When hackers hacked on the computers of one of the major centers of the so-called "Global Warming", they found out that most of the data was false/baseless. These were solid facts, and texts that took up to 100+ Mb in total. This was supposed to turn global warming upside-down. Instead, there was some dull answers from both sides. The answers from the "greens" were as follows:
1. 1,700 British scientists signed a joint statement circulated by the UK Met Office declaring their "utmost confidence in the observational evidence for global warming and the scientific basis for concluding that it is due primarily to human activities." 2. Met Office chief executive John Hirst and its chief scientist Julia Slingo asked their colleagues to sign the statement "to defend our profession against this unprecedented attack to discredit us and the science of climate change." 3. Climatologist James Hansen said that the controversy has "no effect on the science" 4. said that sceptics were "taking these words totally out of context to make something trivial appear nefarious",[15] and called the entire incident a careful, "high-level, orchestrated smear campaign to distract the public about the nature of the climate change problem." 5. He has also said that the theft may be aimed at undermining talks at the December 2009 Copenhagen global climate summit.
You know, Im no conspirisist, but this to me really seems like some giant fund-raiser thing. Save the environment! Buy our product! It's environmentally safe! That's all you ever hear anymore, and if you look at what it is, it's the same thing most of the time.
You know, Im no conspirisist, but this to me really seems like some giant fund-raiser thing.
2.
Don't you just love graphs that people pull out of their orifices?
1.It deffo is for some 2. I like graphs, they look pretty :P. But sod the money game, cos like I said, popping off atom bombs and chopping down the worlds breathing system, the rainforests, is a bayd bayd move. I dont need a graph, a scientist OR a fundraiser to tell me this. The shmit is gonna hit the flam... Just a case of when... and how bayd.
"Because we don't care if the rest of the world has switched units." scientists use celsius, and the article is in a scientific magazine. other scientific articles use celsius, but for some reason this global warming article used fahrenheit. the predicted change was "3.2 to 7.2" degrees fahrenheit. to convert you multiply by 5 and divide by 9, which makes 1.8 to 4 degrees celsius over the century. the change looks more significant when the numbers are in fahrenheit, like the article was guilty of trying to persuade rather than explain. that's exactly what climategate is all about because once a scientist becomes an advocate they lose their scientific objectivity.
