation of evidence:
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.
Suppression of evidence:
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:
Next
time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
the crap out of him. Very tempted.
Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):
……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….
And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority…
The Chicago Way is the Global Warming Mob Way.
Stay tuned.
Posted in: global warmingPrinter Friendly comments (110) trackbacks (9)
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Jim Inhofe to Barbara Boxer We won You Lost Video
Solomonia
Vets On The Watch
The Snooper Report
Sister Toldjah
Vets On The Watch
Hadley Hacked: Hadly Science Bogus: East Anglia Cl
Macmind - Conservative Commentary and Common Sense
Peenie Wallie
Trackback URL
Comments
« Older Comments
#845211On November 20th, 2009 at 5:51 pm, Papa Louie said:
First things first: The alleged hackers need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I say turnabout is fair play. James Hansen flew to England to help get six Greenpeace climate change activists cleared of causing £30,000 of criminal damage at a coal-fired power station. “It was the first case in which preventing property damage caused by climate change had been used as part of a ‘lawful excuse’ defence in court. It is now expected to be used more widely by environment groups.”
Hansen, a Nasa director who advises Al Gore, the former US presidential candidate turned climate change campaigner, told the court that humanity was in “grave peril”. “Somebody needs to step forward and say there has to be a moratorium, draw a line in the sand and say no more coal-fired power stations.”
If a “lawful excuse” defence can work for climate change hooligans, why not for these hackers/whisleblowers? The only damage they did was to expose the truth and reveal data paid for by public funds (assuming the files were not doctored, of course.)
These are the same climate change scientists who refused to share their public funded data with others who wanted to peer review their hockey stick data and try to reproduce the results. Isn’t that what real science is all about? Then, when they couldn’t stall any longer, they claimed that their original raw data had been lost due to a shortage of hard drive space. The “science is settled” and “the debate is over” my foot!
#845217On November 20th, 2009 at 6:04 pm, Papa Louie said:
“If you look at the peer reviewed scientific literature, the debate is over.” –Al Gore
There are at least two problems with that statement. First, it doesn’t hold up when the “peers” who did the review are in on the scam. And second, when it comes to science, the debate is never over. The greatest scientists in history became great because they challenged the prevailing concensus and won.
As a professor I knew once said, “Anyone who is in complete harmony with the science of today will most certainly be out of step with the science of tomorrow.”
#845220On November 20th, 2009 at 6:11 pm, Elm Creek Smith said:
I loved the email that complained that the data didn’t support the computer program’s projection. Sounded like our government when people started pointing out things like the purchase of a $1,000.00 lawn mower couldn’t possibly have saved 60 some jobs.
Climatology corruptocrats beware! We know you are liars!
ECS
#845221On November 20th, 2009 at 6:11 pm, infidel4life said:
Genuine science draws conclusions based on the data. These frauds are deliberately distorting the data to fit the pre-decided conclusions.
#845228On November 20th, 2009 at 6:26 pm, swede said:
infidel4life said:
Genuine science draws conclusions based on the data. These frauds are deliberately distorting the data to fit the pre-decided conclusions prevailing trend.
Which is what attracts funds for their research grants.
We may need a new definition for “Political Science”.
#845232On November 20th, 2009 at 6:30 pm, fulldroolcup said:
“The debate about gravity is over. The science is settled.”
– I. Newton
“No, it’s not”.
– A. Einstein
“God does not play dice with the universe.
– A. Einstein
“Yes, He does.”
– N. Bohr
etc.
#845236On November 20th, 2009 at 6:33 pm, tarpon said:
This is going to be good. Teh whole thing is a fraud and the information is now public. What will Al Gore say to his investors?
#845248On November 20th, 2009 at 7:23 pm, AlohaGuy said:
What will Al Gore say to his investors?
I need more money – my suits don’t fit.
#845257On November 20th, 2009 at 8:02 pm, blogagog said:
“First things first: The alleged hackers need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
Rly? That’s what’s important? Really?
#845264On November 20th, 2009 at 9:01 pm, tbear44 said:
On November 20th, 2009 at 7:23 pm, AlohaGuy said:
What will Al Gore say to his investors?
I need more money – my suits don’t fit.
lol
#845276On November 20th, 2009 at 10:21 pm, Mostly Annoyed said:
I believe intentionally distorting data in federally funded research is fraud. Knowingly using that fraudlent data to obtain more federal funding is also fraud. They should all be put in jail and when they do get out, prohibited from getting closer than 100 yards of any school and banned from any research.
Anyone involved in this fraud (all of the global warming criminals should be investigated by the FBI. This may be the worst criminal enterprise in history because it is being used to justify radical schemes and policies all over the world. Since there is collusion on a massive level this (and the ACORN mess) is what RICO should be used for.
However I expect President “O” is looking into how to give them all the “Presidential Medal of Freedom”, more research money and appoint them as czars.
If we are lucky this will blow up in the Dem’s faces, but I suspect if anything happens, these “few bad apples” will get a slap on the wrist and defended with more federal funds.
I wonder how many jobs they saved with their share of the stimulas money!
