Quote from xaotik :

Hold on. The CRU calls itself a part of the UEA. So, this nefarious political organisation in question is? The government?

DEFRA, which is the government's department for the environment, farming and rural affairs. They helped set the CRU up along with, I believe, the met office, with the CRU integrated into the University of East Anglia

Quote from SamH :

..snip...

Sam it's evident he won't take anything we've both told him seriously...it's plainly obvious he hasn't bothered to read into the CRU whistleblowing at all and is attempting to demonstrate that he knows more about the way the UK's climatology industry works.

I do hesitate before getting into prolonged arguments with people on here (no, really!) but in this case I make an exception for a massive display of ignorance at the issue.

Quote from Shotglass :

name one single scientific institute that isnt at paid for (at least partly or entirely if working in a field that produces results you cant sell) by government

I honestly can't believe I'm reading this hypocritical bollocks

Quote from Shotglass :

yes really

yes, REALLY. You are displaying almost epic levels of ignorance. You refused to believe it was political, yet when confronted with the proof that the CRU was set up by a POLITICAL organisation you refuse to believe it. Seriously, I can't believe what I'm reading.

and don't say 'omfg cite a source', Me and SamH have a far better idea of how the UK government works than you. So I can use your logic - you have no idea how the UK government works, so you can't comment on it. Fair enough, seeing as you don't want us to comment on something we obviously know absolutely nothing about!

Quote from SamH :

Ohhh.. didn't you know? DEFRA set up and fund the UEA CRU. Irrelevant? Really?!

I'd like to know what makes a (presumably) German citizen assume he knows the way the UK man-made global warming lobby groups/government departments who are quids in with this work, better than UK citizens themselves. I've asked him to explain his arguments but so far there has been nothing, and the dismissive attitude is hard to believe.

Quote from Shotglass :

no im basically saying anyone who hasnt wokred in scinece should expect to be told that his oppinion is wrong and stupid if it clearly is

That attitude is exactly the sort of one I hate from people who believe in climate change religiously. Instead of engaging in a proper debate it just turns into a flame war. The opinions displayed by everybody in this thread except you (ignoring of course the 5haz/Intrepid spat) must be wrong and stupid then? Of course they aren't, it's called a different view to your own, so get used to them.

Quote :

with my current work im hoping to get out of it in a few years with a doctorate in hand and have friends and family who spent years or their life in science

fair enough, but that doesn't mean you have to revert to the attitude displayed beforehand. Try actually explaining why you think it is wrong (without the redundant Venus comparison), and engage in a proper debate.

Quote from 5haz :

You clearly haven't been reading this thread, and others then.

I've read this one, and all I see is you and Intrepid having a stupid argument and the occasional on-topic post from other members. I specified this thread and I'm not bringing other threads into it.

He's not annoying anybody else in this thread except you it seems. It doesn't always happen, you MAKE it happen. Just put him on your ignore list and be done with it.

Quote from 5haz :

I think you'll find he replied to a post I made, which was not adressed to him. (Yes I did say 'oh god, here we go' when he first showed up, and that was because it was inevitable the thread would end up like this).

It wasn't inevitable, as he replied to a post you made you shouldn't have risen to it and cause a good thread to get derailed. I hate to try and be a mediator but in all honesty this is getting silly now.

hold up a sec shotglass I want to see if I can clear some things up for you over your series of posts

Quote from Shotglass :

all well and true but you guys make this sound like some international conspiracy thats after the trillions (yeah right... anyone overly concerned about science grant money clearly has never worked in science) of money when in fact its about one perfectly normal sized (ie small) research group

This is international now. Read SamH's post up the top of the page about the CRU in New Zealand doing the same thing. Governments all over the world spend trillions in total on preventative measures based on a lie. It may be a small research group but it is internationally recognised, it's size doesn't make it any less important.

Quote from Shotglass :

so... how much time have you spent working in any sort of scientific field?

Quote from Shotglass :

i have and ive drawn my conclusions based on the experiences i have and the things people have told me and the methods ive witnessed on how they went about their thesis when things didnt look like they would work out in time

so.....how much time have YOU spent working in any sort of scientific field? Before you rubbish mine and others views take a look at how hypocritical you are being.

Quote from 5haz :

Yeah because I want someone to get shot of him, because leaving him alone to be an arse just annoys me. Have you not noticed that I was having a perfectly normal discussion until he showed up, of course not. Typical spouting judgements on people without actually reading the thread.

You could always not start on him automatically? Just an observation.

