Warm THIS!

[Cannon Shell]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...250205490.html

Another dirty little truth

[SOREHOOF]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...250205490.html

Another dirty little truth

How inconvenient.

[Danzig]

you guys did see that all the raw data that had been compiled had been destroyed? there's no way to go back and double-check the figures this group had been using-they erased all the figures.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6936328.ece


SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) 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 CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you guys did see that all the raw data that had been compiled had been destroyed? there's no way to go back and double-check the figures this group had been using-they erased all the figures.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6936328.ece


SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) 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 CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible

I hope you guys realize that this is talking about a limited amount of data, not "all scientific data ever" on climate change?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

I hope you guys realize that this is talking about a limited amount of data, not "all scientific data ever" on climate change?

i guess the fact that most researchers got their data from this group means nothing to you?
i mean, i know i didn't learn enough in science class, but i did learn comprehension skills in english class, so i did pick up on that in the articles.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i guess the fact that most researchers got their data from this group means nothing to you?
i mean, i know i didn't learn enough in science class, but i did learn comprehension skills in english class, so i did pick up on that in the articles.

Of course it means something, this was the assembly clearinghouse, but there is still alot of data they have, and that others have. It's not "all in the toilet" - gone.

You guys also have to realize that what is quoted was written by newsmen writing opinion about science they do not believe in or support. Look at some other sources. Try to find comment from within the scientific world.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Of course it means something, this was the assembly clearinghouse, but there is still alot of data they have, and that others have. It's not "all in the toilet" - gone.

You guys also have to realize that what is quoted was written by newsmen writing opinion about science they do not believe in or support. Look at some other sources. Try to find comment from within the scientific world.

do you mean like scientists who have come out and shown they don't necessarily believe in this science? that they have other, dissimilar info that these scientists then attacked? that they don't agree, that not all scientists back the u.n. findings that were supported with tricks? these same guys who destroyed data, deleted FOI requested info that is illegal to get rid of once there has been an FOI request? why do i need a scientist to tell me that these guys have some shady dealings to explain? much of the original data is GONE, destroyed by these folks. gone forever, with no way of ever going back and redoing what they did. in other words, no split sample.