• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

UK climate scientist to temporarily step down

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,483
Reaction score
8,227
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
UK climate scientist to temporarily step down

UK climate scientist to temporarily step down
Dec 1 01:29 PM US/Eastern


LONDON (AP) - Britain's University of East Anglia says the director of its prestigious Climatic Research Unit is stepping down pending an investigation into allegations that he overstated the case for man-made climate change.
The university says Phil Jones will relinquish his position until the completion of an independent review into allegations that he worked to alter the way in which global temperature data was presented.

The allegations were made after more than a decade of correspondence between leading British and U.S. scientists were posted to the Web following the security breach last month.

The e-mails were seized upon by some skeptics of man-made climate change as proof that scientists are manipulating the data about its extent.

-------------------------------------

Could this eventually be the "game" in "game, set, match."
 
This is as it should be. Any scientist that falsifies or truncates data to prove a point is not a true scientist. The fact that the doctored data 'proves' a political objective makes it that much worse. No scientist found doing this should ever be in a scientific post again.
 
This is as it should be. Any scientist that falsifies or truncates data to prove a point is not a true scientist. The fact that the doctored data 'proves' a political objective makes it that much worse. No scientist found doing this should ever be in a scientific post again.


Agreed, but hey, Van Jones is still in the WH, what makes anyone think that the GW greenies are going to sacrifice their religion over facts?


j-mac
 
About time the wheels fell off of this hoax.....;)
 
I have believed the whole issue of man caused Global Warming and the number of people duped by the HOAX was a testament to the gullibility of some otherwise semi-normal people.

Now the problem is that once someone buys into such a HOAX they feel it necessary to fight to the end trying to justify their beliefs and actions.

It is in the best interest for environmental wackos and their Organizations and groups maintain that this is no more than and isolated case and means nothing in to the core issue or they go out of business.

Environmental groups have never come up with sensible, reasonable, logical plans to deal with real problems that could and or should be addressed.

Their first tactic has traditionally been to go for the over the top fear tactic.

Their only option to stay alive is to claim that they too have been duped then regroup coming up with sensible, reasonable, logical plans and ideas that will address the situations.

This will put off their demise unless there is and effort put forth to drive them into extinction which I favor.
 
And yet another day is passing, and CNN and MSNBC completely ignore this story. Day after day. Not even worth mentioning apparently.
 
Last edited:
I have believed the whole issue of man caused Global Warming and the number of people duped by the HOAX was a testament to the gullibility of some otherwise semi-normal people.

Now the problem is that once someone buys into such a HOAX they feel it necessary to fight to the end trying to justify their beliefs and actions.

It is in the best interest for environmental wackos and their Organizations and groups maintain that this is no more than and isolated case and means nothing in to the core issue or they go out of business.

Environmental groups have never come up with sensible, reasonable, logical plans to deal with real problems that could and or should be addressed.

Their first tactic has traditionally been to go for the over the top fear tactic.

Their only option to stay alive is to claim that they too have been duped then regroup coming up with sensible, reasonable, logical plans and ideas that will address the situations.

This will put off their demise unless there is and effort put forth to drive them into extinction which I favor.
first, let me say that any scientist who has purposely misrepresented data should not be allowed to continue.

now, let me say that it's patently untrue that environmental groups do nothing. recycling is sensible, greater mpg is sensible, and overall reduction of energy consumption is sensible, reasonable and logical. these were the first approaches taken by those groups.

let me ask you a question: why would you want to see the demise of groups who could come up with, sensible, logical and reasonable plans?
 
let me ask you a question: why would you want to see the demise of groups who could come up with, sensible, logical and reasonable plans?

I wouldn't, unless they proved their ethics were second to their political biases, and that their findings were forced to fit those leanings.
 
I wouldn't, unless they proved their ethics were second to their political biases, and that their findings were forced to fit those leanings.
i don't think most "green" groups have hidden agendas.
 
i don't think most "green" groups have hidden agendas.

For some reason, many conservatives think taking care of the planet we live on is a bad idea. I don't get it.
 
For some reason, many conservatives think taking care of the planet we live on is a bad idea. I don't get it.


Strawman. I don't think anyone including the conservatives on this board think that taking care of the planet is a 'bad idea'. If they have said so please show it to us.

