UK Investigation Largely Clears ‘Climategate’ Scientists

Environment • Views: 6,703

The UK is conducting several investigations into the Climategate nontroversy, and the first one has now reported; the House of Commons’ Science and Technology Committee has vindicated the scientists of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit of the most serious charges, that they exaggerated or tampered with climatic research data.

The first of several British investigations into the e-mails leaked from one of the world’s leading climate research centers has largely vindicated the scientists involved.

The House of Commons’ Science and Technology Committee said Wednesday that they’d seen no evidence to support charges that the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit or its director, Phil Jones, had tampered with data or perverted the peer review process to exaggerate the threat of global warming — two of the most serious criticisms levied against the climatologist and his colleagues.

In their report, the committee said that, as far as it was able to ascertain, “the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact,” adding that nothing in the more than 1,000 stolen e-mails, or the controversy kicked up by their publication, challenged scientific consensus that “global warming is happening and that it is induced by human activity.”

Jump to bottom

165 comments
1 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 12:52:25pm

Who are you going to trust? The government panel who had full access and tons of pressure to conduct the investigation or the anonymous hacker who cherry picked a handful of emails to misrepresent?

2 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 12:55:11pm

And I'm sure those who have been so viciously attacking the scientists will accept this and apologize.

/

Sigh.

3 Four More Tears  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 12:56:19pm

re: #2 Obdicut

And I'm sure those who have been so viciously attacking the scientists will accept this and apologize.

/

Sigh.

And then I finally get my unicorn!

4 Jack Burton  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 12:56:58pm

re: #2 Obdicut

And I'm sure those who have been so viciously attacking the scientists will accept this and apologize.

/

Sigh.

Right after the nirthers admit they were wrong and accept the BC that Hawaii already released.

5 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 12:58:10pm

But Al Gore is FAT which means he eats too much and the trucks bringing his food pollute the atmosphere as do the animals grown for him to eat and...and...also, too.

6 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 12:59:43pm

re: #4 ArchangelMichael


Ya know, one of the things that was sad about the whole birth certificate thing is that as a result of Hawaii being called exotic and all the crap during the campaign over his birth certificate, my fiance who barely watches the news thought we'd need passports to go there for our honeymoon.

7 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:00:31pm

re: #6 Dreggas

Tell your fiancee that she's what's wrong with this nation.

Kidding, totally. And congrats.

8 Dark_Falcon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:04:23pm

Anti-AGW Talking Points retracted in
5
4
3
2
1
....[crickets] BBL

9 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:04:26pm

re: #7 Obdicut

She didn't know anything about politics until she met me. It is sad that people aren't more engaged. Don't get me wrong she is smart, she has degrees, the whole 9 yards but sometimes she is just blonde.

And thanks :)

10 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:05:13pm

BREAKING - from the 'devil his due' files, Bill O'reilly is paying the legal fees of that dead Marine son's family here.

Maryland's laws are pretty strict on this, so the judge's hands appear to have been tied re paying court costs in a lawsuit.

11 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:06:40pm

re: #10 keloyd

BREAKING - from the 'devil his due' files, Bill O'reilly is paying the legal fees of that dead Marine son's family here.

Maryland's laws are pretty strict on this, so the judge's hands appear to have been tied re paying court costs in a lawsuit.

OK, I'll give Bill due credit here. Nice work.

12 avanti  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:09:41pm

Ron Paul comments on Abe Lincoln, and offers weird plan to buy and free the slaves :


"Getting down to the last two questions here.... Most people consider Abe Lincoln to be one of our greatest presidents, if not the greatest president we've ever had. Would you agree with that sentiment and why or why not?

No, I don't think he was one of our greatest presidents. I mean, he was determined to fight a bloody civil war, which many have argued could have been avoided. For 1/100 the cost of the war, plus 600 thousand lives, enough money would have been available to buy up all the slaves and free them. So, I don't see that is a good part of our history. Besides, the Civil War was to prove that we had a very, very strong centralized federal government and that's what it did. It rejected the notion that states were a sovereign nation."

13 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:11:05pm

re: #12 avanti

That's so repellent, and so unrealistic, I don't know what to say about it.

What a fantasy world he lives in.

14 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:12:23pm

Any bets on which comment will be the first to use the phrase "whistle blower"? I've got money on comment #14.

15 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:12:30pm

re: #12 avanti

What a complete load of bullshit revisionism.

16 avanti  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:14:06pm

I'm a believer is states rights, but never considered them " sovereign nations"

17 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:14:23pm

re: #12 avanti

Of course the southern slave owners would just....buy more SLAVES!

It's like an underpants gnome theory of Emancipation

1. Buy All the slaves from the south

2. ....

3. EMANCIPATION!

18 Decatur Deb  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:17:33pm

re: #12 avanti

Do something to emphasize that the statement is a quote. I missed the first line in "Spy", and thought you were being held under duress.

19 avanti  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:17:55pm

re: #17 Dreggas

Of course the southern slave owners would just...buy more SLAVES!

