New Climate Data Rigging Scandal Rocks U.S. Government

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I would care about climate change if I was able to make a profit from it. Sadly, that's not the case. I will likely be dead before the possible dangerous side effects of it anyways so why should I give a ? And please don't use "what about future generations" argument. Do you honestly think people's ancestors thought "should we be doing what we are doing right now at this moment or should we stop because of what our future descendants might have to experience as a result of our actions"? They didn't give a about us so why should we give a about out future descendants?

We get it. You only give a about yourself and those you "are able to make a profit from."

It's getting to the point where it seems that you are just trolling.

[MannyIsGod]

It was a key part of the scandal several years ago... you know, the leaked IPCC emails about fudged data...? But hey don't let that stop you from throwing ad hominem attacks in my direction. I don't have time for them, nor I the need for internet badgering.

Its not ad hominem at all. You don't display much knowledge on the subject. As an example, the emails that were stolen (leaked is cute) and then used out of context were not IPCC emails. They were taken from a research organization at a UK university. Then, EIGHT inquiries into the situation found NO evidence of wrongdoing and yet this doesn't seem to stop you from thinking there is evidence here to show we are being lied to.

Hence, why the 'remote' stations conveniently disappeared from the calculations whenever they failed to receive proper maintenance.

Hence, more proof you simply don't know what you're talking about. You know what happens when you put the removed stations back into the dataset? The record shows more heating. The data is still there. Its not being hidden away and analysis with it can easily be run. You're welcome to duplicate the work yourself if you're so skeptical.

Or read up on it.

http://clearclimatecode.org/

I linked you to Berkley Earth because their initial temperature reproduction was funded in part by those who are skeptical of global warming. People such as the Koch brothers. It turns out their reproduction is virtually identical as every other. They also have a poster on that site that was presented at AGU just a couple of months ago with a genized US temperature data set that - shockingly - shows the warming in the US that every other data set shows.

It gets old having to listen to people like you who are obviously talking out of their ass. Thats not an ad hominen attack at all but the observation of someone who DOES know the facts behind climate science.

Nah man... just let the honest-Abe, doesn't-ever-lie-government tell you what you want to hear... it's your perogative, after all... I don't care anymore.

Except its not the government. Its scientists in every high impact peer reviewed geoscience journal. If you have actual proof of wrongdoing or fraudulent use of data then please by all means present it. You've done nothing but make allusions to oft used bull that has been proven wrong time and time again.

[MannyIsGod]

Just for the record (in case you haven't noticed)... I've been avoiding these controversial subjects for the most part.

I came to the realization that no one cares what anybody else thinks... No one has anything to prove to anyone else, and ultimately there's no desire to incur the wrath of others needlessly... To each their own.

Just embrace what brings us to this board in the first place... Our love for the San Antonio Spurs. Dissent for other topics isn't worth the effort.

Projection. I've changed my mind on here plenty of times when others have presented logical evidence that shows I'm wrong. If you're unable to do so then thats on you but please don't project your close mindedness on others.

[pgardn]

I would care about climate change if I was able to make a profit from it. Sadly, that's not the case. I will likely be dead before the possible dangerous side effects of it anyways so why should I give a ? And please don't use "what about future generations" argument. Do you honestly think people's ancestors thought "should we be doing what we are doing right now at this moment or should we stop because of what our future descendants might have to experience as a result of our actions"? They didn't give a about us so why should we give a about out future descendants?

Have a good life.

Do you trip old ladies on staircases? Take their coinage.

[Phenomanul]

Projection. I've changed my mind on here plenty of times when others have presented logical evidence that shows I'm wrong. If you're unable to do so then thats on you but please don't project your close mindedness on others.

Ok, I'll bite... link a thread where this occurred... I'm not talking about petty mistakes, misunderstandings or subjective topics (like whether or not Landon Donovan is the best thing since sliced bread). I'm talking about you taking a stance on a quantifiable issue, defending it, finding out you were wrong about it and then admitting your error. If that's happened on this site (not saying it's never happened at all) - I must have missed the thread.

Close-mindedness... pffffttt. You missed the point. It's more about having a busy life outside of Spurstalk (now being married and having children to tend to) that such discussions (more so the internet variety) MUST take a back seat... especially because these threads usually devolve to a childish name-calling, or arrogant chest pounding... Again, no one has time for that...

[baseline bum]

Hilarious when engineers pretend to be scientists, like the one who claimed the second law of thermodynamics proved creation myths.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Hilarious when engineers pretend to be scientists, like the one who claimed the second law of thermodynamics proved creation myths.

bb, you josher, you!