#845284On November 20th, 2009 at 11:49 pm, sbw999 said:
If true, this is just exhibit # 23458759098 showing that liberals are the most morally bankrupt, intellectually dishonest POS on the face of the planet. This is a fraud of gargantuan proportions; and only liberal lemmings are stupid enough to have bought this man made global warming horse crap 100%.
#845287On November 20th, 2009 at 11:55 pm, Republicanvet said:
On November 20th, 2009 at 10:21 pm, Mostly Annoyed said:
However I expect President “O” is looking into how to give them all the “Presidential Medal of Freedom”, more research money and appoint them as czars.
I doubt ObowMao would do anything, or any other dimmy for that matter.
Considering the volume of email, they should take the same tack as Breitbart.
Should the powers that be choose not to act on this fraud, trickle them out a little at a time.
Kill the whole Gorebal Warming Religion by a thousand email paper cuts.
#845346On November 21st, 2009 at 7:44 am, Danceswithdachshunds said:
The damage control spin machine quickly went into over-drive. Gavin Schmitt:
The timing of this particular episode is probably not coincidental. But if cherry-picked out-of-context phrases from stolen personal emails is the only response to the weight of the scientific evidence for the human influence on climate change, then there probably isn’t much to it.
Is it just me or does anybody else notice one GIGANTONORMOUS ASSUMPTION in the logic of that statement?
Gavin – Real scientists probably should not worry too much about cherry picked emails but … they ought to damn well care about cherry picked DATA that comprises the very essence of the ’scientific evidence’ that you so pompously claim has weight.
(I posted this here because Gavin Schmitt routinely DELETES all comments on his site that are too tough for his ego to deal with.)
#845350On November 21st, 2009 at 8:07 am, Danceswithdachshunds said:
On the GRAVY TRAIN of politically crafted ’science’ – there’s bound to be a little ~leakage~ along the way.
Joanne Nova wrote:
The most telling point is that after spending $30 billion on pure science research no one is able to point to a single piece of empirical evidence that man-made carbon dioxide has a significant effect on the global climate.
IMO, that statement concisely describes the FOUNDATIONAL problem at hand.
#845353On November 21st, 2009 at 8:49 am, jangar said:
As a professor I knew once said, “Anyone who is in complete harmony with the science of today will most certainly be out of step with the science of tomorrow.”
Yes. It’s as if they have declared “We have arrived at all truth…now shut up and go away”.
[ November 21, 2009, 09:53 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted November 24, 2009 03:16 PM
NASA, who can't make it any simplier, and 20gauge, will probably poo poo this information because he thinks John Lott is a questionable character, or something like that? I suppose that doesn't apply to "scientists" that tweak their own data while dogpiling those that disagree. My entire argument about dishonest "scientists" is explained below. I'm not antiscientist, at all. I'm against these true believers that create and cherry pick their own data putting their politics before truth. And, if that weren't enough, they bully stupid government offricials into craming stupid CAP AND TRADE SCHEMES based on wet dreams, down the public's throat. A particularly low form of creature, gives all scientists a bad name, even those that work for NASA. And those guys have their own particular skeletons in the closet. Read on~
Updated November 24, 2009
Why You Should Be Hot and Bothered About 'Climate-gate'
by John Lott
, FOXNews.com
A coordinated campaign to hide scientific information about climate change appears unprecedented. Could it wind up costing us trillions?
print email share recommend (8)
AP2009
AP
Science depends on good quality of data. It also relies on replication and sharing data. But the last couple of days have uncovered some shocking revelations. Computer hackers have obtained 160 megabytes of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. These e-mails, which have now been confirmed as real, involved many researchers across the globe with ideologically similar advocates around the world. They were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global warming claims. The academics here also worked closely with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Professor Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit, and Professor Michael Mann at Pennsylvania State University, who has been an important scientist in the climate debate, have come under particular scrutiny. Among his e-mails, Professor Jones talks to Professor Mann about the "trick of adding in the real temps to each series...to hide the decline [in temperature]." Professor Mann admitted that this was the exchange that he had and explained to the New York Times that "scientists often used the word 'trick' to refer to a good way to solve a problem, 'and not something secret.'" While the New York Times apparently buys this explanation, it is hard to see the explanation for "to hide the decline."
And there is a lot more. In another exchange, Professor Jones tells Professor Mann: "If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone" and "We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind." Professor Jones further urges Professor Mann to join him in deleting e-mail exchanges about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s controversial assessment report: "Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re: [the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report]?" In another e-mail, Professor Jones told Professor Mann and Professor Malcolm Hughes at the University of Arizona and Raymond S. "Ray" Bradley at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst: "I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!"
Professor Jones complains to another academic: "I did get an e-mail from the FOI person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn’t be deleting e-mails" and "IPCC is an international organization, so is above any national FOI. Even if UEA holds anything about IPCC, we are not obliged to pass it on." We only have e-mails from Professor Jones' institution, and, with his obvious approach to delete files; we have no idea what damaging information has been lost.
Another professor at the Climate Research Unit, Tim Osborn, discusses in e-mails how truncating a data series can hide a cooling trend that would otherwise be seen in the results. Professor Mann sent Professor Osborn an e-mail saying that the results he is sending shouldn't be shown to others because the results support critics of global warming. Time after time the discussions refer to hiding or destroying data.