On the larger question, it is about control of the population that drives 'global warming' hoax, and has little to do with the planet one way or the other.


j-mac
 
first, let me say that any scientist who has purposely misrepresented data should not be allowed to continue.

Continue research, continue working anywhere, continue breathing, continue what? We'd like an answer.

now, let me say that it's patently untrue that environmental groups do nothing. recycling is sensible, greater mpg is sensible, and overall reduction of energy consumption is sensible, reasonable and logical. these were the first approaches taken by those groups.

They do worse than nothing. No new nuclear reactors in the started in United States since Jane Fondle's China Syndrome came out.

Steady unrelenting opposition to domestic energy exploitation, making the US criminally dependent on terrorist and socialist nations for it's energy resources, a clear and present danger to American liberty.

Determined opposition to illegal alien exclusion and repatriation, thereby encouraging increased harm to sensitive border region ecosystems.

let me ask you a question: why would you want to see the demise of groups who could come up with, sensible, logical and reasonable plans?

We're not discussing the demise of those groups, we're discussing the demise of environmentalist groups.
 
first, let me say that any scientist who has purposely misrepresented data should not be allowed to continue.

now, let me say that it's patently untrue that environmental groups do nothing. recycling is sensible, greater mpg is sensible, and overall reduction of energy consumption is sensible, reasonable and logical. these were the first approaches taken by those groups.

let me ask you a question: why would you want to see the demise of groups who could come up with, sensible, logical and reasonable plans?

I will grant you that they have done a couple of minor things but the ones you refer to have been very minor and had little real effect. The mileage issue came up in the 70s with the oils crisis and the big three were forced to compete. They didn't change their ways because of environmental pressure or lies.

Recycling is still a joke because because some recycled crap still ends up in land fills. There are protest against using trash to generate power but it is being done in Japan and has been for years and is environmentally safe.

The major lip service I'm talking about comes in the form of the current protests against Solar and Wind energy generation. Solar could endanger some unknown lizard or other BS argument. They protest Wind power because it endangers birds. I can see a giant wind field from my home here near Palm Springs CA. and I assure you having lived in Dallas, TX. Portland, OR. and all over CA. there are more birds here than any place I have ever seen in my life. I can hear them singing every day.

They also protest wind because they don't look nice. B.S.

They are fighting the very things they were crying for just a few years ago, because they are real solutions. They protest some electric cars because the batteries are a danger.

I have been an environmentalist all my life but I wouldn't walk across the street to support any of the usual groups because they lie and dupe their followers.

I learned from my Dad when I was a kid and used to go camping and before my Dad would do anything to set up camp he'd clean the area and we'd leave it better than we found it.

I have always felt it made sense. Let's look at one protest. I choose ELF. they want cleaner air so they protest excessive use of fuel that pollutes the air how? By burning Hummers. It is impossible to justify this dumb ass action because why? Because in just a few minutes they put more pollutants in to the air in the form of toxic smoke that the Hummers would have produced in 20 years of operation. Add to that pollution the the fuel burned by all of the emergency vehicles that have to respond.

Environmental nuts have shut down forests to logging knock thousands out of work driving up the cost of lumber, and increasing the trade deficit because we now import more lumber than ever. Truth is modern logging is sound and the companies replant far more than they cut. Parts of the U.S. have more forests than there were when the Pilgrims landed. That goes for game too. Places in this country face major problems because there are too many Deer and Elk, more than ever before.

Some of the best conservationist are hunters lie the Duck hunters who do more to sustain numbers than any other group, Government or private.

The global warming HOAX is about money, profit, and in Government it's about control.

One of the really stupidest things I have ever heard is the argument by Liberals that we shouldn't drill for oil because it would take 7 to 10 years to have an effect. Well answer me this. How long will it take for new wells to help if we never drill them. This is a typical type of unsound argument used by environmentalists and their supporters, and shows the clear lack of reason, sense, and logic. It's all the same.
 
Last edited:
For some reason, many conservatives think taking care of the planet we live on is a bad idea. I don't get it.

Whoa, now we're grasping. Good Lord.

Conservatives are absolutely for taking care of the planet. In fact, we are typically among the most conscious about picking up after ourselves.

We just don't build a political party around it, and lie and exagerrate environmental "crisis" to gain votes for other hidden agendas.
 
