" Michael Mann has been cleared, of all charges of misconduct, yet again. You can read about it in a Bloomberg report on a National Science Foundation investigation of Mann. If you want, you can get the full NSF findings in PDF form. The NSF goes through the assorted "climate-gate" charges and concludes, laconically if with sub-optimal grammar: >>Finding no research misconduct or other matter raised by the various regulations and laws discussed above, this case is closed.<< Mann had previously been cleared in an investigation by Pennsylvania State, and in a related study by NOAA. I go out of my way to mention this for several reasons. First, because a serious scientist has been vilified, without basis, mainly because his work bears on current politics. "Oh, never mind" clearance from charges rarely gets as much publicity as the original charges themselves. The fact that every scientific body examining Mann's behavior has exonerated him deserves publicity and emphasis. For the record, I have interviewed Mann but don't have any connection to him beyond that. Also, after my article came out I was inundated with mail by people who said, How can you quote this fraud? (Almost as much mail as I got from people on the left, saying, How can you say we're going to keep using coal?) Well, Mann is not a fraud. As a human being and as a scientist he deserves to have that stated again and again. Finally, I raise this episode as a guide. If you hear people talking in environmental debates about "climate-gate" and "Mann's misconduct," recognize that what you're hearing is just like "Obama was born in Kenya." These people are either passively uninformed or knowingly beyond the reach of fact. And if they can't be convinced by the National Science Foundation, NOAA, Penn State, and various European counterparts, then they are in the realm of being anti-science. " http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/08/michael-mann-cleared-again/244051/
This whole thread is a load of crap. What have you done to reduce your own carbon emissions? Do you own an automobile? Do you fly on jetliners? Do you heat your home in the winter? Do you run an airconditioner in the summer? Do you barbeque? Does your home have a waterheater? All of this yammering yet you do nothing in your own life to mitigate your carbon emissions, nothing. The message that conveys is that you don't believe this bullshit yourself. Why aren't you living a lifestyle that sets an example to others? You make post after post on this subject but you cannot answer the singular simple question which is: WHAT DO YOU WANT? Do you want people to fervently agree with you and gush over your vast technical abilities? Do you want them to change their lifestyles? Do you want them to donate money to some organization? Just what the fuck do you want? I suspect you just like to hear yourself yammer and like the look of your prose on the screen. Its all alarmist bunk and I've seen it all before only it was an Ice Age last time. A complete load of crap.
Nice try at deflection of the principal point, but I saw the picture you had posted a while back. You look like someone who regularly gets a good elbow workout at the bar.
That's an awful lot of detail, betraying the inordinate amount of time you spend thinking about me, whom you refer to as an "effeminate faghag." What, then, does that say about you and your peccadillos?
the guys that bring up gay all the time just might have some demons they are fighting: http://comedians.jokes.com/ron-white/videos/ron-white---homosexuality
It says, as 3 admitted, that they are in defacto exile in the real world, and that ET is the only place they can come and display this tripe, most likely due to absentee landlords.
Global Warming Models Are Wrong Again During a fundraiser in Atlanta earlier this month, President Obama is reported to have said: "It gets you a little nervous about what is happening to global temperatures. When it is 75 degrees in Chicago in the beginning of March, you start thinking. On the other hand, I really have enjoyed nice weather." What is happening to global temperatures in reality? The answer is: almost nothing for more than 10 years. Monthly values of the global temperature anomaly of the lower atmosphere, compiled at the University of Alabama from NASA satellite data, can be found at the website http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/. The latest (February 2012) monthly global temperature anomaly for the lower atmosphere was minus 0.12 degrees Celsius, slightly less than the average since the satellite record of temperatures began in 1979. The lack of any statistically significant warming for over a decade has made it more difficult for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its supporters to demonize the atmospheric gas CO2 which is released when fossil fuels are burned. The burning of fossil fuels has been one reason for an increase of CO2 levels in the atmosphere to around 395 ppm (or parts per million), up from preindustrial levels of about 280 ppm. CO2 is not a pollutant. Life on earth flourished for hundreds of millions of years at much higher CO2 levels than we see today. Increasing CO2 levels will be a net benefit because cultivated plants grow better and are more resistant to drought at higher CO2 levels, and because warming and other supposedly harmful effects of CO2 have been greatly exaggerated. Nations with affordable energy from fossil fuels are more prosperous and healthy than those without. The direct warming due to doubling CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be calculated to cause a warming of about one degree Celsius. The IPCC computer models predict a much larger warming, three degrees Celsius or even more, because they assume changes in water vapor or clouds that supposedly amplify the direct warming from CO2. Many lines of observational evidence suggest that this "positive feedback" also has been greatly exaggerated. Mr. Happer is a professor of physics at Princeton http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...7291352882984274.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop