Author Topic: Climate Change Scientists Admit Dumping Raw Data on alleged "Global Warming" (Read 1177 times)

Soul Crusher · « **on:** November 30, 2009, 05:40:28 AM »

Climate Change Scientists Admit Dumping Data
Fox News ^ | 11/30/2009 | Sunday Times

Posted on Monday, November 30, 2009 7:37:54 AM by tobyhill
________________________ ________________________ __________

Scientists at the University of East Anglia have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit CRU was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

________________________ ____________

Does anyone still believe in this nonsense?

240 is Back · « **Reply #1 on:** November 30, 2009, 06:15:01 AM »

nobody believes in it... but that doesn't matter. Obama will pass it.

Hell, the whole world cried abotu WMD until saddam actually gave the UN inspections. They didn't find jack shit. Then, Bush invaded anyway as the world protested.

Consider it to be something along those lines lol... only this time it's a dem shoving an obvious lie down our throats so he can throw a trillion bucks at something he wants.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #2 on:** November 30, 2009, 06:21:21 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on November 30, 2009, 06:15:01 AM

nobody believes in it... but that doesn't matter. Obama will pass it.

Hell, the whole world cried abotu WMD until saddam actually gave the UN inspections. They didn't find jack shit. Then, Bush invaded anyway as the world protested.

Consider it to be something along those lines lol... only this time it's a dem shoving an obvious lie down our throats so he can throw a trillion bucks at something he wants.

The lies are so in your face right now. The WMD at least was a little more plausible than this craziness.

I said globalist warming was a farce from day one. Many people thought I was nuts for calling out this lie. Global Warming believers are no different than the evangelicals that they like to mock. However, we are now about to make a massive collosal mistake on "faith" for the second time in in 6 years.

This is nothing but theiving and stealing from taxpayers, NWO, and regulating our lives.

I swear, 240, you called me the resident Obama hater. I gladly accept that title considering the disastrous policies he is following.

240 is Back · « **Reply #3 on:** November 30, 2009, 06:38:21 AM »

Hey, i've been with you on global warming from day 1. a load of crap. i had no idea why they were pushing it... now i see why.

So many repubs repeated the obvious lie from Iraq. now, they suddenly have an honest streak when a dem is in office. Grow a set, fellahs. You either enjoy the truth all of the time, or none of the time.

of course this is stealing from taxpayers. just like iraq war.
of course this is a big lie. just like WMD.

you starting to understand shit now? both parties do it. It is why I voted libertarian.

Al Doggity · « **Reply #4 on:** November 30, 2009, 07:58:41 AM »

The raw data were not saved. The data that was saved was adjusted to compensate for the way it was collected... this is before it was plugged in to any calculations. You can choose to look at that as controversial, but it really isn't.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #5 on:** November 30, 2009, 08:03:10 AM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 30, 2009, 07:58:41 AM

The raw data were not saved. The data that was saved was adjusted to compensate for the way it was collected... this is before it was plugged in to any calculations. You can choose to look at that as controversial, but it really isn't.

Come on Al.

This story just adds fuel tot he fire that the findings are not legitimate and were "massaged" to reflect what the scientists wanted as the outcome.

Al Doggity · « **Reply #6 on:** November 30, 2009, 08:13:43 AM »

Not really. I used to work in medical advertising and it wasn't that unusual for researchers to get rid of certain data sets that were just five years old. The raw data in this situation would have been worthless if not adjusted, so it's not really so strange that it was not retained.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #7 on:** November 30, 2009, 08:15:18 AM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 30, 2009, 08:13:43 AM

Not really. I used to work in medical advertising and it wasn't that unusual for researchers to get rid of certain data sets that were just five years old. The raw data in this situation would have been worthless if not adjusted, so it's not really so strange that it was not retained.

Al:

The public relations of this really stinks. Scientists hiding and destroying data adds a ton of fuel to the fire that this whole thing is a scam.

Al Doggity · « **Reply #8 on:** November 30, 2009, 08:23:16 AM »

If you want to give in to hysteria, sure it does. If you actually listen to the scientists explanations of what the emails contain, there actually doesn't even seem to be much of a controversy.

