Comments on: Climategate: It’s the Totalitarianism, Stupid

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 05:22:33 +0000

Dear EON: And,largely thanks to a compliant academia and news media, have come close to grabbing their version of the brass ring- that being a collar around humanity’s throat, with them holding the leash

I only quibble with this, they may in fact be compliant, but more than anything they- media academia are ego centric to a fault, basically unqualified and incompetent in areas of “Hard Science,” inept and out right lazy. There are no great journalists, if they ever were, but at least the “Old Left” wanted to get to some truth before they pounded their ideology! not so anymore. Keep writing I enjoy the posts! Redball 6

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:36:15 +0000

I am reminded of a quote:

“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for urge to rule it.” – HL Mencken

The whole thing puts one in mind of “The emperor has no clothes”, and yet I don’t see any coverage on major media networks in the US. Normally, they LOVE to blare scandals from the highest rooftops. Hmmmm; perhaps, if they focused on how Republican politicians (like Schwartzenegger) who sold out and drank the AGW Kool Aid were dead wrong, they could still make a few bucks off of this and advance the liberal agenda….

This whole ridiculous mess will be in the history books one day, right behind the paragraph about Piltdown Man!

By: joe

joe — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:15:09 +0000

if you are not slopping it up at the public trough and you have some reservations about the “consensus” of AGW you are excluded from the peer review process. Therefore: we have achieved complete consensus of the science-whores. No wonder they all vote democrat, its like voting themselves a gauranteed pay raise while the producers of wealth are taxed more to pay for it. If the tax increases have to be deferred for political reasons the fed prints more money and inflation pays for their raises, again at the expense of everyone who actually “produces wealth” in a socialist environment.

The totalitarian marxist society in the United States which could not be achieved through the ballot box or through violent revolution has been achieved through fradulent science and clever 40 acres and a mule promices for votes. algore and the whore-scientists are getting rich on taxpayer money, everybody else is trying to make a living and compete in a global environment with our hands tied behind us by government regulation. Unemployment at 10% plus and crap and trade about to decimate whats left of the free market.

Hey, hows that hope-n-change thing workin for ya Bunkie?

By: Chris the Engineer

Chris the Engineer — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:57:49 +0000

Mark – your being dihonest again! Even today your CRU cronies say (after the major embarassment of the publicized e-mails showing they pusposefully corrupted the peer review process, blackballed opposition, manipulated data, etc.) they will finally release their data and yet they admit they threw away the raw data that they started with! Thus, independent reviewers will only be able to review their postprocessed data not the original data. Yet you see nothing wrong with this? What branch of science are you in? You sound very childlike!

By: Mark York

Mark York — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:41:41 +0000

“or we will finally see all the data and be convinced that your science and “theories” are closer to the truth than we thought?”

As Glenda the good witch said, “It’s been right there all along.” You just need to see it. Alas, you’ve demonstrated that you don’t know how to read. Pity really, but there are classes in remedial atmospheric science should actual learning be a goal. Global warming isn’t a math error as much as you’d like it be. Dumb is as dumb says.

By: Chris the Engineer

Chris the Engineer — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:59:05 +0000

Mark York – you say “your side will lose” and “this is war”, if you truly are a scientist you should know that true science (not “true science”) is not about winning or losing but about finding the truth or getting as close to the truth as we can given our current technological state. You kind of give away your motivations with that statement. Your in it only for the politics not for the truth (not for the science). When you say “your side will lose” does this mean we’ll all be ruined professionally, backballed, or we will finally see all the data and be convinced that your science and “theories” are closer to the truth than we thought? I could live with finding out that theories are sound based on the freely provided independently reviewed data, assumptions, models, etc.. It seems you don’t want to get to that stage. You only want to shut up all of us who don’t trust your side that’s been hiding data, methods, blackballing naysayers, and scientific journals that aren’t on board with your side. I like my way better as I’m sure most real scientists would agree.

By: Chris the Engineer

Chris the Engineer — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:49:49 +0000

Your comment “purveyors of falsehoods” even sounds like religious orthodoxy. Yet the earth is cooling (Brrrrrr). The hurricane seasons haven’t gotten more severe as predicted after Katrina. After correcting for Michael Mann’s phony “hockey stick” (which he hasn’t even corrected) the record temperature magically wasn’t 1998 as your priest declared but was actually 1932(?) well before major western (i.e., evil capitalist) industrial expansion. Remember when they said all the ice would melted in the North Pole a couple of years ago – well that never happened. Let’s not talk about the famous phony starving polar bear picture. Yep, the truth hurts! True scientists are open to reason and to evidence contrary to their theory. Mark York, your Man Made Global Warming (aka, Man Caused Climate Change) “theory” has tons of holes in it. Better to go back to the lab and rethink the “theory” to work out all the missing important details like solar influence, influence of the ocean currents, major disturbances like underwater volcanic activity and normal volcanic activity. If you are a real scientists you’ll stop saying “liar liar pants on fire” to all of us skeptics (i.e., true scientists who aren’t impressed with your shenanigans) and start considering that the non-science public doesn’t trust your sacred “true scientists” anymore. At least not enough to turn over control of most of our freedom and wealth.

By: Bear

Bear — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:41:11 +0000

Mark the ecojournalist: “This is war. We’ve seen the tactics of the purveyors of falsehoods and your side will lose. The truth always wins after the losses are counted. The religious canard is just personal projection. Look it up.”

Your rants don’t mean much. This is all about a premise…that there is a direct correlation between CO2 increases and global warming.

(now climate change…how convenient). If there is any doubt, about the methodology in arriving at that conclusion it should be double checked, not by Climatologists but independently. If said Climatologists created the models (ie wrote the software, massaged the data and did the statistical analysis, then it begs the question, are they best qualified to do that aspect of the study)

To me that is what the emails expose, and some are much more relevant than others. Any process models around mitigation strategy presuppose the link between CO2 increase and warming. I submit that at some point CO2 may be a problem(for other obvious reasons)…cooking the science now is a little premature based on the T data…and focusing on CO2 solely, is plain bad strategy based on the lack of conclusive evidence

using CO2 as the villain is convenient, hence the title of the article.

I’m not anti-environmentalist…just not the watermelon variety.

By: Sebastian Shaw

Sebastian Shaw — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:05:23 +0000

EcoComunist, your very body is composed of carbon; most of Earth’s life is based on carbon. You left that out of your very flawed thesis. Why do you think we have CARBON dating? Think a little while you’re attempting to be a so-called intellectual. I use that term loosely…

By: EcoComunist

EcoComunist — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 10:47:49 +0000

The East is rising while America declines. Their Capitalist hegemony is crumbling. I completely agree with Indian Prime Minister Singh that there needs to be “equitable burden sharing”. The Industrialized Nations have spent the last 70 years exploiting them for their labour, resources and polluting their lands. We have been enslaving the poorest nations in an effort to fill our lives with meaningless shit. The least we can do is offset their costs and not act like a bunch of greedy corporate Capitalist bastards. Environmental degradation does not come cheap; and nor should it. Thank God the Commonwealth can still be useful. We need to make Copenhagen Conference come out with a binding agreement. It is simple mathematics. If you can add and subtract you can get this. Carbon is a “green house gas”, which means it traps heat. I.e. the more carbon we put in the atmosphere the more heat is trapped. The Carbon we use was trapped into the earth via some process (plants take it out of the atmosphere and trap it for instance) and now we are putting more in. It is simple math. More carbon in atmosphere = trapped heat in atmosphere. Carbon formally trapped in earth = carbon now in atmosphere. How simple can you make this?