Other global warming advocates also privately acknowledge what they won’t concede publicly, that temperature changes haven’t been consistent with their models. Dr. Kevin Trenberth, the head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and prominent man-made global warming advocate, wrote in an e-mail: “The fact is we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
There were also been discussions to silence academic journals that publish research skeptical of significant man-made global warming. Professor Mann wrote: "I think we have to stop considering 'Climate Research' as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal." Other emails refer to efforts to exclude contrary views from publication in scientific journals. Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute, told The Wall Street Journal: "This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn't questionable practice, this is unethical."
The New York Times argues: "The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here." -- This from the same news organization that regularly publishes classified government documents! Yet, these e-mails were covered by England's Freedom of Information Act and should have been released when they were requested. Hiding data, destroying information, and doctoring their results raise real questions about many American academics at universities such as Pennsylvania State University, University of Arizona, and University of Massachusetts at Amherst. When at all possible available data must be shared.
Usually academic research is completely ignored by the general public but in this case proposed regulations, costing trillions of dollars, are being based on many of these claimed research results. This coordinated campaign to hide scientific information appears unprecedented.
John R. Lott, Jr.is a FoxNews.com contributor. He is an economist and author of "Freedomnomics."
[ November 24, 2009, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul Melching
Radical Operator Forum "You won't get past the front gate"
Member # 885
|
posted November 26, 2009 06:47 AM
Leonard
Its sad but you wont see any mention of this in the lamestream media these people and their followers run and emotion ,dont confuse them with the facts unless of course it feels good.
I cant help but wonder what is happening to a common sense world seems to have plum evaded us.
soon rivers will run backwards and cats will be sleeping with dogs.I think you said it best weez fuked!
--------------------
Those who value security over liberty soon will have neither !
Posts: 4188 | From: The forest ! north of the dez. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kokopelli
SENIOR DISCOUNT & Dispenser of Sage Advice
Member # 633
|
posted November 26, 2009 07:12 AM
I CAN make it simpler; The Earth has been warming up since the end of the last Ice Age. It will continue to do so until the beginning of the next Ice Age. It's happened several times already & will happen again.
As soon as a 'Panic Czar' is appointed, maybe the next thing to worry about will be the shifting of the magnetic poles. That's happened before too.......... therefore; it also can happen again. Someone will need grant money to study this and other important issues. Lots of grant money. Your money. You can afford it. You own guns. Kill two stones with one bird; Don't ban guns, just tax them out of existance.
--------------------
And lo, the Light of the Trump shown upon the Darkness and the Darkness could not comprehend it.
Posts: 8525 | From: Under a wandering star | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted November 26, 2009 08:58 AM
That comment above where The New York Times sniffs; apparently, the documents were obtained illegally, but that never kept them from publishing secrets, like CIA and others were reading terrorist emails.
IDIOTS!
There is no doubt in my mind. Liberals were dropped on their head as a baby.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul Melching
Radical Operator Forum "You won't get past the front gate"
Member # 885
|
posted November 26, 2009 11:40 AM
There is no doubt in my mind. Liberals were dropped on their head as a baby.
Not from far enough!
--------------------
Those who value security over liberty soon will have neither !
Posts: 4188 | From: The forest ! north of the dez. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dusty Hunter
Knows what it's all about
Member # 1031
|
posted November 26, 2009 06:28 PM
I'm trying to hang on to a thread of hope. This fella used to be a Liberal ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRUbwnkEPqc&NR=1
Posts: 346 | From: AZ | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 01, 2009 11:01 AM
But wait! Calm down people! This just in.
Prince Albert of Monaco: Forget E-Mails -- Global Warming Is For Real
Posted: 11/30/09
I was worried, for a minute. But there it is.
CASE CLOSED
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
skoal
Knows what it's all about
Member # 1492
|
posted December 01, 2009 11:24 AM
Thanks Leonard , I feel better now....
Posts: 251 | From: desert s.w. | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 02, 2009 03:47 PM
APPARENTLY, THESE PEOPLE BELIEVE THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS?
Updated December 01, 2009
Think 'Climate-Gate' Is Nonevent? Think Again
By John Lott
- FOXNews.com
The big question is whether universities have too much at stake, both ideologically and financially, to impartially investigate what has happened with Climate-gate
President Obama's climate czar, Carol M. Browner, and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs might think that Climate-gate is a nonevent, but on Monday Pennsylvania State University announced that it was launching an investigation into the academic conduct of Michael Mann, the school's Director of the Earth System Science Center. And Tuesday, Phil Jones, the director of the Climatic Research Unit at Britain's University of East Anglia, announced that he would stand aside as director while his university conducted an investigation.
Dozens of researchers at other institutions could soon face similar investigations. While Dr. Jones has been the center of much of the discussion because the e-mails were obtained from the server at his university, Mann is named in about 270 of the over 1,000 e-mails, many of which detail disturbing and improper academic behavior.
Last week, Mann told USA Today that the controversy over the leaked e-mails was simply a "smear campaign to distract the public from the reality of the problem and the need to confront it head-on in Copenhagen" next week at the climate summit.
