Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

  1. #1
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    BBC News - Inquiry into stolen climate e-mails

    Details of a university inquiry into e-mails stolen from scientists at one of the UK's leading climate research units are likely to be made public next week.

    Announcement of a chair of the inquiry and terms of reference will probably be made on Monday, a source says.

    The University of East Anglia's (UEA) press office did not confirm the date.

    But a spokesperson said information about the investigation into the hack at UEA's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) would be made public very soon.

    Scientists will be scrutinising the choice of chair and the terms of reference.

    One senior climate scientist told me that the chair would have to be a person accepted by both mainstream climate scientists and sceptics as a highly respected figure without strong connections to either group.

    BBC News understands that senior individuals at UEA have acknowledged the potential damage to the university's reputation from the CRU affair and are anxious to clear the institution's name.

    But there is a risk that some people will not accept the findings of any inquiry unless it is fully independent, as demanded by the former UK Chancellor Lord Lawson earlier in the week.

    A petition is running on the 10 Downing Street website calling for CRU to be suspended from preparation of any government climate statistics until the allegations have been fully investigated.

    Professor Sir David King, the former government chief scientist, told BBC News there are three key issues:

    how did the leakage occur - was there any payment in the process?

    the alleged behaviour of the scientists indicated by the e-mails

    does this have any impact on the scientific conclusion?

    If an independent inquiry encompassed all three aspects, Professor Sir David said he would support it.
    Some observations:

    1. Anyone who ever believed that any professional association of ACADEMICS---devoted blood, sweat and tears to a POLITICAL cause---would act and behave as SCIENTISTS instead of HACKS elicits a lusty LOL! from The pleasure loving Prof.

    2. Thus Oblivious Obama crawls to Copenhagen beneath a hurricane of swirling headlines all aghast and agust over the bogused-up trigonometry employed by the warming watchdogs at the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University.

    3. For one day---Obtuse Obama will spend just one day in the city of Hans Christian Andersen.

    4. Remember what happened last time he visited the mermaid.

    5. Oprah went with him.

    6. Over-his-head Obama will pledge there to cut US emissions by EIGHTY THREE % by 2050.

    7. He might as well promise to rain lemonade.

    8. Climate accords are kaput says APEC.

    9. So does Time.

    World Leaders Put Off a Climate Change Treaty - COP15: Climate-Change Conference - TIME

    10. Indeed, Chairman Hu slapped down the proposal over capers at Singapore when he pointedly explained Peking's position on the topic---climate control, according to the Chinese, means that "wealthy," developed nations must subsidize the cleaner, greener growth of third world economies.

    11. Meanwhile, cap and trade is dead in the US Senate---ask Conrad, Pryor, Dorgan, Lincoln, Byrd, Sharrod Brown, Jay Rockefeller...

    12. The CRU of the AEA has really put Downing Street in a dilemna.

    13. Trapped as well is our inept president.

    14. So he escapes to Copenhagen to spout pretty poetry that bears no relation to reality.

    15. The incredibly shrinking charlatan diminishes.


    The Prof

  2. #2
    User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    01-03-10 @ 06:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    88

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    I have a degree in Physics and I have had trouble all along with the climate change people based PURELY on a scientific basis. The degree flunctuations that they have claimed over the past 100 years are dependent on tenths and hundredths of a degree - something that the measuring devices from 100 years ago could not measure very precisely.

    Also, I have looked and looked but found no scientific basis for CO2 to be a 'greenhouse' gas other than Venus has a large concentration of CO2 and Methane in its atmosphere and is much hotter than the Earth. It is also much closer to the Sun and receives a nice multiple (I can't remember it exactly off the top of my head but recall it being 10 or more times as much) of more solar radiation than Earth does.

    Unfortunately, it is a religion now that we have to cut emissions in order to 'save the planet'. This cult is very strong in the political elite and taken very seriously in the Western World so we probably will see some more attempts to cut them through the force of government regulations and laws.

  3. #3
    Norville Rogers
    Kernel Sanders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    Quote Originally Posted by carlkay58 View Post
    Also, I have looked and looked but found no scientific basis for CO2 to be a 'greenhouse' gas other than Venus has a large concentration of CO2 and Methane in its atmosphere and is much hotter than the Earth.
    You must not have looked very hard.

    Definition of greenhouse gas

    Greenhouse gases are gases in an atmosphere that absorb and emit radiation within the thermal infrared range.
    C02 Absorbtion Spectrum

  4. #4
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    You must not have looked very hard.

