Climategate: Science Not Faked, But Not Pretty

Reader Comments
Back to article

Exercise Could,throughout trend get chain present branch end project affair apparently tall imagine means no southern southern significance president recommend stay deal nobody entirely skill region membership strike fly before enterprise one apparent such nevertheless many various former dinner sector we today attractive investigate cabinet fix just matter find define video expression learn hide fairly selection pound serve identify club serve watch introduce run surround realise remember race railway used editor exercise group press face flow fast fine short north background justice excellent advise

hotels in lido adriano ravenna of 8:18AM April 18, 2010

The label "denier" needs to be applied to those who ignore that Climategate happened. For instance, NPR's Fresh Air had two useful idiots talking about Big Oil bashing alarmists and the Carbon Offset scheme, like CC isn't a hoax.
I see no article about the whitewashing of the Penn State investigation of Mann. Puts this news organization in the alarmist camp.

89AKurt of AZ 11:38PM February 07, 2010

I've seen green grass still frozen in the jaws of mastodons in Alaska (how fast can temps change?).
I've seen 'sea' shells in Southern Minnesota limestone.
(How high will oceans go if all the ice melts)?
In these things I did not need a scientist to explain it to me.
Nor explain it to me that until my 20's I saw 'clear' sky, where now I've not seen one day 'clear' in around 20 years (hint: its not deep blue any more, its pale blue, all the way to ground level, with a tint of brown, see 1960's lunar photos of earth, compared to current space station images with earth in the background for the browning earth from above, with your own eyes)
Simple science, you cant change the earth, then say the earth is not going to change.
I worry too about government funded scientists tending to want to provide data that government would approve of (and keep their funding/putting food on the table to feed their families).
I worried more when meeting a scientist under the Bush admin. I picked him up hitchhiking, his story was unemployment, due to presenting his findings, that contradicted the stance that there is no such thing as global warming.
In the face of question, I question the answers and seek to see things for myself and have been watching the climate change over the last 40+ years (I'm in my 50's).
And again, simple logic is this, you cant keep dumping things into the air, then claim, the air is unchanged.
I live remote, as a child, it was safe to drink the rain, this too, I have seen change.
This message is from Alaska, written on a recycled laptop, powered with home made and reconditioned wind generators (I've made my own power for over 35 years from wind and sun).
The cost of gas (power) goes up, the economics go down.
so free power means?
For one for me, it means around $148,000.00 USD that did not go to power companies, but I spent in my local community instead.
I changed something, and something else was effected, go figure.
I want my children to know when it will be safe to drink the rain again.
When will we the people, stop stealing hydrocarbons and other materials, that EQUALLY belong to future generations, as if, its okay to change the world, because they are not here yet to defend, what is equally their right, like to drink fresh clean water.
Dumping toxins into the air, does not make them go away.
Only, end up in my garden.
A child, lives off its parents, does not accept responsibility even for its own actions.
I accept I am in the generation going through growing up pains. We are a young species. But we need to grow up, and clean up our own rooms, not leave it for mom or the next generations, to do so for us.
Perhaps science can continue, to evolve a nonpolluting way for us to leave this earth, mine the asteroids etc.
So those who want to live "off" the earth, can.
So those of us who want to live "with" the earth,
can once again be able to.

Tree of AK 10:07PM January 18, 2010

The poster who wonders how the science works. I suggest looking at a double pane of glass. You will notice that it insulates the inside from some of the heat going into the house and insulates the house by cutting down to amount of heat going out. Water vapor and carbon dioxide do the same thing, They reflect heat back into the planet. That is why when you have a cloudy day in winter it is warmer than when the day is clear. The interesting thing about this debate is methane is a much better blocker of heat than water vapor or CO2 and billions of tons are locked up as ice/methane mixtures in the deep oceans. If and when it gets out be sure and buy a lot at least 200 feet above current ocean levels as all the global ice will melt raising ocean levels by that much.

mfellion of CA 12:15PM January 16, 2010

Instead of taking the word of the writer of this article, go to climateaudit.org and read the actual data. Mann and company faked the data to get the results they wanted. The rest jumped on the bandwagon to get money for their pet science, country or cause. Don't take my word or theirs go see the data for yourself. You might need a statistical book to define terms and understand what the graphs and data mean but the data and how it was twisted is quite clear with a little study.

mfellion of CA 12:05PM January 16, 2010

Since the earth does not have a physical barrier like a green house, how does something that is colder heat something that is warm? Since half of the earth is at all times radiating heat into space which is ungodly frigid on the shadowed side of the earth, how can a credible claim be made that the lower temperature warms that which is higher?
Heat rises to the frigid regions of space. Any genius's out there who can tell me the temperature of space on the shadowed side of the earth? Since there is no physical barrier to stop this transfer like an actual greenhouse, laws of physics have to apply. Unless they don't understand what Dr. Gerhard Gerlich says, "Essentially, any machine which transfers heat from a low temperature reservoir to a high temperature reservoir without external work applied cannot exist. If it did it would be a “perpetual motion machine”.
Is that what the AGW believers contend?
I believe that there may be some who choose to believe a lie..... when will you wise up Liberals?

Jeff of WI 3:51AM January 08, 2010

Statistically the "average" amount of ice over the polar regions has not changed in the last 15 -20 years.

jeff peters of TX 10:29AM December 29, 2009

The science does not support the global warming model being caused by co2 from man made sources. Instead of repeating the Al Gore mantra, bless his heart, go the climateaudit.org and look at the data. The data, statistical models used and how it was distorted by Mann are there. You need a beginning statistical book as many terms like z and r are not defined in the discussions and papers. See for yourself. The tree ring data was distorted, the ice core oxygen ratios depend on six cores, two of which don't cover the 1990's and the modeling does not correlate with temperature data as every core has different ratios. On top of that no temperature data for the whole planet exist prior to satellites. In case Al Gore did not notice we are coming out of an ice age so things should be warming up. In essence Mann took the temperature of NY city and projected it to the world. Look for yourself you will be surprised.

mfellion of CA 3:54PM December 24, 2009

From R.L. Schaefer: "I remind everyone that climatologists rely entirely on computer models as well"
No, they don't. Apparently you haven't seen the satellite photos of the Arctic or Antarctic.

Cerulean of MN 11:15PM December 18, 2009

How is it possible to publish straight faced an exhaustive review of a possible cover up without a conflict of interest when the lead reporter in the review is one of people involved in the scandal in the first place?
Seth Borenstein is one of the reporters involved in the climategate emails. He has a business relationship with the scientists. Where is the journalistic integrity in the AP allowing him to publish his own exoneration?

Robert Johnson of FL 8:33AM December 15, 2009