It's like an underpants gnome theory of Emancipation

1. Buy All the slaves from the south

2. ...

3. EMANCIPATION!

Here's the entire interview, could it be a spoof and I missed it ?

link.

20 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:19:21pm

"...enough money would have been available..." where? and from whom? Who was in a position to vote to hand over mounds of cash to the landed Southern (and Northern!) slave-holding elite? His economic facts are likely correct; I've heard that calculation many times on the war vs. the value of "buying out" the slave holders, but what in human nature or politics could make it ever workable anywhere, ever?

In a world where even the abolitionists excluded Catholics from their ranks because they were 'slaves to the pope', who had the enlightenment, pragmatism, political muscle, and cash to pull this off? I'm always up for a tu quoque argument in the War Between The States, but this one is not well thought out at all, imho.

21 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:22:12pm

re: #20 keloyd

>> Its always interesting to hear a true-born Southerner talk about the Civil War. So many odd bits of reasoning and phrasology!

22 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:23:47pm

So the North could have miracled the cash to buy all the Slaves and put them where and supported them how exactly?

Ron Paul, you are a fucking moron.

23 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:25:40pm

re: #19 avanti

Given that it's supposed to be ron paul I doubt it was a spoof.

24 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:27:52pm

It's hard to write a Ron Paul spoof.re: #21 windsagio

>> Its always interesting to hear a true-born Southerner talk about the Civil War. So many odd bits of reasoning and phrasology!

Whut? Are yew callin me a poltroon? Ah demand satisfaction!

25 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:29:43pm

re: #24 keloyd

hehe sorry, its just things like the emphasis 'the north had slaves too!', the terminology 'the war between the states', etc etc :P

Its just interesting to me, its a totally different world than where I'm from.

26 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:29:52pm

Do you hear That? Do you?
The sound of Rush's head exploding

27 The Sanity Inspector  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:31:53pm
the House of Commons’ Science and Technology Committee has vindicated the scientists of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit of the most serious charges, that they exaggerated or tampered with climatic research data.

Ah, good; glad that's cleared up. Now we can get back to rationally discussing the AGW issue, without all that distracting name-calling. :%P%

28 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:31:56pm

I wonder what other incidents in history Ron Paul thinks could have been avoided "if only ____" had happened.

29 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:32:17pm

re: #12 avanti

Ron Paul comments on Abe Lincoln, and offers weird plan to buy and free the slaves :


"Getting down to the last two questions here... Most people consider Abe Lincoln to be one of our greatest presidents, if not the greatest president we've ever had. Would you agree with that sentiment and why or why not?

No, I don't think he was one of our greatest presidents. I mean, he was determined to fight a bloody civil war, which many have argued could have been avoided. For 1/100 the cost of the war, plus 600 thousand lives, enough money would have been available to buy up all the slaves and free them. So, I don't see that is a good part of our history. Besides, the Civil War was to prove that we had a very, very strong centralized federal government and that's what it did. It rejected the notion that states were a sovereign nation."

I would think that was a very interesting possible alternate solution to to the problems leading to the Civil War if a third grader had proposed it.

Ron Paul, not so much.

30 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:32:53pm

re: #26 HoosierHoops

Do you hear That? Do you?
The sound of Rush's head exploding


Limbaugh will just point out that the House of Commons is controlled by communists and socialists, who therefore were unwilling to derail their plan of world conquest via Cap and Trade.

31 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:33:52pm

re: #22 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

So the North could have miracled the cash to buy all the Slaves and put them where and supported them how exactly?

Ron Paul, you are a fucking moron.

And the economy of the Southern states would have done what?

32 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:34:52pm

Tancredo calling for Napolitano's head, while exploiting the death of a rancher:

33 The Sanity Inspector  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:35:14pm

re: #6 Dreggas

Ya know, one of the things that was sad about the whole birth certificate thing is that as a result of Hawaii being called exotic and all the crap during the campaign over his birth certificate, my fiance who barely watches the news thought we'd need passports to go there for our honeymoon.

Poor girl. Everyone knows that it's New Mexico that requires the passports.

34 The Sanity Inspector  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:35:59pm

re: #30 freetoken

Limbaugh will just point out that the House of Commons is controlled by communists and socialists, who therefore were unwilling to derail their plan of world conquest via Cap and Trade.

Or he'll have Lord Monckton on to say the same thing.

35 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:36:11pm

re: #31 SanFranciscoZionist

And the economy of the Southern states would have done what?

There is no chain of events in revisionist history, only discreet incidents which have no relation to events before or after.

36 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:36:39pm

re: #21 windsagio

>> Its always interesting to hear a true-born Southerner talk about the Civil War. So many odd bits of reasoning and phrasology!

My (anglo) people have been in Texas 7 generations, having just arrived after the War, when they had to suddenly be somewhere else for legal reasons. My American Indian ancestors have been here a bit longer. Ironically, my parents moved to Kenya Hawaii just long enough to have me, then came right back. Before that, it was Georgia back to the 17th C.

37 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:41:03pm

re: #36 keloyd

...

So where does that POV about that particular war come from then? Just goes up through the family or what?

(I still remember you talking about your grandmother talking in depth about how much she hated Sherman, for instance)

and if I'm being rude, I'm sorry. Its just interesting to me, and the thread is pretty dead otherwise/

38 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:43:31pm

re: #33 The Sanity Inspector

I still remember the post on FailBlog of the woman posting a question on the yahoo questions site about Georgia being invaded by russia and how she looked outside and didn't see any tanks.

39 Scriptorium  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:45:45pm

"...nothing in the more than 1,000 stolen e-mails, or the controversy kicked up by their publication, challenged scientific consensus that “global warming is happening and that it is induced by human activity.”

The lesson is clear. Humans must be much less active. Perhaps if we all just had quiet naps from time to time we could reduce both waste-churning controversies over nothing as well as global warming.

40 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:47:31pm

We're doing well, I think. We're forty comments in, and no one has seized on the word 'largely' like a ravening hyena.

Go us!

41 The Sanity Inspector  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:48:20pm

IMO, the biggest disaster in American history was the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. His standing at the successful conclusion of the War was sky-high, and the resulting political clout with Congress might have made Reconstruction less of a trauma. He would have had the smarts not to take a punitive postwar stance towards the South, been more of a healer. Had he lived, and his second term prospered, he might even have been able to stave off the passage of the Jim Crow Laws, which began in the 1870s, by virtue of his stature. Instead, that drunkard Johnson got batted around by the factions in Congress, and the nation suffered for the leaderless drift that ensued.

42 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:48:26pm

re: #40 SanFranciscoZionist

We're doing well, I think. We're forty comments in, and no one has seized on the word 'largely' like a ravening hyena.

Go us!

AH-HA! A GAP!

43 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:50:11pm
44 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:50:34pm

re: #40 SanFranciscoZionist

Well, I largely don't care whether the largely obese House of Commons largely spends its citizens largely ill-be-gotten gains on largely meaningless inquires into largely meaningless nontroversies.

Nevertheless... yes, go team!

45 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:51:22pm

re: #40 SanFranciscoZionist

well, in fairness, the usual contrarian subjects aren't around just now :P

46 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:52:00pm

re: #45 windsagio

well, in fairness, the usual contrarian subjects aren't around just now :P

Yeah, I thought of that, but decided to emphasize the positive. WE who are here NOW are doing very well!

47 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:53:31pm

re: #37 windsagio

I think we lizards just agree on Climategate, so it's quiet. That particular war has had more revisionism and re-revisionism than any other to my knowledge. Personally, as an academic subject, everything about it personifies "spin" better than anything, anywhere, ever, North and South. Liberals become strict constructionists to the Constitution when it comes to secession, and we bend the English language back on itself with phrases like "benevolent school" and "peculiar institution". The South Africans are a distant second when "friendly neighborliness" was the lace-curtains word for apartheid.

Also, some of my family were sorta old when they had their kids, over and over, so the 'institutional memory' is longer than average. Further, a few of my people in Tennessee fought with the Union. The state was nearly split in half during the War. Try fitting that into the thumbnail sketches of highschool textbooks. Then there's the underdog effect, not a Southern thing, but it's in our DNA.

That said, if I ever find out where general Sherman is buried, and I'm nearby, and drinking, I'm taking a leak on his grave for what he did to people known to people I've known. (Best that I don't look it up at all.)

48 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:53:38pm

re: #46 SanFranciscoZionist

Pff positive?! What internet are you from?!

49 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:53:59pm

re: #41 The Sanity Inspector

Absolutely. Absolutely. The death of Lincoln was the worst thing to happen to the South.

50 Kragar  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:54:08pm

re: #45 windsagio

well, in fairness, the usual contrarian subjects aren't around just now :P

AND WHAT THE HELL DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

51 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:54:21pm

re: #47 keloyd

I think we lizards just agree on Climategate, so it's quiet.

The ones who don't just ignore these threads.

52 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:55:20pm

re: #31 SanFranciscoZionist

And the economy of the Southern states would have done what?

He failed to factor in the cost of forty acres and amule for each: that would'ver run into money, cheaper to just fight a war.

53 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:58:07pm

OT: Dozens Of Cars Towed At Glenn Beck Event

At least 50 cars were towed from the Kappa Sigma fraternity lot. Signs that had directed drivers toward "free parking" had also disappeared once Saturday's event concluded.

54 Cato the Elder  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:58:50pm

Reposted for truth:

For the record, I am firmly opposed to people who oppose offshore drilling in US waters.

What we do now is, we let all the other places with offshore oil deposits drill their asses off, with all the concomitant ecological damage, while the Prius drivers here at home get to do both: suck up the gas and enjoy pristine shorelines. (And pretend their cars are ecologically clean.)

If we were anything less than abject hypocrites, we'd drill the shit out of the Chesapeake Bay and people would see up close and personal the injuries we inflict on other people's environments.

That, in my view, would do more than all the abstract altruism in the world to get people to rethink their habits.

But the general rule of thumb for Western nations is "not in my backyard". Dump all the shit on the brown people and enjoy the fruits without let, hindrance, or bad conscience.

And my targets here are not the ordinary Americans who couldn't give a wet fart about where their gas comes from, but the oh-so-concerned eco-drivers who couldn't give a flying doughnut about any of it unless a baby seal dies in Alaska.

Drill that shit!

55 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:00:10pm

re: #54 Cato the Elder

Reposted for truth:...


What about "justice" and "the American Way"? Aren't they good enough for you?

56 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:00:53pm

Well I will tell you!

This proves nothing! We all know that those scientists were lying!

Don't you see the pattern!

Let out incriminating evidence then make it seem that all of us who saw the incriminating evidence were CRAZY!

This is a giant Alinsky! Why can't people see the truth!

If people believe the warmists then people will demand that we start burning less fossil fuels. If that happens, then we can no longer support the real Americans who made this nation great, the oil men, and our good friends the Saudis!

It is all about robbing the rich to feed the lazy! We are going to punish the oil companies for being successful and give their money to green people! That money rightfully belongs in the hands of Exxon and the Saudi Royal family!

I am not at all surprised that the socialists in England are just stepping forward with their New World Order, while trying to make men of vision like Sen Inhofe look foolish.

Well you know what, it won't wash, because Americans may not be all IVY league educated and all that, but we have common sense!

Everyone knows that carbon dioxide is a gas right?

So if you blow on something with a gas, it gets colder right!

So yeah, there can not possibly any "warming."

57 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:01:28pm

re: #40 SanFranciscoZionist

We're doing well, I think. We're forty comments in, and no one has seized on the word 'largely' like a ravening hyena.

Go us!

Fine. I'll seize on it like a rabid giraffe.

(I just like the image, y'know?)

58 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:02:01pm

re: #54 Cato the Elder

Reposted for truth:

For the record, I am firmly opposed to people who oppose offshore drilling in US waters.

What we do now is, we let all the other places with offshore oil deposits drill their asses off, with all the concomitant ecological damage, while the Prius drivers here at home get to do both: suck up the gas and enjoy pristine shorelines. (And pretend their cars are ecologically clean.)

If we were anything less than abject hypocrites, we'd drill the shit out of the Chesapeake Bay and people would see up close and personal the injuries we inflict on other people's environments.

That, in my view, would do more than all the abstract altruism in the world to get people to rethink their habits.

But the general rule of thumb for Western nations is "not in my backyard". Dump all the shit on the brown people and enjoy the fruits without let, hindrance, or bad conscience.

And my targets here are not the ordinary Americans who couldn't give a wet fart about where their gas comes from, but the oh-so-concerned eco-drivers who couldn't give a flying doughnut about any of it unless a baby seal dies in Alaska.

Drill that shit!

For the record, anything that puts more carbon up there contributes to a larger problem and your complaints about ecofascism are secondary or even tertiary at best.

59 Gus  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:02:22pm

re: #53 Slumbering Behemoth

OT: Dozens Of Cars Towed At Glenn Beck Event

Classic!

One of the victims told WFTV he thought he had been set up, but did not know if it was because of dislike for the conservative Fox News host or if it was motivated by money.

Yeah, a victim.

60 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:03:27pm

Off to lunch, gonna leave everyone with a wonderful story by my favorite 20th century author!

The Catbird Seat

61 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:04:35pm

"With malice towards none,
with charity for all,
with firmness in the right,
as God gives us to see the right." - Palin, who loves all the founding fathers the same, may not have come up with that in Lincoln's place.

"men of vision like Sen Inhofe" - that's worth an upding right there! /

62 Cato the Elder  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:09:43pm

re: #58 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

For the record, anything that puts more carbon up there contributes to a larger problem and your complaints about ecofascism are secondary or even tertiary at best.

And for the record, nothing short of an economically viable alternative or the Second Coming is going to stop us (viz. humanity in the aggregate) from putting more carbon up there. It's a simple matter of cost vs. demographics.

Off course, you could decide to infect all the upwardly-mobile brown people with AIDS or multiresistant TB to put the brakes, as it were, on their enthusiasm for central heating and internal combustion engines. But that would be immoral.

63 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:11:35pm

re: #59 Gus 802

Likely just a frat prank.

64 Gus  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:13:37pm

re: #63 Slumbering Behemoth

Likely just a frat prank.

Right. Or general confusion.

65 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:14:38pm

re: #56 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

Methinks you need to remove the "Slightly drooling" from your handle and change it to "Foaming at the mouth" k thx bye.

//

66 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:17:42pm

re: #64 Gus 802

Yeah, but fifty cars? That's an awful lot of confusion. Prank is more likely.

67 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:20:37pm

re: #62 Cato the Elder

And for the record, nothing short of an economically viable alternative or the Second Coming is going to stop us (viz. humanity in the aggregate) from putting more carbon up there. It's a simple matter of cost vs. demographics.

Off course, you could decide to infect all the upwardly-mobile brown people with AIDS or multiresistant TB to put the brakes, as it were, on their enthusiasm for central heating and internal combustion engines. But that would be immoral.

Or you could actually build and deploy alternative energy sources which are already available and viable. That way they don't suffer (now and in the future) and we don't suffer (in the future).

The pay now or pay a very lot later part of the argument seems to be missing from your analysis.

68 Merkin  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:31:25pm

I can't help but believe that this report will finally put this question of Climategate to rest. A respected deliberative body has looked closely at the evidence, heard testimony from both sides, and rendered its best, evidence based judgment.

What more could the skeptics want?

(remove tongue from cheek, prepare for inrush of "confirmation of my biases is the only truth" types)

69 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:35:36pm

This Commons Committee report really is a non-event. They took evidence for about 4 hours, only 5 members attended the session to deal with the draft report, they say they are unfit to declare either way on AGW and then effectively endorse it, the only scientist on the Committee disagreed across the board with the conclusions of the non-scientist MPs.

I note that the blog post does not mention that the University of East Anglia was strongly criticised for its refusal to adhere to the UK's Freedom of Information Act. And that the Committee expressed serious concern that in the field of "cl;imate science" it appears to be common practice to withhold data and methods, to thereby avoid / evade normal scientific method of reproducability.

70 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:36:37pm

I want to comment on our good friends the Saudis that these green freak commies are trying to hurt!

The King of Saudi Arabia is a proud and just ruler who was put on his thrown by God (through the agency of the British). Real Americans respect the Divine Rights of kings to sell the natural resources of their nations (also put their by God and to be used for making prosperity).

Real Americans would not want to beggar this man or his wives.

Real Americans know that our money is rightfully his! God after all gave him that oil and his thrown!

I wish America could be more like the Saudis. Just today, they announced that they were going to execute a man for witchcraft by public decapitation (this is true) ! Now those are some old fashioned values!

There would be no Mr. Sulu adds for public flaunting of American values if stuck to our values the way the Saudis stick to theirs!

71 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:38:48pm

re: #69 JohninLondon

This Commons Committee report really is a non-event. They took evidence for about 4 hours, only 5 members attended the session to deal with the draft report, they say they are unfit to declare either way on AGW and then effectively endorse it, the only scientist on the Committee disagreed across the board with the conclusions of the non-scientist MPs.

I note that the blog post does not mention that the University of East Anglia was strongly criticised for its refusal to adhere to the UK's Freedom of Information Act. And that the Committee expressed serious concern that in the field of "cl;imate science" it appears to be common practice to withhold data and methods, to thereby avoid / evade normal scientific method of reproducability.

You're like a pop-o-matic!

72 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:40:52pm

If you want a sensible review of the Commons Committee's report - try reading the article by the Guardian's senior Science Correspondent, who is generally a proponent of AGW theory :

"Enquiry has dodged key questions"

[Link: www.guardian.co.uk...]

73 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:42:16pm

re: #71 WindUpBird

No idea what you mean.

But I am a damn sight closer to following House of Commons affairs than anyone else here.

74 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:42:25pm

re: #72 JohninLondon

Fred Pearce has been very dodgy of late, quite the opposite of your characterization of him.

75 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:43:15pm

re: #73 JohninLondon

You're also a damn sight closer to your own biases than we are to your own biases...

76 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:43:32pm

re: #73 JohninLondon

No idea what you mean.

But I am a damn sight closer to following House of Commons affairs than anyone else here.

You pop up to deny, then go away.

77 webevintage  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:43:47pm

re: #10 keloyd

BREAKING - from the 'devil his due' files, Bill O'reilly is paying the legal fees of that dead Marine son's family here.

Maryland's laws are pretty strict on this, so the judge's hands appear to have been tied re paying court costs in a lawsuit.

I guess it is a cold day in hell, because Bill just make me cry...in a good way.
What a kind thing to do.

78 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:44:20pm

re: #72 JohninLondon


The Guardian Disappoints.

The Guardian has done okay, for a newspaper. They're still no substitute for scientists.

79 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:44:26pm

re: #72 JohninLondon

If you want a sensible review of the Commons Committee's report - try reading the article by the Guardian's senior Science Correspondent, who is generally a proponent of AGW theory :

"Enquiry has dodged key questions"

[Link: www.guardian.co.uk...]

"in deep doo-doo" - the British way with words is like listening to a Stradivarius, sometimes. Still a good, nuanced analysis.

80 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:45:30pm

re: #79 keloyd

No, it really isn't.

81 Political Atheist  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:47:49pm

Is this guy credible at all?
[Link: news.bbc.co.uk...]

Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'

Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate change.

Interviewed by Today presenter John Humphrys, videos of which you can see below, he said that while the earth's future was utterly uncertain, mankind was not aware it had "pulled the trigger" on global warming as it built its civilizations.

'We're not really guilty. We didn't deliberately set out to heat the world'

What is more, he predicts, the earth's climate will not conveniently comply with the models of modern climate scientists.

As the record winter cold testifies, he says, global temperatures move in "jerks and jumps", and we cannot confidently predict what the future holds.

82 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:50:08pm

re: #76 WindUpBird

Go away ?

Rubbish.

I don't often join discussions here these days, LGF has skewed way left IMHO, but if I do comment I normally stay around.

re. Fred Pearce - he remains one of the most senior commentators this side of ythe pond. And the Guardian is strongly pro-AGW, just like the BBC.

Yet both Pearce and the Guardian columnist George Monbiot have been scathing - and remain scathing - about the Uni of East Anglia.

(Which has only been a Uni for a handful of decades, hardly any depth of scientific pedigree there)

83 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:50:54pm

re: #81 Rightwingconspirator

He's not saying anything very interesting, there. Yeah, the models may hit unexpected stuff, especially if the ocean methane outgassing is as bad as we currently think.

In addition, the earth may very well 'take care of itself'. That doesn't mean humans won't go extinct.

84 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:51:45pm

re: #82 JohninLondon

You always jump into climate threads at the end and drop a few weak denials. you'd be a lot more credible if you actually posted at the start of threads and stuck around.

85 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:53:36pm

re: #81 Rightwingconspirator

Most people think, it seems on skimming the net, that Lovelock has jumped the shark, so to speak. Yet another one succumbs to old age (that is not intended to be snarky, but serious.)

86 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:53:56pm

re: #78 Obdicut

The Guardian is a relative failure of a newspaper, it would be closed down tomorrow but for cross-subsidies from other ventures. Its main source of ad revenue is public-sector job vacancies - big spreads for all those meaningless jobs that we are taxed to bits for. The old Manchester Guardian was a fine newspaper, but today's rag is a home for nutters and quite a few anti-semites.

87 Political Atheist  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:56:22pm

re: #83 Obdicut

He seems to think we are past the tipping point(s). I have had that suspicion, and I'm wondering where the scientific consensus has gotten on that. As far as extinction goes, well nobody has well modeled what we can take, or how we might adapt. A throw back to a less populated, less mechanized civilization is quite possible. Maybe far more likely than extinction.

88 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:56:48pm

re: #86 JohninLondon

That's nice, John. I wanted to mention that if you think that LGF has skewed left partially because it is now posting the truth about AGW denial, that's rather sad to me, as it indicates that conservatives in Europe as well as the US are taking the anti-science route. That's a shame. One would think the 'right' would be leading the charge in this, but instead they've decided to embrace illogic and demonize scientists.

Let me know how that works out for you.

89 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:57:10pm

re: #82 JohninLondon

Well, Pat Buchanan is one of the "most senior commentators" on this side of the pond, yet no one here gives him any deference at all.

At the end of the day, The Guardian is still a newspaper that has to sell copies, and nothing sells like controversy. The entire UK media have whipped "climategate" into a nontroversy. Whether it is only to sell (copies, advertising, whatever) or if it is a nationalism thing (to trumpet that the UK really has scientists working on its shores)... I don't know.

90 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:57:56pm

This specific Guardian article isn't anti-AGW. On the charges of manipulating data, the government report and this article are in glowing in favor of the scientists and AGW. On the charges loosely defined as how well professors can work in a political environment, yolked by their government and whatever passes for FOIA over there, there were some genuine snafus and badly worded emails, but no real malice or conspiracy. Am I missing anything. Also, they said "doo-doo" in print. How cool is that?

91 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:58:19pm

re: #87 Rightwingconspirator

We may be past the tipping point for catastrophic change, yes. The big question right now is whether ocean methane outgassing is happening much faster than predicted, or whether it has been happening but relatively unobserved. Sadly, there's more reason to think the former than the latter.

However, how much disaster will be caused before a feedback system helps instead of accelerates AGW is a relative unknown. The most likely current scenarios sadly are absolutely devastating.

Yay.

92 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:58:31pm

re: #84 Obdicut

Another of your silly kick-the-man-not-the-ball comments.

You suggest I wait to join a thread only at the end.

Crap.

If I ever join a thread, I join it as soon as I see it. And this thread is hardly started.

Why not try to deal with the issue. The Commons Committee report is hardly worth the paper it is written on.

93 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 2:59:58pm

re: #92 JohninLondon

You routinely join threads at the end and comment. This is something empiracally and observably true.

Your credentials as an AGW denier aren't very good ground for you to delcare anything as 'hardly worth the paper it is written on.'

You have no argument. You only have assertion. It's old, tired, and makes you look lame as hell.

94 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:01:14pm

re: #88 Obdicut

Once again - you try to kick the person, not the ball.

