[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Radio Paradise Comments - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 17, 2022 - 8:31am
 
Wordle - daily game - maryte - Jan 17, 2022 - 8:27am
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - islander - Jan 17, 2022 - 7:33am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - islander - Jan 17, 2022 - 7:29am
 
Patrick Watson should play on RP - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 17, 2022 - 6:53am
 
Sunrise, Sunset - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 17, 2022 - 6:50am
 
Religion - kurtster - Jan 17, 2022 - 12:12am
 
The Dragons' Roost - GeneP59 - Jan 16, 2022 - 8:49pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - Jan 16, 2022 - 8:47pm
 
The Obituary Page - GeneP59 - Jan 16, 2022 - 8:43pm
 
What Did You See Today? - Steely_D - Jan 16, 2022 - 8:26pm
 
volcano! - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jan 16, 2022 - 11:56am
 
Things You Thought Today - haresfur - Jan 16, 2022 - 10:00am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Lazy8 - Jan 15, 2022 - 10:22pm
 
If not RP, what are you listening to right now? - westslope - Jan 15, 2022 - 4:17pm
 
Climate Change - helenofjoy - Jan 15, 2022 - 1:21pm
 
COVID-19 - westslope - Jan 15, 2022 - 12:00pm
 
See This Film - islander - Jan 15, 2022 - 11:34am
 
Thank you, RP! - Steely_D - Jan 15, 2022 - 10:05am
 
Florida - Red_Dragon - Jan 15, 2022 - 9:28am
 
What happened to Radio Paradise? - miamizsun - Jan 15, 2022 - 6:00am
 
Hard Core Trivia - Manbird - Jan 14, 2022 - 4:51pm
 
Who is that guy? - Manbird - Jan 14, 2022 - 3:36pm
 
Yes - miamizsun - Jan 14, 2022 - 2:48pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - BillG - Jan 14, 2022 - 2:30pm
 
New RP listener - miamizsun - Jan 14, 2022 - 1:36pm
 
RightWingNutZ - Steely_D - Jan 14, 2022 - 12:44pm
 
Think About It - miamizsun - Jan 14, 2022 - 11:45am
 
Media Matters - Red_Dragon - Jan 14, 2022 - 11:38am
 
let it spin!! - oldviolin - Jan 14, 2022 - 10:46am
 
Is Wikipedia Objective? - miamizsun - Jan 14, 2022 - 10:17am
 
Russia - R_P - Jan 14, 2022 - 10:02am
 
A lot of 'obscure' repetition lately? - Manbird - Jan 14, 2022 - 10:01am
 
Remembering the Good Old Days - Steely_D - Jan 14, 2022 - 8:23am
 
Ukraine - black321 - Jan 14, 2022 - 8:11am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jan 14, 2022 - 7:18am
 
OUR CATS!! - sunybuny - Jan 14, 2022 - 5:52am
 
Baseball, anyone? - rgio - Jan 14, 2022 - 5:01am
 
Those Lovable Policemen - Lazy8 - Jan 13, 2022 - 9:46pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Jan 13, 2022 - 9:44pm
 
Automotive Lust - miamizsun - Jan 13, 2022 - 3:12pm
 
Britain - miamizsun - Jan 13, 2022 - 12:11pm
 
Food Democracy - haresfur - Jan 13, 2022 - 11:59am
 
Play the Blues - rhahl - Jan 13, 2022 - 10:30am
 
Terrorist Watch! - Ohmsen - Jan 13, 2022 - 10:26am
 
WTF??!! - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 13, 2022 - 10:12am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - fractalv - Jan 12, 2022 - 8:16pm
 
What the hell OV? - Manbird - Jan 12, 2022 - 3:39pm
 
What is the meaning of this? - Manbird - Jan 12, 2022 - 3:37pm
 
Trump - Steely_D - Jan 12, 2022 - 1:57pm
 
Marijuana: Baked News. - Ohmsen - Jan 12, 2022 - 5:36am
 
Crazy conspiracy theories - miamizsun - Jan 12, 2022 - 5:00am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Jan 11, 2022 - 6:52pm
 
• • • Things Magicians Exclaim • • •  - Red_Dragon - Jan 11, 2022 - 6:37pm
 
Word of the Day - miamizsun - Jan 11, 2022 - 5:19pm
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - miamizsun - Jan 11, 2022 - 5:09pm
 
