uncledan
51p62 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0
4 weeks ago @ Big Government - There Is Something You... · 0 replies · +3 points
4 weeks ago @ Daily Camera.com: - Guest opinion: Skeptic... · 5 replies · +1 points
If you take their data (which they tried to hide and have since destroyed and admitted this numerous times in the emails) and send it to dissenting scientists in the field (which the climategate scammers tried to prevent from happening by illegally ignoring FOIA requests numerous times as shown in the emails) the data cannot be proven because:
1. it doesn't all exist any more, having been destroyed and admitted to by the climategate scammers 2. the remaining source code is such a mess that even the coder comments in the source code that he can't figure out what is going on 3. the climategate scammers admit in multiple emails they are having problems proving the theory they espouse - and are thus fudging the data 4. the climategate scammers in numerous emails are seen as setting up a peer review process where only positive peer reviews will be allowed while negative peer reviewers would be locked out of the process by hook or by crook 5. the emails show again and again discussion between the climategate scammers that the data they have is poorly collected 6. the final nail in the coffin which can be recognized by any first year college student - the little data that the climategate scammers cannot be rigorously tested to form a theory from their hypothesis. Once the data are held up to the light by many dissenting scientists, they don't prove anything. An example is the famous hockeystick graph (the underlying graph behind this whole movement). Simply put, you don't move forward with ideas (climate change/global warming) to change economies (the Copenhagen Summit) with unprovable data.
The problem is that the defense of the unprovable (and now we see fudged) data of climategate ranges from the 'you're not a scientist so you can't talk about it' to the 'we just don't understand the way scientists talk' to this one here 'everyone does it in their emails so let's just ignore it' to 'well we can't let a handful of bad scientists spoil the bunch' when it's that handful of scientists who are the source behind the huge carbon credit money movement scheme and all the 'green economies' being pushed by the IPCC at the UN.
4 weeks ago @ Big Journalism - Cue the Vultures: Medi... · 0 replies · +2 points
4 weeks ago @ Big Hollywood - Daily Gut: Oliver Ston... · 0 replies · +1 points
4 weeks ago @ Macleans.ca - Palin In Nixonland · 5 replies · 0 points
No, Palin did none of these things, and while Bush may have opened the door for some of them, it's President B+ and the Democrats who have walked us through.
4 weeks ago @ Big Journalism - Going to Work for 'Sat... · 0 replies · +1 points
4 weeks ago @ Macleans.ca - Kiss caused airport scare · 0 replies · +1 points
THE TSA NEVER SHOULD HAVE LET KISS INTO THE AIRPORT!! ESPECIALLY AFTER THAT GODAWFUL 'KISS MEETS THE PHANTOM OF THE PARK'!
DO YOUR JOB TSA! CAN YOU IMAGINE IF PAUL STANLEY HAD BEEN ABLE TO SNEAK THAT MOVIE IN AND GET IT TO PLAY ON AN INTERNATIONAL FLIGHT? THE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE BLOWN THE PLANE UP THEMSELVES!
4 weeks ago @ Big Journalism - As Climategate Becomes... · 0 replies · +1 points
4 weeks ago @ Big Journalism - As Climategate Becomes... · 1 reply · +1 points
American Thinker just had a nice piece on climategate too.
4 weeks ago @ Big Journalism - Hope Springs Eternal f... · 2 replies · +2 points
Company