Yes I am conservative. But I happen to have an M Sc as well. Just because I remain sceptical about the AGW stuff does not mean I am anti-science.

Try sticking to the issues.

95 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:03:54pm

re: #89 freetoken

But the whole point is that the Guardian does NOT sell in any meaningful quantity. It FAILS to sell. It would not exist any longer but for cross-subsidies.

96 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:04:04pm

re: #94 JohninLondon

Okay, John. The issue you've raised is your personal assertion that the report is a whitewash, and an article by the Guardian. I've linked to an article by RealClimate, a very-well respected site run by actual climate scientists, talking about the Guardian's failures in AGW reporting. Moreover, you have engaged in nearly every denier argument at one time or another.

Your argument is simply a contention. You have not made anything more than that. I can argue against it by pointing out that every major scientific body that has made a statement on AGW endorses the theory, and that the evidence for it is overwhelming, and that the various independent models and independent data sources confirm each other.

97 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:04:47pm

re: #82 JohninLondon

Go away ?

Rubbish.

I don't often join discussions here these days, LGF has skewed way left IMHO, but if I do comment I normally stay around.

hahaha way left

you partisans are so cute!

98 Cato the Elder  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:06:14pm

re: #67 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

Or you could actually build and deploy alternative energy sources which are already available and viable. That way they don't suffer (now and in the future) and we don't suffer (in the future).

The pay now or pay a very lot later part of the argument seems to be missing from your analysis.

The simple economic fact you seem to miss is that "pay now or pay later" plays no role in a corporate culture where results are posted quarterly and stock valuations are calculated by the nanosecond.

Change that, and you might stand a chance.

99 freetoken  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:06:17pm

re: #95 JohninLondon

That is exactly the point, JohninLondon.

The Guardian needs to generate more controversy to sell more hits to its websites and to sell more papers.

Thus it has turned on this nontroversy like its lesser-thought-of but still privately owned competitors.

100 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:07:11pm

re: #93 Obdicut

Obdicut

I should have ignored your ignorant comments from the off. Your mode of offensive and juvenile argument is not worth responding to.

101 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:07:27pm

re: #97 WindUpBird

Why thank you. I think you're cute too! That said, if LGF is frakkin' lefty why in hell are all of us neanderthal conservatives still here debating with those pinko lefties?!

102 keloyd  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:08:22pm

...and why could I say "War Between The States" about 10 times today and no one pounced on me?

103 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:08:22pm

re: #100 JohninLondon

Yes. Noting that you haven't actually made an argument is offensive and juvenile. Noting that you've made many debunked arguments in the past-- how offensive of me. Immediately responding to your comments about the Guardian with an article about the Guardian reporting by a very relevant party-- juvenile.

I'm just terrible that way.

104 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:08:46pm

re: #102 keloyd

I think people are getting used to you saying a lot of dumb things.

105 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:09:57pm

re: #100 JohninLondon

Obdicut

I should have ignored your ignorant comments from the off. Your mode of offensive and juvenile argument is not worth responding to.

You are not credible, man. You're a gadfly who tries to concern troll AGW threads on LGF. You're pointing to a rag to support your assertions, and Ob is pointing to science.

106 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:12:14pm

re: #101 pingjockey

Why thank you. I think you're cute too! That said, if LGF is frakkin' lefty why in hell are all of us neanderthal conservatives still here debating with those pinko lefties?!

I know, it's so lefty that it's just filled with Kos commenters and dudes from Democratic Underground freaking out about the Bush Crime Family OH WHOOPS

I don't think you're partisan in the way that I'm thinking of the term, you're not a Human Talking Point. ;-)

107 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:12:18pm
Lawmakers stressed that their report — which was written after only a single day of oral testimony — did not cover all the issues and would not be as in-depth as the two other inquiries into the e-mail scandal that are still pending.

Nice of them to take one whole day to take testimony. I certainly feel much better knowing politicians got to hear 6 hours of people telling them "it's all good" before making a decision.

108 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:12:27pm

re: #98 Cato the Elder

The simple economic fact you seem to miss is that "pay now or pay later" plays no role in a corporate culture where results are posted quarterly and stock valuations are calculated by the nanosecond.

Change that, and you might stand a chance.

OK so that particular thinking is what got us into the financial crisis in the first place. If you are saying that we need to erase a culture of stupid based solely on short term profits with no heed to long term crashes, you are correct.

109 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:12:48pm

re: #103 Obdicut

If you regard the RealClimate site as somehow above the fray, judiciously independent, you are dumber than I thought. It is utterly parti-pris, as you well know. It was created simply and solely to advance the AGW cause.

Throwing RealClimate stuff around may work here - but there are alternative sites just as "authoritative."

110 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:12:51pm

re: #105 WindUpBird

The Guardian had been doing relatively well, but it probably wasn't selling enough, so they mucked down in the controversy. Or they just can't hack the science, which isn't that rare in journalism, unfortunately.