Take one of Mann's e-mail exchanges with Jones. In an e-mail entitled "IPCC & FOI" (referring to the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Freedom of Information Act) Jones, head of the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, wrote Dr. Mann: "Mike: Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith [Briffa] re [the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report]? Keith will do likewise. . . . Can you also e-mail Gene and get him to do the same? I don't have his new e-mail address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise."
Mann acknowledges that he received the e-mail, but he claims that neither he nor anyone else actually deleted any e-mails to hide information from a Freedom of Information Act request on how the U.N.'s IPCC report was written. Yet, his response is quite damning as it seems that he goes along with Dr. Jones. Far from criticizing the request, Dr. Mann wrote back: "I'll contact Gene about this ASAP. His new e-mail is: generwahl@yahoo.com. talk to you later, Mike."
After the first week of revelations of academic fraud and intellectual wrongdoing, the University of East Anglia denied there was a problem. Professor Trevor Davies, the school's pro vice chancellor for research, issued a statement on Tuesday claiming: "The publication of a selection of the e-mails and data stolen from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) has led to some questioning of the climate science research published by CRU and others. There is nothing in the stolen material which indicates that peer-reviewed publications by CRU, and others, on the nature of global warming and related climate change are not of the highest-quality of scientific investigation and interpretation."
The move to investigate the destruction of information requested under the Freedom of Information Act is a big change. In Britain, the destruction of such documents is a criminal offense and the e-mails indicate that Jones had been warned at least once against destroying such information.
On Monday, Mann tried to justify the damaging e-mails by telling the Penn State college newspaper: "Someone being constantly under attack could be what causes them to make a poor decision." On the one hand, he denies that anything improper happened, but he then seems to accept that improper actions did occur. Regarding pressure, possibly, Mann should ask what the academics, who Mann and others involved in Climate-gate tried to prevent them from publishing in academic journals, think about these events. The e-mails discussed above involve the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's controversial assessment report and raise additional questions about what subterfuge might have been involved in its production.
The big question is whether universities have too much at stake, both ideologically and financially, to impartially investigate what has happened with Climate-gate. Given the amount of taxpayer money at stake, Congress should follow Sen. Inofe's suggestion and investigate these charges issues of destroyed documents and data as well as the general unwillingness to share the raw data paid for by taxpayers.
John R. Lott, Jr. is a FOXNews.com contributor. He is an economist and author of "Freedomnomics."
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 02, 2009 08:14 PM
Lying Liars caught fabricating, deleting and manipulating data. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
Jon Stewart discusses leak of controversial emails exchanged by British climate researchers.
ABC didn't cover it. CBS didn't either. And NBC apparently wouldn't go near it.
The network news broadcasts have ignored a growing scandal over evidence of a potential climate cover-up — and now they've even been scooped by the fake news at Comedy Central.
"The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" produced its "reporting" on Climate-gate Tuesday night, when Stewart quipped, “Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!”
Stewart described leaked e-mails from Britain's University of East Anglia, including one referring to a researcher's "trick" to "hide the decline" in some temperature readings in recent decades.
"It's just scientist-speak for using a standard statistical technique — recalibrating data – in order to trick you," Stewart said sarcastically.
Nearly two weeks since news broke of the e-mail scandal, climate change skeptics have gloated; a leading climate scientist has resigned; at least one U.S. lawmaker has called for an investigation, and countless prominent news outlets have deemed the story worthy of major reporting.
Still, according to a report Wednesday morning by the conservative Media Research Center, "none of the broadcast network weekday morning and evening news shows addressed Climate-Gate or the incriminating Jones development. ... This marked 12 days since the information was first uncovered that they have ignored this global scandal."
The Business & Media Institute had just as much trouble finding the networks' Climate-gate coverage.
"An examination of morning and evening news programs on ABC, CBS and NBC since Nov. 20 yielded zero mentions of the scandal, even in the Nov. 25 reports about Obama going to Copenhagen to discuss the need for emissions reductions," the Institute reported Wednesday.
But during that time, the Institute says, "the networks reported on pro-golfer Tiger Woods' 'minor' car accident at least 37 times. They also found time to report on an orphaned Moose and the meal selection at the president’s State Dinner."
Media Research Center President Brent Bozell reacted to the findings saying, "To pretend this story simply doesn’t exist is damning to journalism."
That left Stewart to fill the void — with analysis of the comedic variety.
The comedian mocked the scientists for discarding the raw data used to formulate the adjusted temperature data that much of the scientific community agrees confirms global warming is occurring.
"Why would you throw out raw data from the '80s? I still have Penthouses from the '70s!" he joked.
[ December 02, 2009, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kokopelli
SENIOR DISCOUNT & Dispenser of Sage Advice
Member # 633
|
posted December 03, 2009 02:18 PM
Even knowing that Jon Stewart would sit on Obama's lap & hug him, I still consider the Daily Show to be as creditable a news source as ABC,CBS,NBC, CNN, ECT.............. And I suspect that I'm not alone.
It's kind of a sad reflection on todays news networks.
