E-Mails Reveal Scientists' Contempt for Skeptics

Hackers broke into the electronic files of one of the world’s foremost climate research centers this week and posted an array of e-mails in which prominent scientists engaged in a blunt discussion of global warming research and disparaged climate-change skeptics.


The creationists finally have their bible and can cite from it in and out of context in support of their climate conspiracy theory. The problem: the data have been stolen, which is illegal. Hence they would not be admitted in a court of law - however it is effective in the court of public opinion. This theft and its internet publication shows the utter desperation of the climate deniers and their readiness to use any means in support of their agenda, no matter how dirty they are.

How much credibility does a thief get…

Kindergarten stuff.

As a historian, I love the last sentence of your second link, which puts the issue into its proper perspective:

“Spencer R. Weart, a physicist and historian who is charting the course of research on global warming, said the hacked material would serve as “great material for historians.””

It is fascinating to go through someone’s working papers and see how they’ve developed ideas and made decisions. Of course the denialists will cherrypick anything they can make a fuss about; but really you need to read the whole thing to understand the context, which takes more work and thought than most people are willing to do.

Spencer R. Weart, a physicist and historian who is charting the course of research on global warming, said the hacked material would serve as “great material for historians

1z0-514 dumps \ HP2-Z18 dumps \ 1z0-519 dumps \ 642-359 dumps \ 642-983 dumps \ BH0-006 dumps \ 1Y1-A19 dumps \ 1Y0-A16 dumps \ 1z0-533 dumps

Here’s their blurb:

Hacked E-Mail Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute

“Private messages hacked from a British university are causing a stir among global warming skeptics, who say they show a climate science conspiracy.”

Why does Andy Revkin insist on quoting and promoting a handful of discredited climate skeptics, people like Pat Michaels, who got his start with the Western Fuels Association denialist program? Is that headline in any way justified? Sure, some fossil fuel lobbyists will jump at anything they think will help swing political and public opinion - but why is a major newspaper doing the same thing?

At some point, you have to ask if the newspapers and reporters who rely on fossil fuel think tanks for quotes and disinformation are simply part of the overall propaganda program - and if they don’t go along, they get fired. CNN’s science team starting running a series of really accurate articles in 2008, and then they were all fired.

The NYT at least has a science section, even if it is often highly distorted and biased in favor of fossil fuels - but I’m not sure that biased science journalism aimed at deceiving the public is any better than no science journalism at all. Their coverage of energy issues is far worse, if that’s any consolation. The energy stories they don’t cover are often the most hopeful ones:


As some have said, “It’s not the things people don’t know that are the problem - it’s the things they do know, but that aren’t so.”

So, for a fair and balanced contribution to the debate, Monckton, Fred Singer et. al. should make available their own full and complete inboxes since 1996…..

The e-mails show a contempt for the scientific process, honesty and integrity as well.

The emails also show a kind of foolishness.

Scientists are smart? They know that emails they fire off are subject to a myriad of different possibilities of being seen or intercepted by someone other than the intended recipient?

Every intelligent person knows that you don’t send something in an email that you don’t want to see splashed all over the internet. Once you hit send - it’s gone.

Scientists are ordinary, foolish and sometimes political people.

Lets cancel the worship contract we have with them.

The CRU emails do discuss scientific fraud

The fraud concerned is within DOUGLASS ET AL. 2007


Note that Fred Singer was one of the authors!

“…The McIntyre and McKitrick paper is pure scientific fraud. I think you’ll find this reinforced by just about any legitimate scientist in our field you discuss this with….” http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=492&filename=1107899057.txt

Phil Jones speaks out.

“…He added that since the emails were leaked he had received personal threats which have now been passed on to the police to investigate…”

“…”Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for Nasa and the National Climate Data Centre in the United States, among others. Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves; there is no need for anyone to manipulate them.”…”

“…Jones accepted, though, that the contents of some of the emails were cause for embarrassment: “Some of the emails probably had poorly chosen words and were sent in the heat of the moment, when I was frustrated. I do regret sending some of them. We’ve not deleted any emails or data here at CRU. I would never manipulate the data one bit - I would categorically deny that.”…” http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/24/climate-professor-leaked-emails-uea

Welcome to the site: real nike shoes
Hot selling shoes,Cheap Jordan are hot selling, Nike Air Yeezy hot selling.jordan fusion hot selling,
NBA cheap Basketball shoes hot selling,HOT!!Celebrate Christmas with a special gite for your love ones,
With FREE gift wrapping,Free Geeeting Card and Free Dilivery,Purchase any items from
real nike shoes online,
you will get free Cheap Jordan,Niike Air Yeezy Sock.

you will get free Cheap Jordan,Niike Air Yeezy Sock.
This is the cheap-jordans website real nike shoes by Zhang