    Definition of greenhouse gas



    C02 Absorbtion Spectrum
    OMG, here he comes with the stupid graphs.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  5. #5
    Norville Rogers
    Kernel Sanders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    I'm terribly sorry for introducing data into this thread

  6. #6
    Owner/Admin
    Benevolent Dictator Schweddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Plano, TX
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    11,512
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    I'm terribly sorry for introducing data into this thread
    Indeed, data is a challenge for some folks because they have to read it.

    C02 is very much a greenhouse gas. Without C02 turning into 03 (absorbing direct sunlight), we would all burn up. Thus C02 -> 03 = good!

    However, with too much 03, not enough of the suns' reflections escape back out or so goes the theory.
    If you analyse it, I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. -Ronald Reagan

    I am also known as "vauge".

  7. #7
    User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    01-03-10 @ 06:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    88

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    But as I read the graph, then O2+O3 and H2O are also greenhouse gasses because they both absorb and emit radiation in the infrared range. Some more so than CO2.

    Energy absorption and emision are methods of storing energy. When the energy is incoming from the sun, it is absorbed by the various atmospheric and ground components (along with some plant and animal matter). At night there is a lack of incoming energy so we have more emisions than absorptions. That is a normal and natural mechanic.

    Atmospheric absorption is the real key here, because it absorbs the energy before it reaches the ground and 'heats' the atmsophere. However the amount of energy that reaches and is absorbed at ground level is what warms the world, gasses do not absorb and hold the heat like solids do (go out and stand on some black top in the early dusk after a sunny day for a good illustration of this principle). But CO2 is the primary key to cloud formation. The clouds (being white) reflect the entire spectrum of visible light and a majority of the infra-red back into space. This reduces the amount of energy that reaches the ground.

    The warming of the oceans is the basis of global warming theory. So the energy from the sun must reach the water (which has a better heat absorption capability of anything else on the surface of the world) in order to truly add to the heat of the world. If atmospheric CO2 is helping form clouds which bounce the radiation back into space, then how is it helping warm the world?

    The key to ALL of this is that the energy radiating from the sun is the source of the energy passing through the atmosphere and warming the world. The global warming theory assumes that this radiation is a constant. It is not. The sun goes through a solar cycle with a period of 11 years with a greater cycle of 66 years. So whenever you take a 100 year sample of data on the world, you have to be careful when you choose your start and end points or you find yourself (as the global warming folks did) with the starting point at the low point in the cycle comparing to the high point of another cycle. Thus you are comparing the two extremes - 100 years ago it was the coldest while 1998 was close to the peak of the warmest.

    So now go back and compare world temperatures through various means to today's temperatures. An interesting fact emerges, the world has a lack of ice caps for over 50% of its existence and the average world temperature is lower now than the historical average by about 5 degrees C.

    In the 1300s the world went through a mini-ice age for about 150 years. We don't know why, but the solar radiation was drastically reduced and growing seasons in France were reduced to as few as six weeks for several years in a row. The average world temperature has yet to reach the pre-mini ice age average.

    So I still say that the nomination of CO2 as a greenhouse gas is nebulous at best since water vapor is actually better at absorbing and emitting in the infra-red range as shown by your graph, but we are not working at removing it from the atmosphere.

  8. #8
    Professor
    Dutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern Arkansas
    Last Seen
    08-23-17 @ 09:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,808

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    I'm terribly sorry for introducing data into this thread
    So.....when do you delete it and ask us to simply trust you?
    Last edited by Dutch; 11-30-09 at 06:06 PM.

  9. #9
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    I'm terribly sorry for introducing data into this thread
    The question is..... where did that data come from? From the criminals that have been massaging the data for 30 years? From the criminals that have been covering up any data that doesn't fit their political agenda?

    Is that the data you are introducing? If not, how do you know?

    BTW……
    ScienceDaily (Feb. 10, 2009) — The leaves of soybeans grown at the elevated carbon dioxide (CO2) levels predicted for the year 2050 respire more than those grown under current atmospheric conditions, researchers report, a finding that will help fine-tune climate models and could point to increased crop yields as CO2 levels rise.
    High Carbon Dioxide Boosts Plant Respiration, Potentially Affecting Climate And Crops

    Seems like it is a self regulating system.... the more CO2, the more plant growth. The more plant growth, the more CO2 used. Maybe you GW disciples need to find a different boogieman.... like maybe oxygen.

    There you go.... decrease the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, maybe even to 0% and we won't have to worry about Global Warming.....errrrr...... Climate change......errrrrrrr..... the next Ice age at all!!!!
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  10. #10
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Inquiry Into Stolen Climate E-Mails

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    OMG, here he comes with the stupid graphs.
    Poor American. Graphs are smarter than him.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •