JonnyBtreed
Well-Known Member
I believe I heard somewhere that Mt. St.Helens dumped more than double the estimated pollution of the entire industrial revolution at once....
HACKERS REVEAL!! Climate change scientists have been manipulating and fixing data
- Thread starter Big P
- Start date
doc111
Well-Known Member
Exactly! And it's not the only volcano spewing shit into the atmosphere.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Cool it with the volcano talk!
Don't be giving Nasty Pelosi any more crazy ideas. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Erupt and Trade bill emerging from the House soon.
Don't be giving Nasty Pelosi any more crazy ideas. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Erupt and Trade bill emerging from the House soon.
The Real Peter Parker
Well-Known Member
So the guy who kept saying 'global warming is real
' decided to leave. He probably is 'the man' who makes money off of the shit.
' decided to leave. He probably is 'the man' who makes money off of the shit.
doc111
Well-Known Member
Cool it with the volcano talk!
Don't be giving Nasty Pelosi any more crazy ideas. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Erupt and Trade bill emerging from the House soon.
You're killin' me!
jeffchr
Well-Known Member
the ocean absorbs CO2 and forms dissolved free carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, bicarbonate and carbonates.
the acid lowers the pH of the ocean. you can read more here:
http://www.oar.noaa.gov/spotlite/spot_gcc.html
doc111
Well-Known Member
bicarbonates act as a natural buffer to the effects of carbonic acid (which is a weak acid).
jeffchr
Well-Known Member
nah, I'm not leavingSo the guy who kept saying 'global warming is real
I wish I made money off shit
CrackerJax
New Member
But that PH crud can EASILY be dispelled by just looking at historical records, and using common sense (gasp).
The Earth has had FAR FAR HIGHER levels of carbon in the atmosphere than right now. Wasn't man made back then ( we contribute less than 3% of the total carbon released naturally by the way, not a tipping point for sure).
In those VERY HIGH levels (compared with today), the earth exploded with life, not the other way around.
Again, global warming will do a few things, none of them negative.
1.) more food can be grown (plants LOVE carbon)
2.) more fresh water will be available to grow them.
3.) Less ppl will die of Pneumonia and the flu (number one killer)
Global cooling will produce the opposite in all three of the above.
Reality check.
The Earth has had FAR FAR HIGHER levels of carbon in the atmosphere than right now. Wasn't man made back then ( we contribute less than 3% of the total carbon released naturally by the way, not a tipping point for sure).
In those VERY HIGH levels (compared with today), the earth exploded with life, not the other way around.
Again, global warming will do a few things, none of them negative.
1.) more food can be grown (plants LOVE carbon)
2.) more fresh water will be available to grow them.
3.) Less ppl will die of Pneumonia and the flu (number one killer)
Global cooling will produce the opposite in all three of the above.
Reality check.
Big P
Well-Known Member
it was easy to believe that we were causing global warming. in the beginning i was supporting al gore to be president in 2000
and i always thought bush was just lieing for special interests when he said he has no eveidence that global warming is caused by humans
but slowly as i began to change my views i starting thinking its quite possible he may be right,
and now this deception has been uncovered,
has this been on fox news yet? cuz this morning at quick glance they were talking about obama going to copenhagen again today to talk about climate change. but they did nto mention this scandle.
has fox news vetted this yet and is talking about it? cuz once they do you can pretty well be sure its true.
even the new york times has an article about it.
Obama to attend beginning of U.N. climate meeting
Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:49am EST
Email | Print |
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama will go to Copenhagen for a U.N. climate change meeting on December 9, hoping to add momentum to an international process despite slow progress on a domestic bill to cut carbon emissions.
Obama planned to make a visit at the beginning of the climate negotiations in Denmark, an administration official told Reuters on Wednesday, before picking up the Nobel Peace Prize at a ceremony in neighboring Oslo.
Obama did not plan to return for the end of the December 7-18 meeting, when roughly 65 other heads of state and government are expected to attend, the official said.
Obama has made climate change a top priority of his administration, but a bill to cut U.S. emissions is bogged down in the U.S. Senate. The U.S. House of Representatives has passed its version of climate change legislation.
Most nations have given up hopes of agreeing to a binding legal treaty text in Copenhagen, partly because of uncertainty about what the United States will be able to offer.
Environmentalists had hoped Obama would be present for the leaders meeting at the end of the talks to give legitimacy to a "politically binding" agreement that host Denmark still hopes to achieve.
In such an agreement, developed nations would set goals for cutting emissions by 2020, developing nations would agree to slow the rise of their emissions, and the rich would come up with new aid and clean technology to help the poor cope with climate change.
(Editing by Will Dunham)
and i always thought bush was just lieing for special interests when he said he has no eveidence that global warming is caused by humans
but slowly as i began to change my views i starting thinking its quite possible he may be right,
and now this deception has been uncovered,
has this been on fox news yet? cuz this morning at quick glance they were talking about obama going to copenhagen again today to talk about climate change. but they did nto mention this scandle.
has fox news vetted this yet and is talking about it? cuz once they do you can pretty well be sure its true.
even the new york times has an article about it.
Obama to attend beginning of U.N. climate meeting
Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:49am EST
Email | Print |
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama will go to Copenhagen for a U.N. climate change meeting on December 9, hoping to add momentum to an international process despite slow progress on a domestic bill to cut carbon emissions.