--------------------
And lo, the Light of the Trump shown upon the Darkness and the Darkness could not comprehend it.
Posts: 8525 | From: Under a wandering star | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 03, 2009 02:38 PM
quote:
sad reflection on todays news networks.
I suppose that means, we can't trust them? When and how did it happen that the Media became totally biased? The bastards ought to be burned at the stake.
And recently, "legitimate" (haha) news organizations accused "FAIR AND BALANCED" FOX News of being the information arm of the Republican Party.
Can you imagine how Obama's ratings would slip if we had accurate and objective news reporting? I mean, are any of the major networks actually telling viewers and readers about the Health Care Bill; what's in it and how much it will cost and when the rationing will start?
Lying bastards. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 05, 2009 09:35 AM
Updated December 01, 2009
Critics Decry 'One-Sided' Media Coverage of Climate Change Debate
FOXNews.com
The mainstream media are abandoning objective reporting and acting as full-time advocates for measures to combat global warming, some media watchdogs say, accusing them of pushing for a sweeping international agreement on climate change.
The mainstream media are abandoning objective reporting and acting as full-time advocates for measures to combat global warming, some media watchdogs say, accusing them of pushing for a sweeping international agreement on climate change.
As President Obama prepares to travel to Copenhagen, Denmark, to attend an international conference on climate change scheduled for Dec. 7-18, the media are already "out in front of the administration" in pushing a liberal agenda, says Dan Gainor, vice president for business and culture at the Media Research Center.
"There's no more clear religion in the mainstream media than the religion of global warming," Gainor told FoxNews.com.
"It's gone from being a situation where there was some debate, to now there's almost none," Gainor said. "You can't say anything that even raises the question that there might not be real science here. That's not what journalism is supposed to do."
Obama, who will arrive in Copenhagen on Dec. 18, plans to unveil a 10-year plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. by 17 percent below 2005 levels. The president will also take up a 181-page draft treaty proposed by the United Nations that calls on representatives from 170 countries to establish sweeping measures to reduce emissions and combat climate change.
And the mainstream media are hopping aboard the bandwagon, critics say.
"The media already accept the theory of manmade global warming, so their modus operandi will be -- let's come to an agreement on reducing energy, either through taxes or restrictions," Cliff Kincaid, editor for Accuracy in Media, told FoxNews.com.
"The coverage is so one-sided," Kincaid said. "It seems to me the media have an obligation to read the (treaty) and tell us what's in it.
"Many in the media don't want to hear that. If they would bother to read the treaty, they would report that there are numerous proposals for global taxes. I don't think those are going to go over too well with the American people."
But other media watchdogs say journalists are not biased on the issue. They say they are simply representing the facts offered by the majority of the scientific community.
"Journalists are not scientists -- they do not have an extensive background in cutting-edge science," says Jim Naureckas, editor of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.
"It seems to me that you have to defer to scientists on scientific questions, and get their take on what's going on," Naureckas told FoxNews.com.
"You're dealing with very serious issues here. If one accepts that scientists generally know what they're talking about on the topics they're studying -- then you're dealing with an oncoming global catastrophe.
"It's clear there is a scientific consensus on global warming that is quite compelling," Naureckas said.
But critics say the mainstream journalists are ignoring the other side. Gainor pointed to what he said was the media's inattention to the scandal dubbed "Climate-gate," a series of e-mails made public recently after computer hackers obtained messages from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England.
In some of the e-mails, scientists appear to discuss hiding or deleting data that contradicts global warming claims. Some explicitly admit to hiding data that would indicate a global cooling trend rather than a rise in global temperatures.
"This is a story of global importance, involving potentially enormous scandal. Other than a little bit of print coverage, the mainstream media has made no comment," Gainor told FoxNews.com.
"I would like a genuine, legitimate, scientific inquiry before we spend billions or trillions of dollars," Gainor said.
Dan Amundson, research director for the nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs, says the media have given less coverage to the climate change debate than other heated issues such as health care reform or foreign policy. But he says there seems to be a pattern of support for "some type of international agreement and taking concrete steps about carbon dioxide."
"While global warming critics get more airtime and coverage than environmentalists would like, they are a small part of coverage over the years," Amundson said.
A majority of Americans believe that climate change is occurring and that it is a serious problem, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll from Nov. 25, 2009.
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 05, 2009 10:19 AM
(from the above article)
quote:
"It seems to me that you have to defer to scientists on scientific questions, and get their take on what's going on," Naureckas told FoxNews.com.
HM mini editorial
The problem here is the NAZI tactics of smearing those that disagree, in the unlikely event that their disagreement sees the light of day.
While we need an unbiased Media, that Media doesn't seem to understand what is expected of them....unless it be the burning desire to give a political platform to the most outrageous mass murderer or child molester.
But, the Scientific Method is apparently a little too old fashioned for these hypocrites. In other words, publish your data and let the chips fall where they may. They cannot stifle others with contradictory data, and those in the position of reporting are expected to be unbiased. Our Media, however, doesn't seem to understand the need, jumping on the bandwagon and becoming partners in advocating one side of a question.
