Whistle blowing on Global Warming

[Kev367th]

Submarines AT the North Pole in open water March 1959.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/

So surely it was warmer then?

[Chalenge]

I dont remember Miami being under water? Isnt that what the 'warmers' are saying will happen in another six years when Greenland is green again? 

[Widewing]

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. Their excuse? The data was dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.... They managed to retain "adjusted data" (IE: Massaged to suit their needs).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece


My regards,

Widewing

[Kev367th]

I dont remember Miami being under water? Isnt that what the 'warmers' are saying will happen in another six years when Greenland is green again? 

Will happen?
Al Gores film in 2006 said a 20ft sea rise was IMMENENT!
Mind you at the same time he was buying a waterfront condo, so maybe not huh?

Google-
For the first day or so of the 'Climategate' scandal typing 'Climategate' into Google search would prompt an auto-complete.
Not any more. Guess who is a senior advisor to Google? Yup good old Al. The 'fix' is starting.
Probably a shame they can't control the Internet, yet.

[33Vortex]

Must admit that I was up until very recently a believer in global warming. Started having my doubts earlier this year, seeing how many environmental organizations are owned and/or managed by the same people running certain other businesses.

Started to see and make the connections, and then the CRU emails put the final spike in. Let me tell you, this stuff is not limited to global warming research. I only just recently realized how interconnected this is to the bigger picture.

 

[CptTrips]

Yeah, I just got thru reading that.

You know, at my age, having been around the block a few times, I'd figure I'd seen enough BS not to be shocked anymore.  But I have to admit, reading that I was open-mouthed incredulous.

I'd always suspected there was BS involved in this debate.  I assumed though that it was a disagreement based on good-faith misinterpetation of data and "heated" debate.

It's over.  This just fraud.  Simple, plain, viscious, intentional fraud with malice of fore-thought.  If the powers that be continue to try and use this charade to make their one-world climatocracy grab for power and tens of trillions of dollars in crippling carbon taxation powers then there is nothing left but open revolution in the streets.

Regards,
Wab

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. Their excuse? The data was dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.... They managed to retain "adjusted data" (IE: Massaged to suit their needs).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece


My regards,

Widewing

[CptTrips]

And still I can find nothing on this amazing story on CNN.  Equally unbelievable. 

Wab

[Bronk]

And still I can find nothing on this amazing story on CNN.  Equally unbelievable. 

Wab

You can almost see the sarcasm dripping .

[33Vortex]

Hehe 

[Chalenge]

Im wondering if Goreboi dumped his stock yet?

[Getback]

i've never been one of the most intelligent people in the circles i hang with. i have, however, always been one of the smartest.
 i tend to over-analyze things. i tend to never take things at what they seem. often this makes me appear paranoid. it annoys some of my friends.
 but...when you REALLY read things, and pay attention to what you read, you don't even have to dig into the scientific parts to realize this was all a ginormous sham.

 as long as i can remember, i've been saying it was bs, and now it's finally coming out.....

Me too. Never bought into it. Never made sense to me. I know some people who just insanely stay with this nonsense.

[Charge]

Well, 200 kilometers south from arctic circle the change in mean temperature of Nov/Dec is quite noticeable by the lack of snow -and the change has taken less than 10 years.
Be it man made or not, such rapid change cannot be very good if it's not just a glitch in long term weather.

-C+

[Chalenge]

Cant speak to that but if there is 250 feet of snow on top of the 'Glacier Girl' site and sea water was no higher in the 1940s my money is on it not getting a whole lot higher if that snow melts. 

[MORAY37]

Cant speak to that but if there is 250 feet of snow on top of the 'Glacier Girl' site and sea water was no higher in the 1940s my money is on it not getting a whole lot higher if that snow melts.  

Because the only other place in the world that that water could have possibly ever been was the ocean.  Period.  It's either the ocean, or as snow on top of Glacier Girl, right?  Can't be anywhere else in the world.....? Definately not as fresh water in rivers.  Not snowpack in the Alps. Not water vapor.  It's either ice over Glacier Girl, or it's in the ocean.

Such linear myopic vision, but, be as it were.

And you're right, sea level was no higher in the 40's.... it was LOWER in the 1940's. Whether you believe it or not, it is true.  We may dance as to why it's happening.  But the sea is rising.  Look up the Mid Pacific Islanders that are losing their islands without subsidence of the coral atolls.  (The land isn't sinking....and if the land isn't sinking....there's only one other thing that can be happening.  Unless the gravitational field has lessened, and it only affects water.)

[Chalenge]

Actually moray I dont think I even implied it ALL had to go back into the ocean just that the ocean was not higher. Personally I know of a few lakes that could use the water so lets melt it!  

Way to be myopic yourself and then thrust that on me!