Whoa, now we're grasping. Good Lord.

Conservatives are absolutely for taking care of the planet. In fact, we are typically among the most conscious about picking up after ourselves.

We just don't build a political party around it, and lie and exagerrate environmental "crisis" to gain votes for other hidden agendas.

I have to congratulate you for this point. A quick comparison between the Conservative 9-12 group of near the same size as the inauguration croud in January and see who made a mess and who cleaned up after themselves. It sure as hell was not the Liberal Obama worshiping mob.
 
This is as it should be. Any scientist that falsifies or truncates data to prove a point is not a true scientist. The fact that the doctored data 'proves' a political objective makes it that much worse. No scientist found doing this should ever be in a scientific post again.

That's why government scientists are no better than government priests.
 
For some reason, many conservatives think taking care of the planet we live on is a bad idea. I don't get it.

We're all for taking care of our planet. But, let's try not to lie about what needs fixing. Common sense would suggest that wasting money on a problem that doesn't exist would ultimately be bad for the planet.
 
We're all for taking care of our planet. But, let's try not to lie about what needs fixing. Common sense would suggest that wasting money on a problem that doesn't exist would ultimately be bad for the planet.

I wonder how many trees have to die to print up a trillion dollars. good point.
 
I wonder how many trees have to die to print up a trillion dollars. good point.

There it is. How much paper does our new huge asses government use to write up all these BS reports about how the Earth is going to explode any day now? I guess they could use recycled paper. Oh, wait, that produces a toxic byproduct. Damn!

How much gas does the newly expanded government fleet burn? Using ethonal could solve that problem. Oh, damn, it takes three gallons of water to make one gallon of ethonal and ethonal fueld cars get half the gas mileage of gasoline fueld cars. Dammit all to hell!!!

Sometimes I think the treehuggers do more harm than good.
 
Last edited:
UK climate scientist to temporarily step down

UK climate scientist to temporarily step down
Dec 1 01:29 PM US/Eastern


LONDON (AP) - Britain's University of East Anglia says the director of its prestigious Climatic Research Unit is stepping down pending an investigation into allegations that he overstated the case for man-made climate change.
The university says Phil Jones will relinquish his position until the completion of an independent review into allegations that he worked to alter the way in which global temperature data was presented.

The allegations were made after more than a decade of correspondence between leading British and U.S. scientists were posted to the Web following the security breach last month.

The e-mails were seized upon by some skeptics of man-made climate change as proof that scientists are manipulating the data about its extent.

-------------------------------------

Could this eventually be the "game" in "game, set, match."

For anyone interested in getting better informed about how the Far-Right is desperately trying to spin a non-story...

Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For anyone really interested in the facts of the criminal case--here they are:

The Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, also known as Climategate,[1][2][3] began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, England, in the United Kingdom. An unknown individual stole[4] and anonymously disseminated over a thousand e-mails and other documents.[5][6][7] The university confirmed that a "criminal breach" of their security systems took place,[8] but could not confirm the authenticity of the material at short notice,[9] and expressed concern "that personal information about individuals may have been compromised."[10] Details of the incident have been reported to the police, who are investigating.[5] Later, Phil Jones, Director of the CRU, confirmed that all of the leaked emails that had provoked heated debate appeared to be genuine.[11]

Climate change sceptics have asserted that the e-mails show collusion[12] by climate scientists to withhold scientific information.[13] Other prominent climate scientists, such as Richard Somerville, have called the incident a smear campaign.[14] Jones called charges that the emails involve any "untoward" activity "ludicrous",[15] and Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research stated that the sceptics have selectively quoted words and phrases out of context in an attempt to sabotage the Copenhagen global climate summit in December.[16]

The CRU's researchers said in a statement that the e-mails had been taken out of context and merely reflected an honest exchange of ideas.[9] Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, called the charges that the emails involve any "untoward" activity "ludicrous."[15] Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Center, said that sceptics were "taking these words totally out of context to make something trivial appear nefarious",[9] and called the entire incident a careful, "high-level, orchestrated smear campaign to distract the public about the nature of the climate change problem."[23] Kevin E. Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research said that he was appalled at the release of the e-mails but thought that it might backfire against climate sceptics, as the messages would show "the integrity of scientists."[13] He has also said that the theft may be aimed at undermining talks at the December, 2009 Copenhagen global climate summit.[16]

Go Jim Inhofe, keep shilling for energy corps. Your kids must be so proud...:rolleyes:
 
Whoa, now we're grasping. Good Lord.

