One in the eye for polluting climate sceptics.
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Man at B&Q on 31 Mar 2010 10:57 On Mar 31, 1:33 pm, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > Didn't the skeptics make a big fuss about the University of East > Anglia emails and they have now been shown to be completely wrong, as > usual. > > "...The Commons Science and Technology Committee criticised UEA > authorities for failing to respond to requests for data from climate > change sceptics. > > But it found no evidence Professor Phil Jones, whose e-mails were > hacked and published online, had manipulated data. > > It said his reputation, and that of his climate research unit, > remained intact. > > The e-mails were hacked from the university's computer network and > were published on the internet just before the Copenhagen climate > conference in December 2009..." It's also very clear that he (Phil Jones) was WRONG to deny access to the raw data. If that access had been allowed none of this fuss would have happened. He certainly doesn't come out of it whiter than white. There are further enquiries into why other researchers were asked to DESTROY e-mails. Staff at UEA have only their own behaviour to blame for bringing themselves into disrepute. MBQ
From: Doug on 31 Mar 2010 10:58 On 31 Mar, 15:52, Albert T Cone <a.k.ki...(a)durham.ac.uk> wrote: > Doug wrote: > > On 31 Mar, 14:23, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > >> The Commons Science and Technology Committee, also found that there > >> had been unreasonable withholding of climate data requested under the > >> Freedom of Information Act by scientists who are sceptical about > >> Anthropenic Global Warming (AGW) or Man Made Climate Change! > > > The data was unavailable simply because the University was inundated > > with requests from climate change sceptics. > > They were inundated for requests *because* they had not revealed their > data or methodology for scientific scrutiny as they should have done. > No because of the serious concerns raised because of the email hacking sceptics just prior to Copenhagen. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net "The car, more of a toilet than a convenience".
From: Man at B&Q on 31 Mar 2010 11:00 On Mar 31, 2:36 pm, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > On 31 Mar, 14:23, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > > > On 31 Mar, 13:33, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > > > Didn't the skeptics make a big fuss about the University of East > > > Anglia emails and they have now been shown to be completely wrong, as > > > usual. > > > > "...The Commons Science and Technology Committee criticised UEA > > > authorities for failing to respond to requests for data from climate > > > change sceptics. > > > > But it found no evidence Professor Phil Jones, whose e-mails were > > > hacked and published online, had manipulated data. > > > > It said his reputation, and that of his climate research unit, > > > remained intact. > > > > The e-mails were hacked from the university's computer network and > > > were published on the internet just before the Copenhagen climate > > > conference in December 2009..." > > > > Odd coincidence eh? > > > > More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8595483.stm > > > > -- > > > UK Radical Campaignswww.zing.icom43.net > > > Travel broadens the damage. > > > The Commons Science and Technology Committee, also found that there > > had been unreasonable withholding of climate data requested under the > > Freedom of Information Act by scientists who are sceptical about > > Anthropenic Global Warming (AGW) or Man Made Climate Change! > > The data was unavailable simply because the University was inundated > with requests from climate change sceptics. Wrong. It was unavauilable because they didn't want to make it available. Being inundated with requests does not make the data magically disappear. MBQ
From: Doug on 31 Mar 2010 13:13 On 31 Mar, 16:00, "Man at B&Q" <manatba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 31, 2:36 pm, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > > > > On 31 Mar, 14:23, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > > > > On 31 Mar, 13:33, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > > > > Didn't the skeptics make a big fuss about the University of East > > > > Anglia emails and they have now been shown to be completely wrong, as > > > > usual. > > > > > "...The Commons Science and Technology Committee criticised UEA > > > > authorities for failing to respond to requests for data from climate > > > > change sceptics. > > > > > But it found no evidence Professor Phil Jones, whose e-mails were > > > > hacked and published online, had manipulated data. > > > > > It said his reputation, and that of his climate research unit, > > > > remained intact. > > > > > The e-mails were hacked from the university's computer network and > > > > were published on the internet just before the Copenhagen climate > > > > conference in December 2009..." > > > > > Odd coincidence eh? > > > > > More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8595483.stm > > > > > -- > > > > UK Radical Campaignswww.zing.icom43.net > > > > Travel broadens the damage. > > > > The Commons Science and Technology Committee, also found that there > > > had been unreasonable withholding of climate data requested under the > > > Freedom of Information Act by scientists who are sceptical about > > > Anthropenic Global Warming (AGW) or Man Made Climate Change! > > > The data was unavailable simply because the University was inundated > > with requests from climate change sceptics. > > Wrong. It was unavauilable because they didn't want to make it > available. Being inundated with requests does not make the data > magically disappear. > But much more important of course there was no conspiracy and the data was correct so the ridiculous claims of the polluting sceptics were wrong. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net "The car, more of a toilet than a convenience".
From: The Medway Handyman on 31 Mar 2010 13:19
Adrian wrote: > Derek C <del.copeland(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much > like they were saying: > >>> You seem to forget all those expensive TV ads showing cartoon >>> puppies being drowned, and telling us all to drive five miles less. > >> Don't forget the risk of being killed by a polar bear falling out of >> the sky! > > That's a non-trivial risk, y'know. It's happened to me twice already, > this week alone. I was rammed by a polar bear only last week... -- Dave - the small piece of 14th century armour used to protect the armpit. |