Thursday, July 08, 2010

There is no "ClimateGate"

An Independent report released Wednesday shows that the so called "Climategate" is not real it cleared the scientist. So if anyone just thought that the hacked emails prove that there is no such thing as Global Warming I regret to inform you that this is the second time the climate scientist were cleared. So all the words like Trick was just meaning  "A way to handle information". So let's stop arguing about the science because it is clear that there is Climate change. We need to keep trying to reduce our CO2  from the air to help stop Global warming. If you are still a skeptic I say that look at the science, and Climate change is not just temperature changes oil is leaving and is dangerous, so think of renewable energy that is not leaving. So don't think that climate change is just the  environment it is also energy needs and economics.

In his submission, Jones told the review that "the word 'trick' was not intended to imply any deception, simply the 'best way of doing or dealing with something.'"
The scandal fueled skepticism about the case for global warming just weeks before world leaders met to agree a global deal on climate change at a United Nations conference in Copenhagen last December.


  1. Good and there will be no carbon credits taxes either. I hope you love more taxes an monitoring of your personal habits.

  2. They fudged the numbers, they contaminated the peer review process, ignored FOI requests and hid their data, yet you implicitly trust them? None of that concerns you at all?

    You're a religious freak.

  3. If you are still a skeptic I say that look at the science

    If you are still a True Believer I say follow the money. Who is profiting from the billions of dollars spent on this fearmongering? Why do they keep changing their story every time they get caught lying (even changing the name from 'global warming' to 'climate change' when it became too obvious that the world wasn't actually getting warmer as they had predicted)?
    Why can't their computer models predict a single thing correctly?

  4. Yes, by all means, let's look at the science. What particular piece of empirical data convinced you that AGW is real? Just curious.

    Specifically, what convinced you of the existence of positive water vapour feedbacks without which any CO2 induced warming is benign?

    And as far as any whitewashing investigation of climate gate, I still choose to believe my lying eyes.

  5. "If you are still a skeptic I say that look at the science"

    Actually I did look at the science. I used to be a climate alarmist and I was convinced that CC was caused by human activity, that is, until I actually read the UN IPCC AR4 report when it was released in 2007. The press release was a huge media orgy, with over 200 reporters from all over the world, speaking all languages. The IPCC stated that it was unequivocal; the AR4 report proved it and the time for debate had ended, it was time to take climate action. I downloaded it and I was absolutely stunned, the AR4 report was one wishy-washy equivocation after another. Virtually nothing in it was unequivocal, let alone the ultimate conclusion. The report actually said there was a 1 in 10 chance that climate change was NOT caused by human activity. I could not believe the disconnect between what was said at the media release and the actual report. That’s when I really started to question and investigate climate science more thoroughly. It took about 6 months before I realized I wasn’t an AGW Believer anymore, I was now a skeptic. I’ve been reading the science ever since and my opinion remains unchanged.

  6. 97% of climate scientist believe in climate change and believe it is caused by humane activity.the science is crystal clear climate change is real !

  7. vanillaman said...

    97% of climate scientist believe in climate change and believe it is caused by humane activity.the science is crystal clear climate change is real !

    A common mistake. Science is not about consensus. Politics is about consensus...and politics is what is driving this enormous boondoggle.

    The scientists will say whatever they are told to say because they are being paid to do so. Any who balk at this will be threatened with the loss of employment or silenced by having their reputations attacked.

  8. According to Wikipedia "When these gases are ranked by their contribution to the greenhouse effect, the most important are: water vapor which contributes 36–72%, carbon dioxide which contributes 9–26%, methane which contributes 4–9%, ozone which contributes 3–7%."

    So WikiP says that water vapor is the biggest contributor to the greenhouse effect, not CO2. And that does NOT include clouds. When you include cloud's contribution to the greenhouse effect, Wikipedia says "When considering water vapor and clouds together, the contribution is between 66-85%."

    So CO2 is insignificant. And humanity contributes only 3% of the earths total annual CO2 output. In the end, we are nothing to the greenhouse effect.


Any highly offensive matter will be deleted whether it be solid, water, gas or plasma. No comments from outsiders represent the opinions of Owner and Doggy or vanillaman. We reserve the right to delete any comments without explanation.