Not only that, they attempt to destroy anybody and any opinion that disagrees with their own. This is beyond dishonest. It is criminal. If our Media sees no need to arrive at truth, above all else, they are shameful and worthless and do not deserve to be in the position of educating the public about any issue.
This is enormously serious. A Media we cannot trust to be truthful and objective? I say it is criminal and those responsible for publishing opinion disguised as TRUTH need to be held accountable.
How can we, the People, proceed with things like CAP AND TRADE and GLOBAL WARMING as a religion of selfevident truth when the Media holds the keys to discusion and won't allow both sides to be heard, or acts as judge and jury, pronouncing the issue as "settled science".
It's just shameful, and the entire reason why we can be led like sheep, somehow electing a totally unqualified Commander in Chief.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul Melching
Radical Operator Forum "You won't get past the front gate"
Member # 885
|
posted December 05, 2009 12:33 PM
You nailed it Leonard the complicit media is a most dangerous enemy.
They only publish as fact that which fits their agenda and asasinate all other opinion that
finds the light of day.
Pretty convenient set up for the left.
Unfortunatley many see the news and actually believe they are watching the news.
we certainly live in intresting times ehh!
[ December 05, 2009, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: Paul Melching ]
--------------------
Those who value security over liberty soon will have neither !
Posts: 4188 | From: The forest ! north of the dez. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kokopelli
SENIOR DISCOUNT & Dispenser of Sage Advice
Member # 633
|
posted December 05, 2009 01:40 PM
Hey Paul;
"May you live in interesting times" was an ancient curse from (I belive) China.
Oh well, at least it's not boreing!!!!!
--------------------
And lo, the Light of the Trump shown upon the Darkness and the Darkness could not comprehend it.
Posts: 8525 | From: Under a wandering star | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Az-Hunter
Hi, I'm Vic WELCOME TO THE U.S. Free baloney sandwiches here
Member # 17
|
posted December 06, 2009 06:45 PM
Short of a massive nuclear exchange, man couldn't change global climate if he/we tried. Gonna be fun to watch in the coming years how the "warmers" back out of the self righteous little corner they painted themselves into.
Funny, how at first we, the "deniers" were snickered at, and now the table turns, and the "warmers" look like bafoons....it tickles me to no end:)
Posts: 1679 | From: 5 miles west of Tim | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 06, 2009 11:05 PM
Yeah, this Prime Minister dink from England calls us Flat Earthers. Really? That's right, when you have no case, a liberal uses insults.
Hey, I'll settle for a completely open and transparent investigation. I got tired, (a long time ago) of believing everything these snake oil salesmen disguised as "scientists" told us what to think. Yeah, TRUST THEM while they manipulate data. Makes me SICK!
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrossJ
SECOND PLACE: PAUL RYAN Look-a-like contest
Member # 884
|
posted December 06, 2009 11:18 PM
quote:
Gonna be fun to watch in the coming years how the "warmers" back out of the self righteous little corner they painted themselves into.
Yeah, but it almost seems as if they have anticipated that.....its not 'globel warming' anymore, its 'climate change'. So now, regardless of where the median temp falls....its got to be mankinds fault, and the only way to save us is to....tax us!
--------------------
A friend will help you move. A good friend will help you move a body.
Posts: 1025 | From: on a water tower | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 07, 2009 12:03 PM
What follows is so much garbage contained in a single dispatch, this dweeb ARTHER MAX deserves a Nobel and an Oscar and a Pulitzer for totally biased reporting. read on~
UN climate conference opens with pressure on US
By ARTHUR MAX, AP
COPENHAGEN -The largest and most important U.N. climate change conference in history opened Monday, with organizers warning diplomats from 192 nations that this could be the last, best chance for a deal to protect the world from calamitous global warming.
Negotiations have dragged on for two years and only recently have shown signs of breakthroughs with new commitments from major emitters such as the United States, China and India to control greenhouse gas emissions.
In a signal the Obama administration is prepared to act without congressional action, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it has concluded that greenhouse gases are endangering Americans' health and must be regulated.
The two-week conference convened in an upbeat mood after a series of promises by rich and emerging economies to curb their greenhouse gases. Still, major issues have yet to be resolved.
At stake is a deal that aims to wean the world away from fossil fuels and other pollutants to greener sources of energy, and to transfer hundreds of billions of dollars from rich to poor countries every year over decades to help them adapt to climate change.
Scientists say without such an agreement, the Earth will face the consequences of ever-rising temperatures, leading to the extinction of plant and animal species, the flooding of coastal cities, more extreme weather events, drought and the spread of diseases.
With the commitments remaining short of scientists' demands, the pressure was on those major emitters for bigger cuts. Swedish Environment Minister Anders Carlgren, speaking for the European Union, said it would be "astonishing" if President Barack Obama came for the final negotiation session "to deliver just what was announced in last week's press release."
The U.S. EPA said the scientific evidence surrounding climate change clearly shows that greenhouse gases "threaten the public health and welfare of the American people" and that the pollutants — mainly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels — should be regulated under the Clean Air Act.
American business groups have strongly argued against tackling global warming through the Clean Air Act, saying it is less flexible and more costly than the bill being considered before Congress. On Monday, some of those groups questioned the timing of the EPA announcement, calling it political.
