Lords of Death Forums Lords of Death Forums LoD General Discussion Climate Change Science

The whole purpose of their work is to make it completely reproducible and open to the public\layman. The math can be checked out by anyone. -Rainman

What the fuck do you even think the scientific method is? To say that we can't get a grip on how scientists come to their conclusions is the dumbest thing I've ever fucking heard. Maybe you and the handful of other people can't, but I am smarter than that. All it takes is actually trying to lazy fucks.

Do you know what the fuck this is? -Rainman

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: ?We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.?

Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. ?The CRU is basically saying, ?Trust us?. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,? he said.

There are three threads in particular in the leaked documents which have sent a shock wave through informed observers across the world. Perhaps the most obvious, as lucidly put together by Willis Eschenbach (see McIntyre's blog Climate Audit and Anthony Watt's blog Watts Up With That ), is the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws.

Now you're just being a dishonest lieing motherfucker. Did I not post previously that EVERY MOTHER FUCKING COUNTRY IN THE WORLD TESTED THE THEORY USING THE METHOD ABOVE AND FOUND IT TO BE FACT!! Now you are telling me that what I posted is just a "tid-bit".

You motherfucker are dishonest, and I have no trust or sympathy for the dishonest. Posting a reply like you are pretending to be a neutral debater. I wasn't born yesterday. -Rainman

?1. There needs to be a clear statement of why the instrumental and proxy data are shown on the same graph. The issue of why we dont show the proxy data for the last few decades ( they dont show continued warming) but assume that they are valid for early warm periods needs to be explained.?

No you dishonest pos. Pseudoscience is any science that isn't using the scientific method as described above. -Rainman

The New Zealand Government?s chief climate advisory unit NIWA is under fire for allegedly massaging raw climate data to show a global warming trend that wasn?t there.

George Monbiot, a leading environmentalist, said Phil Jones should resign from the Climatic Research Unit over leaked emails that appear to show researchers suppressed scientific data.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...l#ixzz0YQgKnOTg

Impossible, the raw data and methodology was not available, therefor part of the science process - (replication) is not possible. Real science is engaging, it is open for scrutiny.

FLea]

Here are some that disagree

When I have some time tonight, I will oblige.

?Scientific American took a random sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition?one was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise, and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages. Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of about 200 climate researchers; a respectable number, though rather a small fraction of the climatological community.?

The Seattle Times also investigated the Orgeon Petition, and found that some questionable people had signed.

?Several environmental groups questioned dozens of the names: ?Perry S. Mason? (the fictitious lawyer?), ?Michael J. Fox? (the actor?), ?Robert C. Byrd? (the senator?), ?John C. Grisham? (the lawyer-author?). And then there?s the Spice Girl, a k a. Geraldine Halliwell: The petition listed ?Dr. Geri Halliwell? and ?Dr. Halliwell.?

Asked about the pop singer, Robinson said he was duped. The returned petition, one of thousands of mailings he sent out, identified her as having a degree in microbiology and living in Boston. ?It?s fake,? he said.

?When we?re getting thousands of signatures there?s no way of filtering out a fake,? Robinson, 56, said in a telephone interview from Oregon.?

Signatories are approved for inclusion in the Petition Project list if they have obtained formal educational degrees at the level of Bachelor of Science or higher in appropriate scientific fields. The petition has been circulated only in the United States.

The current list of petition signers includes 9,029 PhD; 7,157 MS; 2,586 MD and DVM; and 12,714 BS or equivalent academic degrees. Most of the MD and DVM signers also have underlying degrees in basic science.

All of the listed signers have formal educations in fields of specialization that suitably qualify them to evaluate the research data related to the petition statement. Many of the signers currently work in climatological, meteorological, atmospheric, environmental, geophysical, astronomical, and biological fields directly involved in the climate change controversy.

The Petition Project classifies petition signers on the basis of their formal academic training, as summarized below. Scientists often pursue specialized fields of endeavor that are different from their formal education, but their underlying training can be applied to any scientific field in which they become interested.

Outlined below are the numbers of Petition Project signatories, subdivided by educational specialties. These have been combined, as indicated, into seven categories.

1. Atmospheric, environmental, and Earth sciences includes 3,804 scientists trained in specialties directly related to the physical environment of the Earth and the past and current phenomena that affect that environment.

2. Computer and mathematical sciences includes 935 scientists trained in computer and mathematical methods. Since the human-caused global warming hypothesis rests entirely upon mathematical computer projections and not upon experimental observations, these sciences are especially important in evaluating this hypothesis.

3. Physics and aerospace sciences include 5,812 scientists trained in the fundamental physical and molecular properties of gases, liquids, and solids, which are essential to understanding the physical properties of the atmosphere and Earth.

4. Chemistry includes 4,821 scientists trained in the molecular interactions and behaviors of the substances of which the atmosphere and Earth are composed.

5. Biology and agriculture includes 2,965 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of living things on the Earth.

6. Medicine includes 3,046 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of human beings on the Earth.

7. Engineering and general science includes 10,103 scientists trained primarily in the many engineering specialties required to maintain modern civilization and the prosperity required for all human actions, including environmental programs.

The following outline gives a more detailed analysis of the signers' educations.

Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment (3,804)

1. Atmosphere (579)

I) Atmospheric Science (112)
II) Climatology (39)
III) Meteorology (343)
IV) Astronomy (59)
V) Astrophysics (26)

2. Earth (2,239)

I) Earth Science (94)
II) Geochemistry (63)
III) Geology (1,683)
IV) Geophysics (341)
V) Geoscience (36)
VI) Hydrology (22)

3. Environment (986)

I) Environmental Engineering (487)
II) Environmental Science (253)
III) Forestry (163)
IV) Oceanography (83)

Computers & Math (935)

1. Computer Science (242)

2. Math (693)

I) Mathematics (581)
II) Statistics (112)

Physics & Aerospace (5,812)

1. Physics (5,225)

I) Physics (2,365)
II) Nuclear Engineering (223)
III) Mechanical Engineering (2,637)

2. Aerospace Engineering (587)

Chemistry (4,821)

1. Chemistry (3,128)

2. Chemical Engineering (1,693)

Biochemistry, Biology, & Agriculture (2,965)

1. Biochemistry (744)

I) Biochemistry (676)
II) Biophysics (68)

2. Biology (1,438)

I) Biology (1,049)
II) Ecology (76)
III) Entomology (59)
IV) Zoology (149)
V) Animal Science (105)

3. Agriculture (783)

I) Agricultural Science (296)
II) Agricultural Engineering (114)
III) Plant Science (292)
IV) Food Science (81)

Medicine (3,046)

1. Medical Science (719)

2. Medicine (2,327)

General Engineering & General Science (10,103)

1. General Engineering (9,834)

I) Engineering (7,281)
II) Electrical Engineering (2,169)
III) Metallurgy (384)

2. General Science (269)

FLea]Of course there will be global warmingists trying to debunk the petition with fake signatures, the global warming farce is political. A few bad apples do not spoil a tree.

A few do not discredit the bunch. The petition is valid.