Batman Begins - Manbird - Jan 11, 2022 - 3:50pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jan 11, 2022 - 3:04pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jan 11, 2022 - 12:45pm
 
Name My Band - Isabeau - Jan 11, 2022 - 12:00pm
 
Out the window - Isabeau - Jan 11, 2022 - 11:59am
 
Fox Spews - Isabeau - Jan 11, 2022 - 11:56am
 
Streaming Marantz/HEOS - jarro - Jan 11, 2022 - 11:09am
 
NASA & other news from space - miamizsun - Jan 11, 2022 - 10:28am
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - Jan 11, 2022 - 5:59am
 
Derplahoma! - sunybuny - Jan 11, 2022 - 4:57am
 
Breaking News - westslope - Jan 10, 2022 - 3:38pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - Red_Dragon - Jan 10, 2022 - 3:26pm
 
Irish Traditional - rhahl - Jan 10, 2022 - 2:40pm
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - Antigone - Jan 10, 2022 - 2:38pm
 
Poetry Forum - ScottN - Jan 10, 2022 - 10:55am
 
::Famous Birthdays:: - miamizsun - Jan 10, 2022 - 10:04am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Jan 10, 2022 - 10:02am
 
RPeep News You Should Know - GeneP59 - Jan 10, 2022 - 8:18am
 
Military Matters - Red_Dragon - Jan 10, 2022 - 5:55am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Climate Change Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 112, 113, 114
Post to this Topic
MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:39pm

 musik_knut wrote:


One email? Scores upon scores of emails. Some of them show concern that the climate is not acting as their fraudulent models and software predict. One email? Scores...
But don't take my word on this. I'm just making it up as I go along...not. That's not my way of reporting anything in the sciences...
If you read the emails (EMAILS as in scores), you find that the fraudulent attempts to phony up the data were well coordinated with political measures in mind.
As a scientist, I understand the severity of fudged data, or the manipulation of data to coax a predetermined outcome. Such activities are damned in the science community. As well they must be.

 

I did read some of the info this morning.  I said one email EXPOSE (ie the University of East Anglia expose).  I know you are a scientist.  I studied some of the scientific papers on climate change 20 years ago (only it was identified solely as rising sea level at that point) when I was taking my degree in Geography.  There is some discussion of events over the last few days in one of the global warming threads.  I agree that the information is damaging and very poor behaviour on the part of the scientists involved and some information has been discredited but you can't just take out the whole shooting match on that basis.

In fairness HJ will be better placed to discuss this later when he is around as I don't keep as up to date as he does and I don't get time to read as much information as him these days so I haven't followed every blow in the saga.


musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:33pm

 MrsHobieJoe wrote:

Oh FFS.  One email expose does not "bust" over twenty years of scientific research.  You really need to see the politics and the science separately.
 

One email? Scores upon scores of emails. Some of them show concern that the climate is not acting as their fraudulent models and software predict. One email? Scores...
But don't take my word on this. I'm just making it up as I go along...not. That's not my way of reporting anything in the sciences...
If you read the emails (EMAILS as in scores), you find that the fraudulent attempts to phony up the data were well coordinated with political measures in mind.
As a scientist, I understand the severity of fudged data, or the manipulation of data to coax a predetermined outcome. Such activities are damned in the science community. As well they must be.
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:29pm

Following Bills advice I will just,,,  {#Smile}climate change image
Growing populations and rising living standards helped drive emissions ever upwards during the second half of the 20th century. In the first years of the new century, China's emissions overtook those of the US.


MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:27pm

 musik_knut wrote:
Busted! If you have not read the emails from one to another on climate change, where in many of the emails, there is a conspiracy to doctor the data, then you should. The whole climate change data base being used by, notably, The UN, in the various declarations of woe and doom, as from the ever babbling Al Gore, is a fraud of science. For Mr. Gore, user of the now infamous 'hockey stick curve' to demonstrate rapid warming, an independent researcher found that no matter what data was entered into the program that gave rise to the 'hockey stick curve' , the 'stick' acted the same. The program itself is a piece of fraudulent science. This scientific voodoo with plans to dump emails in order to avoid a paper trail in the conspiracy, with doctored data and programs designed to yield desired results/data, is being hailed as one of the greatest acts of science fraud in history.
Busted!

