Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[convert]

How could Climateprogress remove it when it wasn't even on their website?

 

The article doesn't even mention ClimateProgress.

 

btw The sentiments are perfectly understandable. I imagine very similar comments are being made about the oil company advocates "drill, baby drill" in the US at the moment as a result of the latest and largest oil based environmental disaster as a result of oil industry lobbyests actions opposing regulations and safety.

 

I think you need to look again

 

In June 2009, former Clinton Administration official Joe Romm defended a comment on his Climate Progress website warning skeptics would be strangled in their beds. "An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds,"

 

You think the sentments below are understandable!!

 

“This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors”

"So shouldn't we start punishing them now?"

“At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers.”

"An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds,"

 

 

 

Words fail me.

[convert]

There is no evidence that CRU behaved criminally in its handling of FOI requests. There were some emails that looked compromising. But there is no evidence they were anything other than the scientists letting off steam. The Select Committee criticised the Information Commissioner for making a statement about the case not backed up by the evidence.

 

Not providing that information however, had no bearing on the ability of the requestors to do their own research based on the huge wealth of data available. Something they have either failed to do or failed to publish because the data as numerous studies have shown supports CRU's conclusions.

 

Sorry but I refer you to this:-

 

The Information Commissioner's office wants to plug a loophole in the UK’s sunshine laws, after academics at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal at the University of East Anglia escaped prosecution on a technicality.

 

The ICO has said the Climatic Research Unit breached Section 77 of the Act - the so-called "shredding offence" - by failing to comply with requests to hand over data made in 2007 and 2008.

 

Because CRU delayed releasing the information for more than six months, they evaded prosecution.

[Wildcat]

Does the word "whitewash" mean anything to you?

 

Of course the scientists were exonorated by their friends in Westminster! There's an awful lot of research grants and green taxes dependent on the perpetuation of the global warming myth.

 

In reality, as we now know, the Climate gate scandal proved that global warming isn't happening and that for the last ten years the earth has actually been cooling, but the pro-global warming lobby had suppressed this. No amount of whitewashing can change that fact.

 

The latest news that the Pacific Islands are growing, not shrinking just reinforces this.

 

Yes because of a global conspiracy involving all the scientific establishments studying the topic, is so convincing depsite the fact there is no evidence of one.

 

Climate gate scandal proved nothing except the extent to which people will believe what they want to believe inspite of the evidence.

 

Rather like your claiming that a report showing some micronesian islands are growing because of sedimentation, a report that explicitly supports sea level rise because of global warming, supports you argument despite the fact it is in direct contradiction.

[Wildcat]

Sorry but I refer you to this:-

 

The Information Commissioner's office wants to plug a loophole in the UK’s sunshine laws, after academics at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal at the University of East Anglia escaped prosecution on a technicality.

 

The ICO has said the Climatic Research Unit breached Section 77 of the Act - the so-called "shredding offence" - by failing to comply with requests to hand over data made in 2007 and 2008.

 

Because CRU delayed releasing the information for more than six months, they evaded prosecution.

 

The decision not to act on these was criticized by the Information Commissioner's Office as an apparent violation of the FOIA, but the statute of limitations had expired, and no formal investigation would ensue. The Committee criticizes the ICO concluding that violations probably took place, saying it made "a statement to the press that went beyond that which it could substantiate."

 

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/03/uk-parliament-clears-climatologists-calls-for-more-openness.ars

[Wildcat]

I think you need to look again

 

You think the sentments below are understandable!!

 

“This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors”

"So shouldn't we start punishing them now?"

“At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers.”

"An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds,"

 

Words fail me.

 

When the impact millions of people made homeless and major cities are under water because policy makers have been ignoring the scientific community infavour of oil companies short term interests, there will be a generation of people wanting to throttle the people that have prevented action being taken on this now destroying our futures and their lives. That is not extreme, it is a simple assessment of the facts.

[GordonBennet]

Yes because of a global conspiracy involving all the scientific establishments studying the topic, is so convincing depsite the fact there is no evidence of one.

 

Climate gate scandal proved nothing except the extent to which people will believe what they want to believe inspite of the evidence.

 

Rather like your claiming that a report showing some micronesian islands are growing because of sedimentation, a report that explicitly supports sea level rise because of global warming, supports you argument despite the fact it is in direct contradiction.

 

The classic tactic of the troll, to accuse others of the very thing he's guilty of himself!

 

I realised long ago on this thread that there's no point arguing with you on this subject, as the moment you're confronted with facts that prove you wrong you do the online equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "ner ner ner! Can't hear you!".

 

However, it's important for newcomers to this thread to realised that you're in a minority of one, and thankfully most people are waking up to the fact they've been tricked into believing that global warming exists and only now is the truth coming out.

[convert]

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/03/uk-parliament-clears-climatologists-calls-for-more-openness.ars

 

At the same time, it says the event was a clear indication that the six month window for filing FOIA complaints is clearly insufficient, and should be reevaluated.

 

Nevertheless, climatology has reached a point of such global importance that some of the standard procedures for data and method handling (ones it shares with many other fields) are no longer publicly acceptable.

 

If the failure to comply with FOI requests isn't a problem why does your report state that the 6 month window is insufficient?

 

Why does it also state that the procedures and methods used for handling the data are no longer acceptable?

 

Where oh where can I find the actual code for the models used by the CRU, and the base (unadjusted) datas used in those models (other than the leaked information ala Climategate)?

[SimonCookson]

Regardless of the complex science behind the many arguments, which means that we don't know for certain what will happen in the future, or be 100% certain what has caused what ever happens to our climate. I like to keep things simple, so it's my belief that we should all try and make small changes to our lifestyles, that I know for me can be a bit indulgent sometimes.

 

Take today, there is no reason why I should be drying my laundry in the tumble on such a hot day. It's a waste of my money and energy, and that's true weather global warming is a fact or not!

 

That's why I've made a promise to dry outside on here: http://sheffieldismyplanet.co.uk/

[convert]

When the impact millions of people made homeless and major cities are under water because policy makers have been ignoring the scientific community infavour of oil companies short term interests, there will be a generation of people wanting to throttle the people that have prevented action being taken on this now destroying our futures and their lives. That is not extreme, it is a simple assessment of the facts.

 

What about when millions of people realise they've been led up the (green) garden path; that their extra taxes are not being used to investigate alternate energy sources, but to enable people like (prince) Albert Gore to live in mansions, jet around the world and get rich?

 

What about when our already fragile economy collapses due to the extra strain placed on it be ill concieved green policies?

 

What about when people realise that CO2 isn't the problem we were greenwashed into believing it was?

 

Even when all that happens , I still wouldn't be calling for people to be tried for treason, to be strangled in their beds or to be executed.

 

I might call for them to be jailed though; along with all the others who have helped to perpetrate the myth.

 

PS if CO2 output is such a problem, why aren't you calling for China and India to also massively reduce their output?

[convert]

Regardless of the complex science behind the many arguments, which means that we don't know for certain what will happen in the future, or be 100% certain what has caused what ever happens to our climate. I like to keep things simple, so it's my belief that we should all try and make small changes to our lifestyles, that I know for me can be a bit indulgent sometimes.

 

Take today, there is no reason why I should be drying my laundry in the tumble on such a hot day. It's a waste of my money and energy, and that's true weather global warming is a fact or not!

 

That's why I've made a promise to dry outside on here: http://sheffieldismyplanet.co.uk/

 

A good post. We can all do our bit to conserve the resources of the planet.

 

However I have to disobey those who would force junkscience down our throats re CO2. Rebillion is the way forward says I.