Climate activists in Copenhagen said the decision could help the Obama administration move ahead on climate policy without waiting for action from Congress.
"The question is will they use it that way, or are they using it as a bargaining chip to threaten action, and get Congress to act instead," said Damon Moglen, of Greenpeace USA.
Conference president Connie Hedegaard said the key to an agreement is finding a way to raise and channel public and private financing to poor countries for years to come to help them fight the effects of climate change.
Hedegaard — Denmark's former climate minister — said if governments miss their chance at the Copenhagen summit, a better opportunity may never come.
"This is our chance. If we miss it, it could take years before we got a new and better one. If we ever do," she said.
The conference opened with video clips of children from around the globe urging delegates to help them grow up without facing catastrophic warming. On the sidelines, climate activists competed for attention to their campaigns on deforestation, clean energy and low-carbon growth.
Mohamad Shinaz, an activist from the Maldives, plunged feet-first into a tank with nearly 200 gallons (750 liters) of frigid water to illustrate what rising sea levels were doing to his island nation.
"I want people to know that this is happening," Shinaz said as the water reached up to his chest. "We have to stop global warming."
Leah Wickham, a 24-year-old from Fiji, broke down in tears as she handed a petition from 10 million people asking the negotiators at Copenhagen to come up with a deal to save islands like hers.
"I'm on the front lines of climate change," she said.
Denmark's prime minister said 110 heads of state and government will attend the final days of the conference. Obama's decision to attend the end of the conference, not the middle, was taken as a signal that an agreement was getting closer.
"The evidence is now overwhelming" that the world needs early action to combat global warming, said Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an U.N. expert panel.
He defended climate research in the face of a controversy over e-mails pilfered from a British university, which global warming skeptics say show scientists have been conspiring to hide evidence that doesn't fit their theories.
"The recent incident of stealing the e-mails of scientists at the University of East Anglia shows that some would go to the extent of carrying out illegal acts perhaps in an attempt to discredit the IPCC," he told the conference.
The first week of the conference will focus on refining the complex text of a draft treaty. But major decisions will await the arrival next week of environment ministers and the heads of state in the final days of the conference, which ends Dec. 18.
"The time for formal statements is over. The time for restating well-known positions is past," said the U.N.'s top climate official, Yvo de Boer. "Copenhagen will only be a success it delivers significant and immediate action."
Among those decisions is a proposed fund of $10 billion each year for the next three years to help poor countries create climate change strategies. After that, hundreds of billions of dollars will be needed every year to set the world on a new energy path and adapt to new climates.
"The deal that we invite leaders to sign up on will be one that affects all aspects of society, just as the changing climate does," said Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen. "Negotiators cannot do this alone, nor can politicians. The ultimate responsibility rests with the citizens of the world, who will ultimately bear the fatal consequences if we fail to act."
A study released by the U.N. Environment Program on Sunday indicated that pledges by industrial countries and major emerging nations fall just short of the reductions of greenhouse gas emissions that scientists have said are needed to keep average temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C (3.6 F) by the end of the century.
In Vienna, another senior U.N. official warned that the fight against climate change must not "cannibalize" development financing.
Kandeh Yumkella, director-general of the U.N Industrial Development Organization, said poor countries need "fresh money" to combat global warming, not funds diverted from efforts to improve maternal health or fight world hunger.
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted December 07, 2009 12:14 PM
Yes of course! Fresh money with no accountability. Why didn't we think of that sooner?
I'm going to be ill.
Sudden thought. How does jumping into cold, (edit: frigid ) water up to your neck illustrate GLOBAL WARMING? Tears, I like the tears and the children. Yes, children will tug at our collective heartstrings and compel us to do the right thing. If logic doesn't work, if exposing fraud doesn't work, how about a little emotion from small children? That's always good for misdirecting the question.
We can't win with so many liars and cheats and ignorant misguided people willing to go along with anything THE EXPERTS TELL THEM!
I think evolution has hit the highwater mark a long time ago. We are sliding downhill very fast.
Good hunting. LB
edit: BTW, THANKS NASA. This whole thing could have been stopped if you had used a little common sense and explained the facts, and mentioned the concept of integrity to your "scientific" friends who pursue the funding and the grants based on lies and half baked theories. Yeah, thanks a lot.
[ December 07, 2009, 12:21 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32865 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Az-Hunter
Hi, I'm Vic WELCOME TO THE U.S. Free baloney sandwiches here
Member # 17
|
posted December 07, 2009 07:06 PM
News flash.....polar icecaps melt, women and children hit the hardest!
Posts: 1679 | From: 5 miles west of Tim | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Az-Hunter
Hi, I'm Vic WELCOME TO THE U.S. Free baloney sandwiches here
Member # 17
|
posted December 07, 2009 07:22 PM
Something a bit more refreshing, a look from the other side:),more in line with my perspective on this global warming bullshit:
"Many of you are too young to remember, but in 1975 our government pushed "the coming ice age."
