Climate Cat out of the Bag? Potentially dynamite revelations
Discussion
turbobloke said:
AshVX220 said:
I'm trying not to get to excited about it yet though, there are too many powerful people and organisations that will do whatever it takes to continue leading the public down this particular path. Don't under-estimate the power of spin.
Seems likely they'll want to "Do A True Believer" and say blah blah then lie low for a while before popping up again as if nothing happened.If true, this though may be a bit too much for that time-worn twostep.
ludo said:
An occasional individual scientist does that sort of thing, but an organized conspiracy? Not likely.
But they may not be working on a conspiracy, they may just be doing what they are asked by governments based on a political. On the big debate thread:ludo said:
it is not unreasonable for them [governments] to ask the scientists to investigate such a scenario and make projections based on their best understanding of the physics (as built into the models).
So maybe that's exactly what they have done, but as the data doesn't support the wishes of the pay masters people may have become more "flexible" with interpretation.Just a thought.
However, I agree that until there is any voracity on the provenance of this material it is all speculation.
It's Weapons of Mass Destruction all over again....
It does a diservice to the arguement either way, Governemts just need to 'fess up, tell us they are getting us off the strategic fuels for geo-political reasons and resign themselves to the fact they can't make money out of it now.
Were they bulls
tting all along? (or just redacting the inconvenient bits together - like a conspiracy but, well, scientific)
Are they victims of a well planned and detailed forgery? As ever, cui bono?
It does a diservice to the arguement either way, Governemts just need to 'fess up, tell us they are getting us off the strategic fuels for geo-political reasons and resign themselves to the fact they can't make money out of it now.
Were they bulls
tting all along? (or just redacting the inconvenient bits together - like a conspiracy but, well, scientific)Are they victims of a well planned and detailed forgery? As ever, cui bono?
ludo said:
You would have to be bloody stupid to do so with climate change, as if you know it is bullst, you will be proved wrong by the climate within your own lifetime, so there is little to gain (other than a prison sentence for fraud).
And yet you still don't see that because of the point you made above that it is most likely to be real and not bullst, you will be proved wrong by the climate within your own lifetime, so there is little to gain (other than a prison sentence for fraud).t?I'm being cautious with this whole story, as are many others TB included. You really should consider doing the same until more info becomes available. This is an evolving story which is yet to hit the mainstream, but it is big, and it will be heavily scrutinised.
Whichever side of the fence we sit on (ludo et al, Tb et al) someone will be eating their words when this is over and someone will be celebrating. This will end the debate I feel. Currently it looks like it will end it in the skeptics favour, but we shall see what government/climate "scientist" spin can do.
Dan_1981 said:
ANY mainstream media interest in any of this yet?
Nothing on Google Newshttp://news.google.co.uk/news/search?aq=f&um=1...
Plenty of hits on the search engine though, but none mainstream
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&...
One response and a riposte from elsewhere:
“Most cyber attacks are opportunistic and against soft targets. I doubt that CRU has gaping holes in their security systems, precisely because they fear the risk of attack from people wanting access their data.”
“Gary McKinnon faces extradition to the United States, where he is wanted for allegedly hacking into computers at the Pentagon and NASA.”
“Most cyber attacks are opportunistic and against soft targets. I doubt that CRU has gaping holes in their security systems, precisely because they fear the risk of attack from people wanting access their data.”
“Gary McKinnon faces extradition to the United States, where he is wanted for allegedly hacking into computers at the Pentagon and NASA.”
FunkyGibbon said:
ludo said:
An occasional individual scientist does that sort of thing, but an organized conspiracy? Not likely.
But they may not be working on a conspiracy, they may just be doing what they are asked by governments based on a political. On the big debate thread:ludo said:
it is not unreasonable for them [governments] to ask the scientists to investigate such a scenario and make projections based on their best understanding of the physics (as built into the models).
So maybe that's exactly what they have done, but as the data doesn't support the wishes of the pay masters people may have become more "flexible" with interpretation.Just a thought.
Funky Gibbon said:
However, I agree that until there is any voracity on the provenance of this material it is all speculation.
yes, absolutely. One way to provide voracity would be to reproduce the studies where the results have been doctored using the original data sources, most of which are not controlled by CRU/Hadley. The doctoring ought to be detectable if it is there.AshVX220 said:
ludo said:
You would have to be bloody stupid to do so with climate change, as if you know it is bullst, you will be proved wrong by the climate within your own lifetime, so there is little to gain (other than a prison sentence for fraud).
And yet you still don't see that because of the point you made above that it is most likely to be real and not bullst, you will be proved wrong by the climate within your own lifetime, so there is little to gain (other than a prison sentence for fraud).t?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff