Eat that GW believers!

alexjrgreen · Post by **alexjrgreen** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:38 pm

Ignoring the issue isn't going to make it go away. Coming to a reasonable settlement and putting the issue to bed seems the better course.

bcglorf · Post by **bcglorf** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:56 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:Ignoring the issue isn't going to make it go away. Coming to a reasonable settlement and putting the issue to bed seems the better course.

That'd be great, if it would work. I'm in Canada and the 'reasonable' settlements to right the wrongs against Native peoples is without end. The problem is the solution only works if both sides can agree on what is a reasonable settlement, and I've witnessed first hand that is in a great many cases not possible. There is a point were the militarily stronger side needs to just make the decision, the settlement will be such and such, period, and be willing to accept the level of turmoil left among those for whom that is not enough.

Unfortunately, on a grand scale the only thing our species really respects is force or threat of force, and negotiations are based not on right or wrong but balance of power between the two sides. Right and wrong sometimes effect the balance of power, but not nearly as often as I'd wish.

seedload · Post by **seedload** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 3:22 pm

jmc wrote:Looking through the emails I don't think its fair to say that these climate folk were "fraudsters" in a "conspiracy" with each other

Has anyone ever seen this graph? From NOAA's website. 0.5 degrees C of the final temperature data is based on adjustments. Look at the slope of the adjustments from 1960 to 1990's. Does it look like anything you recognize?

Or this graph. Created from the unintentionally released CRU's code, an arbitrary adjustment to the temperature record.

This was in the CRU code. The graph was created using an array in their code with the following comment. "Apply a VERY ARTIFICIAL correction for decline!"

IT IS NOT JUST THE EMAILS. They are damning. Look at the actual code. You can't dismiss fraud. You can't.

regards

bcglorf · Post by **bcglorf** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:46 pm

I'd add an amen to what was just said, and the note that Dr. Jones was also one of the co-ordinating Lead authors for the IPCC reports. It's also worth noting how intertwined his work is with all the 'independent' studies that are supposed to confirm his temperature reconstructions.

Luzr · Post by **Luzr** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:54 pm

seedload wrote: This was in the CRU code. The graph was created using an array in their code with the following comment. "Apply a VERY ARTIFICIAL correction for decline!"

IT IS NOT JUST THE EMAILS. They are damning. Look at the actual code. You can't dismiss fraud. You can't.

As much I am on sceptics side, I would be little bit careful here. If you would take my full codebase, you would find a lot of crappy code that was only used for experimental or development reasons.

I think basing allegations on some piece of code coming from nowhere and not knowing the context is just stupid. You need a proof that such code was really used to produce hockey sticks.

In the end, we still need to examine the raw data...

jnaujok · Post by **jnaujok** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:59 pm

Luzr wrote:In the end, we still need to examine the raw data...

Which is exactly what the emails and recent information have shown the people at CRU and those associated with them (Penn State, GISS, etc) have been working very, very hard to keep hidden.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:38 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:Ignoring the issue isn't going to make it go away. Coming to a reasonable settlement and putting the issue to bed seems the better course.

Who said anything about ignoring? The way is forward. Forward learning from the dead ends of the past. Settlement is a nice ideal, but how do you fairly implement it (back to what I said: not much use when most people didn't have a hand in it) and what good (sum of positives and negatives) does it do in practice? Two wrongs don't make a right. Africa's problems, as far as I've seen (but I'm no specialist) is comparable to South America's: bad leadership, mismanagement, political corruption.

alexjrgreen · Post by **alexjrgreen** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:45 pm

Betruger wrote:not much use when most people didn't have a hand in it

Just because I wasn't there doesn't mean I'm not reaping the benefit. If my prosperity is based on the suffering of generations of Africans, how can I say I don't owe anything?

jnaujok · Post by **jnaujok** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:07 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:Just because I wasn't there doesn't mean I'm not reaping the benefit. If my prosperity is based on the suffering of generations of Africans, how can I say I don't owe anything?

Okay, here's an example. I'm Caucasian. Under every "reparations" plan I've heard, I'll be paying a large chunk of my earnings to pay for the "slave holocaust" in America based on the color of my skin.

