meteorologist Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 http://motherjones.com/environment/2011/04/history-of-climategate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 http://motherjones.c...-of-climategate It's a little one-sided and simplistic in spots, but overall gives some good context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Climategate is simple in my opinion. - Climategate is constantly overblown by skeptics, and they make themselves look absolutely silly when they start talking about "fraud", or "manipulation"... there was no "fraud" or "Manipulation", the science of AGW is irrelavent. - Warmists underplay it, as if "nothing went wrong". Thats not true either. The problem here is Not that the science of AGW is bad, or that the data is fake, its how the scientists went about the social aspect of their work, such as refusing FOI requests, and hiding the large uncertanties. All of that indeed occured, but it wasn't an epidemic, and was a relatively minor issue. So for once, I'd Agree More-so with the Warmists, and not my own camp Although I'm split. One thing I will say, the Hockeystick by Michael Mann is a Load of BS, and I'm not going to go into it now. But hear one thing.......... Do not use Tree-Rings, Leaves, or ANY plant matter for a Proxy... Period. If the Reconstruction uses anything plant/tree related, throw it out! Thats the end of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.