How to get the damaging leaked University of East Anglia CRU files about AGW

The Democrats ran the last presidential and congressional elections by blaming Bush for everything, especially global warming.

/BAH

You are wrong. Nobody seems to have noticed the bill that the House of Representatives passed and is going through the Senate about capping emissions. From the little I've heard, and I emphasize the little, it's going to put even more burdens on small businesses.

/BAH

jmfbahciv wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news5.newsguy.com:

the entire "green" movement has been preempted by the Marxists as the newest way of seizing power. AGW is a big part of that.

(and yet they have the GALL to call conservatives "fearmongers")

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Buyers' Remorse:

John

What the world need is facts. Raw data, analysis source code, justifications for corrections, background on how trees were selected for ring analysis, that sort of thing. Climategate told us that the warmingist scientists are enthusiasts for an outcome and are prepared to hide or destroy data rather than reveal it, their software is a mess, they will twist arms to keep opposing papers from being published, and they and are conspiring to evade FOI law.

Spending trillions on their say-so isn't reasonable. It isn't moral, either.

John

Uh-oh. The Cahill Troll has discovered s.e.design.

Beware!

Thanks, Rich

Problem is, it's not.

It's just that simple.

Hope This Helps! Rich

And you're in denial of the fact that the polar bear population has been burgeoning, an inconvenient fact that's contrary to warmingist dogma.

Ah, why do I waste my time? I'll be out back, trying to teach bricks to sing. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

First, we need to focus on the politics of nuclear energy, a proven technology that works TODAY. I don't think we'll see controlled fusion in any of our lifetimes - nobody can control that much power, except for Hell bombs, of course.

Or, keep researching it, but with private funds. :-)

Thanks, Rich

Cahill's a troll. He finally figured out that everybody on s.e.b has filtered him, so he's looking for a new sandbox to piss in.

Hope This Helps! Rich

They're even blaming Bush for Osama^H^H^H^Hbama's escalation in Vietnam^H^H^H^H^H^H^HAfghanistan.

I thought he won by promising to get us out of there? Not that there is ANY promise he's kept.

Thanks, Rich

I don't think so. For the public, AGW was a fad that's fading. I think scepticism is the new fad, and even the press is starting to go along.

Joe Public is perfectly capable of opening his front door to see four feet of snow piled on his car and conclude that climate scientists are twits.

If Copenhagen bombs, as it likely will, there may never be enough political momentum to revive it. Things are swinging the other way.

John

The warming, or the warmingism? ;-)

Cheers! Rich

On a sunny day (Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:09:50 -0800) it happened Rich Grise wrote in :

There seems to be a plan, a company working with Los Alamos

Could perhaps work... Always a bit sceptical fof mechanical hammers doing things.... :-) ITER will likely never work.

On a sunny day (Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:21:10 -0800) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

Not if sufficiently indoctrinated.

Copenhagen will not fail, because it is a public show to bring carbon taxes to the masses. :-)

That was excellent. Lord Monckton's keynote:

"We, the people, are no longer afraid of 'global warming.' We are fed up to the back teeth of hearing about it. We are bored by it. And the bed-wetters know it. Their ever-more-outlandish predictions are a measure of their blind panic. The Dr. Strangelove of NASA [Jim Hansen, presumably], in the latest of a series of ever-more-desperate attempts to flog the dead horse of climatic apocalypse, recently wrote that sea level is about to rise by 246 feet, =93und anyvun zat disagrees viz me vill be arrested und put on trial for high crimes against humanidy und nature.=94=85

And

"It is lamentable that the National Academy of Sciences should have seen fit to publish so scientifically baseless a paper in its Proceedings. Regrettably, very nearly all scientists are taxpayer- funded: the United States alone spent almost $40 billion on climate- related 'research' =96 often in the form of mere political propaganda such as the Solomon et al. paper =96 in the fiscal year 2008. Since the scientific journals are intended to appeal to scientists, nearly all of whom are parasites upon the taxpayer, they pander to the prejudices of scientists by failing to subject papers such as that of Solomon et al. to proper peer-review. Instead, it appears that the reviewers merely check to find that the paper comes to the 'politically-correct' conclusion, regardless of whether there is any scientific, logical or rational basis for that conclusion. Indeed, most scientists no longer have sufficient training in the Classical studium generale to recognize how often and how grievously the arguments they advance in their papers on climate change are, in the formal sense, irrational."

Lots of people have made the same points. IOW, a consensus.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

Not for the first time IIRC. Probably due to the multiple groups.

How he belongs in either sci.energy or sci.physics is a mystery too.

Graham

In , Eeyore wrote in part:

Insolation at Earth's surface in theArctic and Antarctic year-round is generally around 30-40% of that at the equator - I would notcall that minute.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

the masses.

" Gordon Brown became the first world leader to fly into Copenhagen last night where he warned there was a possibility the climate change talks may not end in agreement.

The prime minister is attending the talks two days earlier than planned in order to help broker discussions on who should pay to tackle global warming. But he immediately cast a gloomy pall, telling reporters in Copenhagen: "It is possible that we will not get an agreement and it is also true that there are many issues to be sorted out."

With the talks balanced on a knife-edge, earlier in the day the prime minister had issued a call to arms to fellow heads of state, saying they had three days to "shape the future of humanity". As the high-level political part of the summit began, its Danish president, Connie Hedegaard, echoed the pessimism of the prime minister: "In these very hours we are balancing between success and failure. Success is within reach. But I must also warn you: we can fail."

Delegates at the summit are nervously awaiting fresh versions of the draft treaty text which more than 115 world leaders will want to finalise by Friday.

The first sign of progress could come today with Ethiopia's prime minister, Meles Zenawi, expected to announce new proposals for climate change. Developing countries say they need billions of dollars to cope with rising sea levels ... "

But sea level is currently FALLING !

Graham