On the other hand, several people I work with would be receiving those "reparations" because of the color of their skin.

Ignoring, first of all, the inherent racism based on the color of skin, let's look a little deeper.

My ancestors came from Germany in the 1920's and 1930's. All of the people I work with are second generation Americans, whose parents came over in the 1950's.

So, someone whose ancestors never owned slaves and never owned slaves them-self or profited in any way from slavery in America, will be paying large sums of money to someone who was never a slave, had no ancestors subjected to slavery, and never was hurt by slavery in America.

And this is fair and equitable -- how?

Show me one person alive today in America who legally owned a slave in America, or one person who was legally kept as a slave in America, and I'll agree to reparations. Anyone?

How long must we wait before someone accepts that an act against their ancestry doesn't allow them to do nothing but complain, and they get off their own ass and work for themselves to make their life better?

Hitler took away all the lands and wealth of my grandfather's family. Can I go and sue the current government of Germany for reparations?

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:25 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:
Betruger wrote:not much use when most people didn't have a hand in it
Just because I wasn't there doesn't mean I'm not reaping the benefit. If my prosperity is based on the suffering of generations of Africans, how can I say I don't owe anything?

I don't know if you can say that YOU don't owe anything, but I can definately say that you CAN'T say that I owe something. I don't. I am a recent scandahoovian on my father's side, and a northern abolitionist with folks who died in the Civil War freeing the slaves, so I don't owe ANYTHING.

jmc · Post by **jmc** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:32 pm

alexjrgreen wrote: Just because I wasn't there doesn't mean I'm not reaping the benefit. If my prosperity is based on the suffering of generations of Africans, how can I say I don't owe anything?

How much benefits are we reaping? A bowl full of bananas and a bar of chocolate are hardly the basis of all Western economies. How much do we import from Africa overall?

I suppose there's oil from Nigeria, but one also has to consider that Africans benefit from the existence of Europe and import cars, mobile phones, AIDS drugs etc., etc.,

The ancient europeans of old certainly mistreated Africans and had an unpleasant and ignorant racist ideology, but it cannot be denied than colonization brought medicine and the green revolution, which is largely responsible for the growth rate of African populations as a result of dying less.

Ofcourse colonisation included racism and slavery, but this was not confined to white folk. Some blacks can be just as racist as some whites and there were slaves long before whites even existed, in fact the main export of sub-saharan africa were slaves to the Arabs long before colonization.

All humans are the same and if you dig back long enough in history, everyones ancestors have a dirty secret (minorities included). I agree with jnaujok, there is only one way and that is forward.

I'm not against redistributing wealth, but it should be out of charity and it should be on the basis of poverty (poor white folk included) an not race based on some perverse and convoluted sense of guilt.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:52 pm

alexjrgreen wrote:
Betruger wrote:not much use when most people didn't have a hand in it
Just because I wasn't there doesn't mean I'm not reaping the benefit. If my prosperity is based on the suffering of generations of Africans, how can I say I don't owe anything?

So in your system you have a couple of extremely evil individuals single handedly ruining whole future generations' livelihoods because of guilt by very distant association. It's not communism but it sounds completely unfair by being as uncomprehensive in very similar way. It's neither fair nor functional.

jmc · Post by **jmc** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:52 pm

I wonder what peoples responses are to this link...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global- ... n-1998.htm

djolds1 · Post by **djolds1** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 9:37 pm

jmc wrote:I wonder what peoples responses are to this link...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global- ... n-1998.htm

More interesting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8387737.stm

Note especially the source. The Beeb, one of the most 'correct' of the 'Sources of Record.' The Mandate of Heaven for AGW may be wobbling; the Party Line may be about to shift.

seedload · Post by **seedload** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:12 pm

jmc wrote:I wonder what peoples responses are to this link...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global- ... n-1998.htm

Without following the link, I would consider 1998 an unfair year to start a sample on because of the strong El Nino. I think it deceptive to start in 1998.

Talk-Polywell.org

Eat that GW believers!

It would be nice

Amen