It can't be emphasized enough that the story hinges on exerpts of stolen private emails. The "smoking guns" that have been touted by certain factions are more questionable when looked at in context.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #9 on:** November 30, 2009, 09:02:46 AM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 30, 2009, 08:23:16 AM

If you want to give in to hysteria, sure it does. If you actually listen to the scientists explanations of what the emails contain, there actually doesn't even seem to be much of a controversy.

It can't be emphasized enough that the story hinges on exerpts of stolen private emails. The "smoking guns" that have been touted by certain factions are more questionable when looked at in context.

Maybe if they werent trying to get us to literally empty our wallets to pay for their "science" it would not be such a big deal. But since Al Gore and the rest of this Goldman/GE/ EU/ et al gang want to tax the shit out of us, yeah, you know what, there does need to be a ton of scutiny on these people.

BM OUT · « **Reply #10 on:** November 30, 2009, 09:54:03 AM »

Its a hoax.Its now been proven!!!!

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #11 on:** November 30, 2009, 09:57:12 AM »

Quote from: BILLY MIMNAUGH on November 30, 2009, 09:54:03 AM

Its a hoax.Its now been proven!!!!

As far as Al's argument about the adjustments go, how do we know that they didnt make ridiculous adjustments that all but ensured the ultimate outcome of their findings?

kcballer · « **Reply #12 on:** November 30, 2009, 10:03:23 AM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 30, 2009, 08:23:16 AM

If you want to give in to hysteria, sure it does. If you actually listen to the scientists explanations of what the emails contain, there actually doesn't even seem to be much of a controversy.

It can't be emphasized enough that the story hinges on exerpts of stolen private emails. The "smoking guns" that have been touted by certain factions are more questionable when looked at in context.

Very well explained Al. The problem is both sides (and i too can fall for this) become too attached to one or two pieces of evidence. But this is human nature, when something we agree with comes up we trump it for all it's worth, when something we don't agree with comes up we bash it for all it's worth usually regardless of the facts at hand.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #13 on:** November 30, 2009, 10:07:47 AM »

Quote from: kcballer on November 30, 2009, 10:03:23 AM

Very well explained Al. The problem is both sides (and i too can fall for this) become too attached to one or two pieces of evidence. But this is human nature, when something we agree with comes up we trump it for all it's worth, when something we don't agree with comes up we bash it for all it's worth usually regardless of the facts at hand.

Look, before we embark on some crazy quest to "save the earth" we need to be 100000000000000000000000 00% sure on the science, facts, etc.

BM OUT · « **Reply #14 on:** November 30, 2009, 10:09:43 AM »

They claim to have "lost" the data on temeratures.Lost it?No,they threw it away because they know its a hoax.

shootfighter1 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 30, 2009, 10:25:14 AM »

Scientists must never be persuaded by political agendas! The problem is that funding for climate research often comes from groups that are biased towards global warming. This is extremely conserning. If research had been adjusted, as suggested by these hacked emails, this needs to be front and center and no major legislation passed until there is a real consensus. There are growing #s of scientists who say man made CO2 does not contribute significantly to climate changes.

blacken700 · « **Reply #16 on:** November 30, 2009, 01:58:22 PM »

fox news just said the world is flat ,so it must be flat

shootfighter1 · « **Reply #17 on:** November 30, 2009, 02:04:43 PM »

As a doc (science based field), I feel very strongly about science being nothing but objective. This man made global warming debate has been anything but objective. I don't care what Fox news has to say...just what unbiased climatologists think and right now they are divided. No policy that will harm us economically should be passed until there is more undeniable data.

Coach is Back! · « **Reply #18 on:** November 30, 2009, 02:15:00 PM »

What?? Global warming was just a political sham? It's just lie? Say it isn't so Al, say it isn't soo!

shootfighter1 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 30, 2009, 02:22:17 PM »

There have been warming and cooling trends all throughout the earth's history. Some scientists feel this is directly related to the energy cycles of the sun. The warmest period on record is after the ice age when everything melted and the oceans were created (man was not a factor here). Looking at recent temperature changes, the last 20yrs have been a relatively cool period.

I hate when people start using marketing techniques to promote an agenda based on science. I don't want to see cute little polar bears and little kids asking us to address global warming. Thats bullshit that pulls at the strings of people's senses, nothing to do with objectivity and screw Al Gore for making this debate so political. This is a debate for climatologists and they should be left to analyze data free from all political and social influence, which is the farthest thing from what has happened.