Quote from Shotglass :

no it isnt and your ignorance of how science actually works shows more and more
sure its a scandal... in science
in actual fact all they have to gain from this is a phd and have a lot more to lose ie ****ing up their entire career as they did
thats all there is to it

i have and ive drawn my conclusions based on the experiences i have and the things people have told me and the methods ive witnessed on how they went about their thesis when things didnt look like they would work out in time

Ignorance. You're basically saying that anyone who hasn't spent ages involved in the science isn't allowed an opinion on the matter. What about the multitude of other people in this thread who share my view and the view of those who've drawn THEIR own conclusions from the CRU emails? Are you prepared to dismiss EVERY person in this thread?

whats this about selecting desired file associations on the installer? I am confuz

Quote from Intrepid :

5Haz talks about his 'right' to ignore the BBC or whatever yet he doesn't use his freedom to put me on his ignore list. A simple 2 minute job to do. I suggest he should then he wouldn't get so irate.

one would think he hasn't blocked you because he intentionally wants to cause friction

*edit* back on topic, I wonder how many people have complained to the BBC about the lack of coverage...I shall be watching News Watch with great interest this week and if there is no mention of it on that well, that is shameful.

5haz you're looking a lot worse than Intrepid here....

You both have differing opinions, that is fine. Just don't turn one of the most interesting topics on this board in a long time into a personal grudge match.

Quote from SamH :

More fun.. sounds like the New Zealand CRU have been caught massaging data and are using the now-questionable "peer reviewed method" excuses.

http://briefingroom.typepad.co ... e-temperature-faking.html

my my, this story keeps getting bigger...I wonder how long the BBC (among others) will keep acting like it doesn't exist.

On a related note, can we keep personal bitch-fights between Intrepid and tristan etc out of this thread?

Quote from Shotglass :

so... how much time have you spent working in any sort of scientific field?

That is totally irrelevant. Judging by the replies you've left here you have obviously done no research into what is going on at the CRU regarding these emails.

The Daily Mail and Channel 4 have been the only organisations to give adequate reporting to this scandal, but I am sticking firmly to the blogosphere like others have said.

Quote from Shotglass :

1) just because one institute produces bad data doesnt suddenly debunk the entire science behind it
especially if we still have venus right there telling you everything you need to know about co2 rich atmospheres and why you wouldnt want to create one
2) speaking of trillions isnt enitrely blown out of proportion then? have you got any numbers to back the claim of it being about trillions up?

also for crying out loud a few guys fiddled with data presumably to help their phd thesis... clearly a true scandal because that never happened before on a daly basis ever

You clearly have absolutely no idea what is going on, or the implications it is having. This was a University research group of international acclaim, who's findings formed the basis for a lot of predictions we hear. It's not just 'a few guys fiddling with data to help their phd', and if you think that you must be truly ignorant.

Whilst this scandal explodes around us, the BBC finds time to publish on it's website the most laughable piece of journalism I've ever seen.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8375949.stm

Which proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that global warming is causing the wars in Africa. And Darfur's troubles are caused by CO2...

Before people attack Intrepid for his views on aunty, take time out to try and find a balanced article on AGW from the BBC, and try and also find a thorough, balanced report on the CRU whistleblowing while you're at it. You won't find one.

The manipulation, swerving and apparent want to destroy data which could prove them wrong comes as no surprise to me. This is a global conspiracy on a massive scale and finally, this is the thing which has made more and more people wake up.

What is more worrying than the initial leak has been the total lack of adequate coverage of this story on the BBC. This is one of the biggest scientific stories of the year and I have seen only one short report about it on the BBC news and only a couple of stories on the web, all of which ended with the accepted 'man is to blame' line. The BBC treats man-made global warming as absolute fact and with an almost religious fervour, and anything that dares to prove them wrong doesn't get a look-in, or does but is swiftly put to bed by people on the pro-AGW side. I think the BBC thought the story would blow over in a couple of days so they could get away with minimal coverage but it seems set to rumble on for a while with people from both sides of the Atlantic getting involved and calling for there to be an enquiry.

Shocking and shameful behaviour from our state broadcaster. It's also interesting to note the way it is reported as a 'hacker' attack, but it is far more likely to be a whistleblower.

yes, because I'm a resident of Korea...

I have facebook and paypal

worst thread ever

I don't dance but I go to provide support to my other friends who don't dance so we end up acting all shifty eyeing up some pretty ladies and stuff

May have posted this one before...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com ... 58954472_e74daedbec_b.jpg

Here are a few from my trip to Hellingly Asylum a week or so back

http://farm3.static.flickr.com ... 10619974_78de35e969_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com ... 09802403_f2af35ff94_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com ... 10579186_b694734eee_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com ... 10741324_455a011a7b_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com ... 10106107_db5c82a949_b.jpg

Venetian Snares - JonBenet Taxidermy