 
Oh FFS.  One email expose does not "bust" over twenty years of scientific research.  You really need to see the politics and the science separately.

musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:23pm

Busted! If you have not read the emails from one to another on climate change, where in many of the emails, there is a conspiracy to doctor the data, then you should. The whole climate change data base being used by, notably, The UN, in the various declarations of woe and doom, as from the ever babbling Al Gore, is a fraud of science. For Mr. Gore, user of the now infamous 'hockey stick curve' to demonstrate rapid warming, an independent researcher found that no matter what data was entered into the program that gave rise to the 'hockey stick curve' , the 'stick' acted the same. The program itself is a piece of fraudulent science. This scientific voodoo with plans to dump emails in order to avoid a paper trail in the conspiracy, with doctored data and programs designed to yield desired results/data, is being hailed as one of the greatest acts of science fraud in history.
Busted!
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 11:26am

Sea level rise could cost port cities $28 trillion

CNN

Zep

Zep Avatar



Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 3:58pm

 Rod wrote:
Do you know anything about this one? It sounds very promising. Not temperature driven, but it uses slow water currents to create energy. I originally posetd this in the Solar/WindGeothermal...thread.
 
Vivace Energy Technology Harnesses Vortex Hydro-Energy
 
A lot of work is being done on currents, but there are significant technological hurdles to overcome.  The most significant is getting the energy back along the grid to land.  These sites typically need to be in deep water in order to avail themselves of a good current flow, and that gets farther away from shore. Still, it's very cool. 
 
Rod

Rod Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 12:45pm

 Zep wrote:


Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion?

I did a master's thesis on it.

 
Do you know anything about this one? It sounds very promising. Not temperature driven, but it uses slow water currents to create energy. I originally posetd this in the Solar/WindGeothermal...thread.
 
Vivace Energy Technology Harnesses Vortex Hydro-Energy



HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 12:26pm

Google might save the planet !
is about greenland ice 15 hours ago.

 

"The message on the science is that we know a lot more than we did in 1997 and it's all negative," said Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. "Things are much worse than the models predicted."




HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 12:20pm

 Zep wrote:


Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion?

I did a master's thesis on it.

    As I understand this was a new way not done before,been looking for the TV clip found other stuff instead.
    Greenland ice is going much faster,new reports today,and I can report that the internet is slow right now for us here,found a link to original english site but can't come throu,will try in the morning when you guys are asleep.


Zep

Zep Avatar



Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 11:51am

 HazzeSwede wrote:
On my TV morning show this morning;The Norwegians has come up with a new way to make electricity.
It will be on full scale in a year.I have been watching BBC and CNN for something in english,nothing yet
but I am sure there will be.
To complex for me to even try to relay but the working prototype uses sweet water and salt water only.
Some way in the gizmo they got it driving a turbine,but hey,he was prolly just trollin for money for his
experiment now takin place only in the Caymans.{#Arghhh}
 

Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion?

I did a master's thesis on it.
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 10:28am

On my TV morning show this morning;The Norwegians has come up with a new way to make electricity.
It will be on full scale in a year.I have been watching BBC and CNN for something in english,nothing yet
but I am sure there will be.
To complex for me to even try to relay but the working prototype uses sweet water and salt water only.
Some way in the gizmo they got it driving a turbine,but hey,he was prolly just trollin for money for his
experiment now takin place only in the Caymans.{#Arghhh}
rosedraws

rosedraws Avatar

Location: close to the edge
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 10:03am

 Welly wrote:


 
 

"we're melting.  Love, the glaciers". 

Welly

Welly Avatar

Location: Lotusland
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 9:52am


Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 9:18am

 dionysius wrote:
Good piece, Zep. Now, let's hear the "refutations" (of course there won't be; this will simply be ignored).
 
I'm seeing a lot of things being ignored, mostly the reprehensible behavior exhibited in the emails.

I make my living with applied science. The whole architecture of science requires skepticism, challenge, and honest response. A scientist is expected to respond to a challenge with evidence, not authority. What the hacked information shows is a group of people so committed to their conclusions that they will say anything to convince people they're right—hide contradictory data, refuse to talk to anyone challenging their methods or conclusion, and to simply make things up.

If you live and work outside the sciences it may be hard to imagine how deeply offensive that is. This is despicable behavior for a scientist. In my world that kind of behavior would wreck my credibility—no one would take anything I said seriously again.

Of course, that doesn't make the conclusions they so badly want us to share wrong, but if you want to argue with the authority of science you have to use the rigor of science. If they're right the evidence, honestly presented, will show it. If they're wrong no amount of celebrity endorsements will make them right.