Random House dutifully printed "THE WEATHER CONSPIRACY … coming of the New Ice Age." This may be the only book ever written by 18 authors. All 18 lived just a short sled ride from Washington, D.C. Newsweek fell in line and did a cover issue warning us of global cooling on April 28, 1975. And The New York Times, Aug. 14, 1976, reported "many signs that Earth may be headed for another ice age."
Yahoo! BuzzOK, you say, that's media. But what did our rational scientists say?
In 1974, the National Science Board announced: "During the last 20 to 30 years, world temperature has fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade. Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end…leading into the next ice age."
You can't blame these scientists for sucking up to the fed's mantra du jour. Scientists live off grants. Remember how Galileo recanted his preaching about the earth revolving around the sun? He, of course, was about to be barbecued by his leaders. Today's scientists merely lose their cash flow. Threats work.
In 2002 I stood in a room of the Smithsonian. One entire wall charted the cooling of our globe over the last 60 million years. This was no straight line. The curve had two steep dips followed by leveling. There were no significant warming periods. Smithsonian scientists inscribed it across some 20 feet of plaster, with timelines.
Last year, I went back. That fresco is painted over. The same curve hides behind smoked glass, shrunk to three feet but showing the same cooling trend. Hey, why should the Smithsonian put its tax-free status at risk? If the politicians decide to whip up public fear in a different direction, get with it, oh ye subsidized servants. Downplay that embarrassing old chart and maybe nobody will notice.
Sorry, I noticed.
It's the job of elected officials to whip up panic. They then get re-elected. Their supporters fall in line.
Al Gore thought he might ride his global warming crusade back toward the White House. If you saw his movie, which opened showing cattle on his farm, you start to understand how shallow this is. The United Nations says that cattle, farting and belching methane, create more global warming than all the SUVs in the world. Even more laughably, Al and his camera crew flew first class for that film, consuming 50% more jet fuel per seat-mile than coach fliers, while his Tennessee mansion sucks as much carbon as 20 average homes.
His PR folks say he's "carbon neutral" due to some trades. I'm unsure of how that works, but, maybe there's a tribe in the Sudan that cannot have a campfire for the next hundred years to cover Al's energy gluttony. I'm just not sophisticated enough to know how that stuff works. But I do understand he flies a private jet when the camera crew is gone.
The fall of Saigon in the '70s may have distracted the shrill pronouncements about the imminent ice age. Science's prediction of "A full-blown, 10,000 year ice age," came from its March 1, 1975 issue. The Christian Science Monitor observed that armadillos were retreating south from Nebraska to escape the "global cooling" in its Aug. 27, 1974 issue.
That armadillo caveat seems reminiscent of today's tales of polar bears drowning due to glaciers disappearing.
While scientists march to the drumbeat of grant money, at least trees don't lie. Their growth rings show what's happened no matter which philosophy is in power. Tree rings show a mini ice age in Europe about the time Stradivarius crafted his violins. Chilled Alpine Spruce gave him tighter wood so the instruments sang with a new purity. But England had to give up the wines that the Romans cultivated while our globe cooled, switching from grapes to colder weather grains and learning to take comfort with beer, whisky and ales.
Yet many centuries earlier, during a global warming, Greenland was green. And so it stayed and was settled by Vikings for generations until global cooling came along. Leif Ericsson even made it to Newfoundland. His shallow draft boats, perfect for sailing and rowing up rivers to conquer villages, wouldn't have stood a chance against a baby iceberg.
Those sustained temperature swings, all before the evil economic benefits of oil consumption, suggest there are factors at work besides humans.
Today, as I peck out these words, the weather channel is broadcasting views of a freakish and early snow falling on Dallas. The Iowa state extension service reports that the record corn crop expected this year will have unusually large kernels, thanks to "relatively cool August and September temperatures." And on Jan. 16, 2007, NPR went politically incorrect, briefly, by reporting that "An unusually harsh winter frost, the worst in 20 years, killed much of the California citrus, avocados and flower crops."
To be fair, those reports are short-term swings. But the longer term changes are no more compelling, unless you include the ice ages, and then, perhaps, the panic attempts of the 1970s were right. Is it possible that if we put more CO2 in the air, we'd forestall the next ice age?
I can ask "outrageous" questions like that because I'm not dependent upon government money for my livelihood. From the witch doctors of old to the elected officials today, scaring the bejesus out of the populace maintains their status.
Sadly, the public just learned that our scientific community hid data and censored critics. Maybe the feds should drop this crusade and focus on our health care crisis. They should, of course, ignore the life insurance statistics that show every class of American and both genders are living longer than ever. That's another inconvenient fact.
Posts: 1679 | From: 5 miles west of Tim | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kokopelli
SENIOR DISCOUNT & Dispenser of Sage Advice
Member # 633
|
posted December 08, 2009 08:02 AM
I remember that 'Global Cooling' mantra. As I recall, there was even a plan to dump black soot on the polar regions to absorb more sunlight.
Real blast from the past; Does anybody remember the anti-polution campaign slogan from the early 60's; "The Solution to Polution is Dilution". 'Twas in the days of the 'super-stacks'.
--------------------
And lo, the Light of the Trump shown upon the Darkness and the Darkness could not comprehend it.
Posts: 8525 | From: Under a wandering star | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
