guilty

i was somewhat shocked at the content, be it real or fake, so you'll hvae to forgive my terrible titleing!

Again, nobody, including the originators of the messages, are claiming they've been altered in any way.

Don't see why they would as the source is not legitimate. Also how would they prove otherwise? Best action frankly is to ignore it.

Anyhow needless to say given the source I am dubious of their validity and authenticity. Even if they are legit and unaltered which I doubt, they probably have been "cherry picked".

They don't have to prove diddly. All they have to say is these emails have been altered, made up, conjured out of thin air. Let the hackers try to prove their authenticity.

Their ignoring it in this case tells me the messages are not only authentic but an accurate view of the situation.

That was precisely what a couple of scientists here said when a paper asked them to take a look at the messages. They thought the messages were authentic, but that the quotes floating around are a small part of normal correspondance, which just looks suspicious when taken out of context.

Same here. For example the blown-up "big" story of somebody telling somebody else he found out the "trick". It is not a cheat, he meant, but it simply is jargon insiders of the profession often use. "Trick" means not how to manipulate and get a certain wanted result, it simply means: the solution to a technical or scientific problem.

Scepticists already have played extremely dirty before, have misquoted sources, distorted data, have simply lied, and have mislead established scientists with faked petitions and have founded fake pseudo-"science" institutions that just raised claims and sold them as scientific material wehre indeed they just were selling propaganda. And it seems they are turning desperate if needing stunts like this. But the truth probably is that it simply is what thois forum has seen a lot in the past two: quoting out of context, and wrongly translating insider'S slang.

Look at what happens in the world, that is all you need these days in order to know that very dramatic chnages are going on. many consequences of man's activity on Earth are already so very obvious, also in the climatic field, that you really do no longer need just another scientific research project, after having had hundreds and thousands of them. The business-as-usual-lobby just wants to buy time by claiming "more research" is needed". In quite some areas, research on specific details and problems is needed indeed - but not on the fact itself that Global Warming and climate change are a real trend, and that human'S are the major variable contributing to it, and that the oceans have warmed up and become more acid and that species follow shifting climate zones into new places they had not been lived in befdore where in other places they flee from changed conditions.

etc.

etc.

etc.

etc.

Most sceptics are not really interested in more research. All they want is to stick to the same old ways and living styles that they never want to change, collecting more short-sighted immediate profits from the old business models and thinking it would ever be like this. A suicide's regressive hallucination about the garden Eden.

Just for craps and giggles let's take the emails at face value. So the media dropped a few lines here and there from the emails. Makes the story valid to the media outlet using just a few sentences here and there. Looks to be a cherry pick to us in that respect. However, if the emails in full context state that this is all BS how are we to know until we see said emails?

Here is the biggest question...What if the emails are authentic, not cherry picked and really dispells the warming theory?

I'm guessing a lot of people are out of work.

We base on that assumption of yours - once it has been demonstrated to be like you assume. Until then, it is just claims by "them" and assumptions by you, and we better base on the experience we have made with the scepticists' campaigns in the past.

In the end, the dogmatists will die out sooner or later. But with the consequences of global warming we will need to deal with no matter we "believe" in it or not. Global warming does not ask us for permission, it seems.

What warming? I was told it was cooling. Just another big lie? Just a fabrication? Just a self fulfilling prophecy? I would venture to guess both you and I will never find out in your and my lifetime. Big money has been invested in global warming. People have staked their careers on this occurance, real or imagined. If anyone is known as a forward leading authority on global warming certianly will not like egg on the face if in fact this leading authority is WRONG! There perhaps is a motive to hide such emails as a result? Well, sure. Maybe Al Gore is the inconvienent truth! No no! It has been drilled into us for so long it all must be true. We are going to fry on our own planet! I know this because a retired VP for the US told me so.

It's a no "Brainer". I don't believe what an admitted "THEIF" puts up on the internet.

The victims of the theft IMO don't have to defend themselves.

There are agendas on both sides. The fact, however, is that one side is right in spite of their agenda. The parallel global warming on Mars and other planets suggests that we may be, as usual, claiming too much credit for "global warming." The fact that the tree huggers have switched the tag to "climate change" speaks louder than any stolen e-mails.

Wonder what the Vikings would have believed at the beginning of the little ice age, had they had the same resources and twisted egos that we do? "We TOLD you not to sack Lindisfarne! Now look what's happening to the climate!"

then it must be true. For you have been told.

No, just a plateau phase. Something that in no way is strange or rare in natural metacycles and general trends. Like one rainy day in July does not end the summer.

Well, I already do. But you maybe live in a covered box in a hospital, I do not know.

Changes that do not take place from one day to the other, ar hard to see, and often escape people'a awareness. Socalled landscape forgetfulness (translated from the German) is such an example. It means that people living in the mountains, for example, do not note the glacier becoming a little bit smaller in size every year. But when seeing a photo from 50 years ago, and compare it to the present, they suddenly realise and maybe remember from their childhood that what today is green and brown even in mid-winter, 50 years ago was white all year long.


And established business still invests even more money per year in lobbying and campaigning to ridicule climate science, to deny global warming and to replace scientific research and existing data with manipulated data, data quoted out of context, fictional pseudo-data, faked consent of scientists who had been tricked by manipulative (blatantly lying) "petition" texts, etc. It all is about raising doubts that have no real point.

I do not publish my emails in a public blog as well. Do I "hide" them therefore?
And next, show those emails to be of any meaningful content regarding your accusations. I just explained somewehre above just one example in what way the sceptics' sensational conclusions about them could be misleading.