Conservatives are absolutely for taking care of the planet. In fact, we are typically among the most conscious about picking up after ourselves.

We just don't build a political party around it, and lie and exagerrate environmental "crisis" to gain votes for other hidden agendas.

I read your Penn State article that was taken from the Penn State student newspaper (not researched by US News & World Report by the way). I am not really sure how this line

Climate change opponents say the E-mails indicate that climate change researchers—including Penn State Prof. Michael Mann—exaggerated or fabricated global warming data.

indicates that the theory of global warming is definitely proven to be wrong.

Or this one:
That's what people are calling the controversy surrounding leaked E-mails among climate change researchers that climate change opponents say expose the researchers' falsification of data.

Couldn't someone say that you are kinda exaggerating a little yourself at this point? I'd rather someone independent have made these comments.

Having "climate change opponents" make claims that two researchers falsified info really doesn't tell me much. Little more details before we jump to conclusions, thus looking as guilty as the ones you accuse of being wrong.

But I can give another chance to prove it. The Breibart article mentions e-mail between "leading US researchers" of global climate change. Do me a favor and list these people so we'll recognize their names when they get investigated, OK?
 
Last edited:
i don't think most "green" groups have hidden agendas.

I do. Global warming is a convenient way to advance an agenda of more powerful central governments at the expense of ngo's.
 
For some reason, many conservatives think taking care of the planet we live on is a bad idea. I don't get it.

In point of fact dmany conservatives do want to protect the environment. I know I do. What is happening is many liberals/leftists are using suspect science as a way to advance a political agenda.
 
I will grant you that they have done a couple of minor things but the ones you refer to have been very minor and had little real effect. The mileage issue came up in the 70s with the oils crisis and the big three were forced to compete. They didn't change their ways because of environmental pressure or lies.

Recycling is still a joke because because some recycled crap still ends up in land fills. There are protest against using trash to generate power but it is being done in Japan and has been for years and is environmentally safe.

The major lip service I'm talking about comes in the form of the current protests against Solar and Wind energy generation. Solar could endanger some unknown lizard or other BS argument. They protest Wind power because it endangers birds. I can see a giant wind field from my home here near Palm Springs CA. and I assure you having lived in Dallas, TX. Portland, OR. and all over CA. there are more birds here than any place I have ever seen in my life. I can hear them singing every day.

They also protest wind because they don't look nice. B.S.

They are fighting the very things they were crying for just a few years ago, because they are real solutions. They protest some electric cars because the batteries are a danger.

I have been an environmentalist all my life but I wouldn't walk across the street to support any of the usual groups because they lie and dupe their followers.

I learned from my Dad when I was a kid and used to go camping and before my Dad would do anything to set up camp he'd clean the area and we'd leave it better than we found it.

I have always felt it made sense. Let's look at one protest. I choose ELF. they want cleaner air so they protest excessive use of fuel that pollutes the air how? By burning Hummers. It is impossible to justify this dumb ass action because why? Because in just a few minutes they put more pollutants in to the air in the form of toxic smoke that the Hummers would have produced in 20 years of operation. Add to that pollution the the fuel burned by all of the emergency vehicles that have to respond.

Environmental nuts have shut down forests to logging knock thousands out of work driving up the cost of lumber, and increasing the trade deficit because we now import more lumber than ever. Truth is modern logging is sound and the companies replant far more than they cut. Parts of the U.S. have more forests than there were when the Pilgrims landed. That goes for game too. Places in this country face major problems because there are too many Deer and Elk, more than ever before.

Some of the best conservationist are hunters lie the Duck hunters who do more to sustain numbers than any other group, Government or private.

The global warming HOAX is about money, profit, and in Government it's about control.

One of the really stupidest things I have ever heard is the argument by Liberals that we shouldn't drill for oil because it would take 7 to 10 years to have an effect. Well answer me this. How long will it take for new wells to help if we never drill them. This is a typical type of unsound argument used by environmentalists and their supporters, and shows the clear lack of reason, sense, and logic. It's all the same
.

Well said, sir, well said.
 
Back
Top Bottom