The hand-wringing about this is misplaced, and the response of circling the wagons and attacking opponents is counterproductive. Maybe that helps the authors of these emails preserve their positions, but it isn't helping the cause of understanding climate change. The folks at UEA need to decide what their role is here: are they scientists, committed to a process of discovery of the truth, or are they political agitators pressing for a cause? They've shown they can't be both.

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 8:21am

Good piece, Zep. Now, let's hear the "refutations" (of course there won't be; this will simply be ignored).
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 8:01am

    Bravo,,Zep !!!!{#Clap}
Zep

Zep Avatar



Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 7:56am

Leaked email climate smear was a PR disaster for UEA

Source.

There was no evidence of conspiracy among climate scientists in the leaked emails – so why was the University of East Anglia's response so pathetic?

The leaked emails from the University of East Anglia contained no evidence of conspiracy.

The lay public, when presented with confusing data and competing arguments about climate change, deploy the mental shortcut of believing the people they most trust. Trust in the communicator is therefore crucial.

Unfortunately the three main climate change communicators: politicians, journalists and environmental campaigners, are among the least trusted people in society – fighting it out for bottom place in the ranking with lawyers and car salesmen. No one would pay any attention to them at all if they were not drawing on the aquifer of public trust in scientists.

But climate scientists have always misunderstood the dynamic of public belief and trust. They assume that belief will be built on their data and that public trust is merited by their authority. With the exception of a few outstanding communicators, they often make no attempt to speak to deeper values or make an emotional connection with the public – indeed they see that as contrary to their professional independence.

Climate change deniers have always understood this. They use language that is designed to appeal to deeper values (such as freedom, independence, progress). The narrative they tell of being determined (and even persecuted) free-thinkers, standing against the tide of oppressive and self-interested conformity is designed to create an aura of integrity and trustworthiness.

The recent hacking of the servers of the University of East Anglia can only be understood within this landscape of competing appeals to public trust. The denial industry (and hordes of climate nerds) has trawled through these emails and found sentences which, when removed from context, support their storyline that climate science is being deliberately distorted and exaggerated for a mixed bag of self-interested and politicised ends.

But you could find anything in here. I looked and found lots of references to lunch and fun, 94 to hate, 31 to love. Generally, though, the emails are extremely focused, technical, and, dare I say it, really dull. As noted on realclimate.org, the emails contain "no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to 'get rid of the MWP', no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no 'marching orders' from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords."

But this is hardly the point. This is an orchestrated smear campaign and does not require balance or context. The speed with which the emails have been cut apart and fed into existing storylines is remarkable. At the very least the UEA email campaign is an application of dirty political tactics to climate change campaigning.

I suspect it goes further than that. The storyline is too clever, the timing on the brink of Copenhagen and the US climate bill too convenient. I wait with interest to find out how these emails were obtained.

The UEA response has been frankly pathetic. It was informed by Real Climate of the hack on 17 November but only reacted two days later when journalists caught on to the story. It refused to confirm whether the emails were accurate or not and, for a long time, refused to comment at all.

Now, in typical scientist fashion, it seeks to argue the data rationally. The UEA website states that "the selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way". Mischievous? Irresponsible? What naughty pixies.

Then the Climate Research Unit director, Prof Phil Jones, focuses on one of quotes: "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." For the smear campaign it is only those key words "trick" and "hide" that count – the rest can be made into anything it wants. Jones ignores this and responds with a detailed technical explanation of the passage with reference to the original graphs. It's like responding to someone calling you a bastard by showing them your birth certificate.

One can only imagine that the UEA's communications team is totally out of its depth. A less charitable conclusion is that they are defending the interests of UEA and are not concerned about (or have not understood) the damage to climate science.

I believe that Jones should speak to every journalist who calls, go on the offensive and defend his science. He ought to clearly state that he is not prepared to have his hard-working and committed colleagues around the world defamed or slandered by the kinds of people who illegally hack into computers. This is a desperate, last-ditch tactic by fanatics who have lost the rational debate.

Sadly, due in part to the lacklustre response, I am sure that these wretched emails have now entered permanently into the mythology of climate denial. Scientists are going to have to be a lot more savvy and on the ball in future.

• George Marshall is the founder and director of projects at the Climate Outreach and Information Network. He posts regularly to the blog climatedenial.org.




Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 112, 113, 114