Ah, I knew that he would be mentioned sooner or later. Now that you just have relieved yourself from the pressure to mention him, can we move on, yes?!

Ooops - it's the end.


In the end, you will see the same world going down the drain that I see going down the drain. and when it is beyind a certain point it will mean nothing anymore that people like me saw it coming, while people like you still tried to deny it even while it already took place.

Actually we have a good idea what they thought. They named it "Greenland". Nobody would make this mistake now,.... but maybe in 50 years?

I did not deny anything. I need more proof. You have taken what you have read and digested it as verse.


You were told the world is heating up. So it must be true!?! :hmmm:

There is no denying man does create havoc in the natural course of order concerning the mud ball we call Earth. To what extent I do not think can be measurable. The Earth does go through her cycles. The Earths riches are not infinite. It is very finite and taking a look at the vast fruitless deserts on the raped continent of Africa would paint a very good picture of what will become of this world. Long before the Al Gore hailstorm of doom in the next decade. THis planet will become as barren as the moon. The world can warm all it likes....the resources will run out long before warming will do a thing mankind. Perhaps before that occurs one of the quacks that runs a country will push the big button because he is having a bad day. Good luck to us...global warming or not.

Are you serious? What makes you think the world is going down the drain?

Oh, right, these guys:
Unless you are a physicist like goldorak, how do you know how accurate these climate scientists are? :hmmm: All we know is what we read on the internet and hear on TV.

I can highly recommend the book

The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjørn Lomborg

He spends a lot of his book just looking at where the data comes from, how it was recorded, and how accurately it has been measured.

This is an example of how a scientist approaches the problem. He investigates and evaluates the data and not just accepts it. A very interesting read. :up:

Neal, I am adding together observations from many different fields, as far as I have had inout on them from media, reading books and essays on the matter, and getting some personal feedback as well. when I said the planet is going down the drain, then I mean the planetary conditions are detoriating that way that nations become ungovernable, conflict over ressources break out, natural desasters due to environmental changes, the self-dynamic of global processes already running and gotten started by man'S industrial impat and high number of population. In short I add scientific information and economic projection, culture-psychologic assessement and historic precedences, power-politics and ecologic facts together, and come to a planet that is exploited beyond what nature can repair, is intoxicated at gropwing levels, that is in a solid trend towards massive climatic change that will have - and already has - tremendous effects on weather, ocean, erosion, land and ocean environments as well as the lifeforms and ecosystems on this planet, and I see that more and more conflict between human tribes break out over shortening resources, with mankind being insane enoguh to still not think about enforcing strict birth control and limited population sizes in a long term project to achieve that. But reality will adress that - and we will not like it. It already is a horror picture show, we already have seen it becoming more brutal in the past 15-20 years, and it will become much, much, much worse int he future, due to local wars over questions of survival, and natural disasters.

I could sit down and look through my library and refer to details on this author and that scientific book,. but what I instead do, like all humans, is forming a general summary, a general conclusion of all the input, a sum of all my info and thought. And this sum of it all paints a grim picture for the future.

And many scientists have written about these themes, having come to similiar conclusions in their fields. And sometimes I happened to have read this or that book by them. I do not claim to be a speiclaist and insider, I am a generalist, and a man with wide interests in the fields of popular sciences. So why should I stay away from trying to form an opinion on these matters? To leave assessements and decisions to the established elites only who have contributed their share of respinsibility for the mess we are facing...?

I can understand, from a psychological point of view, that many people having families and children, tend to reject too grim scenarios for the future. Man needs hope to bear life, a future considered worth to live for. But I am not like that, I cannot help it. There are many, many precedence of societies that have decided intentionally, rationally to act and bezhave in ways that guaranteed their fall and extinction. We are not the first. We just repeat old patterns. We are just te first society falling that is truly global in size, where as all historic exmaple before have been local "only".

I again, for the x-th time, recommend the works of Jared Diamond: maybe I should have a thread with a summary of his work. I know no other scientist who has referred so compellingly to the importance of environmental factors in the fall of past societies, like he does. That does not mean environment is the only factor in the fall of socieities and civilisations, but it's importance until now has been dramatically underestimated. the patterns history teaches us in many examples - have been followed once again to a worrying degree in the present. Any many cultures fell for them, their people dying.

People are too obsessed with having a party and thinking since it is their life now, it must be good times. It's a variation of the old human hobby of assuming "all world revolves around me". Do they think they have a special deal with fate, or with the planet? If you hold a gun at your head and pull the trigger, you're dead - there is no cheat, no deal possible, no bribery to trick life.

We already see it happening right now, Neal. Just open your eyes, don't get dulled by creeping normality that hides the changes from your mind due to the slow pace at which they take pace. It's not about sometime in the future. It's now.

Unfortunately Sky's evaluation pretty much matches my own conclusions on the subjects involved. I have also thought extensively about this stuff and done plenty of my own research into it, and made my own observations.

I am also deeply concerned about the future, so much so that I am very reluctant to have kids, as I would not want them to experience what I fear is coming. I also suspect things will go really wrong during my own lifetime.

Even Monbiot says the science now needs “reanalyising”


Andrew Bolt@HeraldSun November 24, 2009 wrote:

Even George Monbiot, one of the fiercest media propagandists of the warming faith, admits he should have been more sceptical and says the science now needs to be rechecked:


If even Monbiot, an extremist, can say that much, why cannot the Liberals say far more? And will now the legion of warmist journalists in our own media dare say as Monbiot has so belatedly:


Scepticism is the essential disposition of our craft, yet too many journalists have abandoned it. Remember: the opposite of sceptical is gullible.