Obama planned to make a visit at the beginning of the climate negotiations in Denmark, an administration official told Reuters on Wednesday, before picking up the Nobel Peace Prize at a ceremony in neighboring Oslo.
Obama did not plan to return for the end of the December 7-18 meeting, when roughly 65 other heads of state and government are expected to attend, the official said.
Obama has made climate change a top priority of his administration, but a bill to cut U.S. emissions is bogged down in the U.S. Senate. The U.S. House of Representatives has passed its version of climate change legislation.
Most nations have given up hopes of agreeing to a binding legal treaty text in Copenhagen, partly because of uncertainty about what the United States will be able to offer.
Environmentalists had hoped Obama would be present for the leaders meeting at the end of the talks to give legitimacy to a "politically binding" agreement that host Denmark still hopes to achieve.
In such an agreement, developed nations would set goals for cutting emissions by 2020, developing nations would agree to slow the rise of their emissions, and the rich would come up with new aid and clean technology to help the poor cope with climate change.
(Editing by Will Dunham)
jeffchr
Well-Known Member
I don't get it. Where is the deception?
CrackerJax
New Member
Guess he didn't even bother to read the first post... 
Where's the carbon chart??
Lawdy....
Where's the carbon chart??
Lawdy....
GrowTech
stays relevant.
I don't particularly care about global warming, or what life will be like after I die, so I have no real position on it- but let me put it out there like this...
1) These hacked emails are fruit of the poisonous tree.
2) Any data in the emails could have been altered post-hack.
3) Few of us have any degrees or professional background in the topic.
We've been told lies by the government and leading researchers for years, some lies offering no incentive to the people perpetrating these lies. I am inclined to believe though, that where there is incentive in lying, there is usually a lie or two.
If you want to read the content that has already been released and mirrored all across the internet, you can torrent the information via this link. Of course, any of the data in these emails and document folders could be tampered with to create whatever information the 'hacker' wants...
1) These hacked emails are fruit of the poisonous tree.
2) Any data in the emails could have been altered post-hack.
3) Few of us have any degrees or professional background in the topic.
We've been told lies by the government and leading researchers for years, some lies offering no incentive to the people perpetrating these lies. I am inclined to believe though, that where there is incentive in lying, there is usually a lie or two.
If you want to read the content that has already been released and mirrored all across the internet, you can torrent the information via this link. Of course, any of the data in these emails and document folders could be tampered with to create whatever information the 'hacker' wants...
Straight up G
New Member
It is not a convenient truth, goverments have lied to gain money and trust since the beginning, a disgusting organisation, if you are taken in by them you are a fool.
Straight up G
New Member
Agreed 100%
Straight up G
New Member
Be carefull not to voice your own inconvenient truth or they will send their pig minions to take you away.
Big P
Well-Known Member
good find, shows evidence these emails are authentic:
BBC Climate Correspondent Was Forwarded CRU Emails Five Weeks Before They Were Made Public
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Tuesday, Nov 24, 2009
Paul Hudson, a weather presenter and climate correspondent for the BBC, notes on his blog “I was forwarded the chain of e-mails on the 12th October,”.
Hudson says he saw the exact emails that were either hacked or leaked from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University placed on the internet last week.
“The e-mails released on the internet as a result of CRU being hacked into are identical to the ones I was forwarded and read at the time and so, as far as l can see, they are authentic.” Hudson notes.
Hudson says he saw the exact emails that were either hacked or leaked from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University placed on the internet last week.
“The e-mails released on the internet as a result of CRU being hacked into are identical to the ones I was forwarded and read at the time and so, as far as l can see, they are authentic.” Hudson notes.
Following the publication of a 9th October article Hudson wrote for the BBC entitled “whatever happened to global warming?“, in which he questioned the science behind the theory of human induced warming, the BBC correspondent was discussed within emails to which several of the CRU climatologists were privy, including Kevin Trenberth, Michael Mann, Tom Wigley and Philip D. Jones.
Hudson’s article, which pointed out that there had been no increase in global temperatures since 1998, spurred Kevin Trenberth, one of the leading authors of the IPCC report on climate change to make the following comment within the private emails to his colleagues:
“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.”
lol what an asshole why is it a travesty that we may not be responsible for global warming?
lol what an asshole why is it a travesty that we may not be responsible for global warming?
Climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University also commented on Hudson’s piece, writing:
“extremely disappointing to see something like this appear on BBC. its particularly odd, since climate is usually Richard Black’s beat at BBC (and he does a great job). from what I can tell, this guy was formerly a weather person at the Met Office.
We may do something about this on RealClimate, but meanwhile it might be appropriate for the Met Office to have a say about this, I might ask Richard Black what’s up here?”
As we reported yesterday, in addition to showing that the scientists manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, the thousands of leaked emails have already revealed several references to efforts by the CRU scientists to exclude skeptical warming viewpoints and evidence from important scientific publications and the media at large.We may do something about this on RealClimate, but meanwhile it might be appropriate for the Met Office to have a say about this, I might ask Richard Black what’s up here?”
If it is confirmed that the emails were forwarded to the BBC’s Paul Hudson on October 12th, it would provide a strong indication that the source of the leak is an insider at the CRU, rather than an external hacker.
Hudson says he is in the process of providing a more detailed write up on the matter.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it was a whistleblower, not a hacker. Any detractor willing to dismiss the evidence based on an illegal hack is grasping at straws.
Mega-fail.
Mega-fail.