111 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:13:32pm

re: #98 Cato the Elder

The simple economic fact you seem to miss is that "pay now or pay later" plays no role in a corporate culture where results are posted quarterly and stock valuations are calculated by the nanosecond.

Change that, and you might stand a chance.

And as a corollary, that is why the government needs to step in, because you are correct that the companies will not do it without a nudge to.

112 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:14:49pm

re: #110 Obdicut

The Guardian had been doing relatively well, but it probably wasn't selling enough, so they mucked down in the controversy. Or they just can't hack the science, which isn't that rare in journalism, unfortunately.

Controversy moves paper, it's for sure. :(

113 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:14:50pm

re: #105 WindUpBird

You are not credible, man. You're a gadfly who tries to concern troll AGW threads on LGF. You're pointing to a rag to support your assertions, and Ob is pointing to science.

Rubbish.

I have commented at LGW much longer than any of the names I recognise here.

And as this thread concerns a UK Commons report on a UK matter, I joined in because I believe the blog post does not present a fair view of overall reaction this side of the pond.

114 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:14:53pm

re: #109 JohninLondon

Really? Name the alternative site who is run by a large number of climate scientists.

They're not 'above the fray'. They are, however, completely credible, as the people running it are scientists who routinely publish work with open methodology that's freely criticize-able and debunk-able.

I'm really interested to hear about these 'alternative sites' that have equal credibility.

I do like that you're resorting to personal insults after deriding me for being juvenile, though.

115 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:15:50pm

re: #106 WindUpBird
Got ya. I just had to put my 2 cents in. Partisan is good, stand up for your side, use facts. Don't have fits and call names and believe rumors, innuendos, half truths to support your point of view. I swear, Obama comes out with something I agree with, drilling and all Boehner can do is say it isn't enough. Jesus in the Haymow!(Something granpa used to say)

116 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:18:24pm

re: #115 pingjockey

Got ya. I just had to put my 2 cents in. Partisan is good, stand up for your side, use facts. Don't have fits and call names and believe rumors, innuendos, half truths to support your point of view. I swear, Obama comes out with something I agree with, drilling and all Boehner can do is say it isn't enough. Jesus in the Haymow!(Something granpa used to say)

Not to be rude but what would you expect the opposition to say? Flip the sides for a minute, if bush had decided to drill off the East coast but lock-up Alaska and the Gulf what would you expect Pelosi to come out and say?

It is what it is.

117 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:19:22pm

re: #115 pingjockey

Got ya. I just had to put my 2 cents in. Partisan is good, stand up for your side, use facts. Don't have fits and call names and believe rumors, innuendos, half truths to support your point of view. I swear, Obama comes out with something I agree with, drilling and all Boehner can do is say it isn't enough. Jesus in the Haymow!(Something granpa used to say)

Facts and a self-awareness of the difference between ideology and research, anecdotes and data, and so on, totally. The Boehner thing at first had me scratching my head, but I think the GOP just believes the current strategy is to oppose Obama on everything no matter what. It's honestly probably a better straight up strategy for the GOP in the midterms to do that, I don't know if it's good long term.

My favorite phrase my dad would say (to me) "Kid, you could screw up an iron ball."

He said it with love :D

118 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:20:44pm

re: #116 RogueOne

Yes. However, this makes sense! I still don't know how the HCR is going to work and I was against it. No tort reform. But we need our own backyard energy supplies.

119 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:21:11pm

re: #116 RogueOne

Not to be rude but what would you expect the opposition to say? Flip the sides for a minute, if bush had decided to drill off the East coast but lock-up Alaska and the Gulf what would you expect Pelosi to come out and say?

It is what it is.

Well, for example, every Democrat didn't oppose the Iraq war...

Drilling offshore is a center-to-center-right position, your reversal doens't make sense.


Think of it more like this: Would the Democratic leadership savage a Republican president who came out in favor of federal gay civil unions?

120 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:21:22pm

re: #117 WindUpBird
Heh.

121 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:22:39pm

re: #113 JohninLondon

Rubbish.

I have commented at LGW much longer than any of the names I recognise here.

And as this thread concerns a UK Commons report on a UK matter, I joined in because I believe the blog post does not present a fair view of overall reaction this side of the pond.

I am honored sir that people like you and Lord Monkton stand up for the truth and deny the lies of those Darwinist anti-God, anti-capitalist New World Order seeking "scientists!"

May your Island prosper because you have such clear thinking and visionary people who are not afraid to connect the dots just like me and DAD.

122 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:22:46pm

re: #118 pingjockey

Yes. However, this makes sense! I still don't know how the HCR is going to work and I was against it. No tort reform. But we need our own backyard energy supplies.

I know how it's going to work in broad terms: the mandate distributes risk, forces healthy people into the system, keeps prices down, the feds make insurers justify increases and force them to spend a specific % on care. The details get complex, but it makes perfect sense in broad terms.

123 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:23:04pm

re: #119 WindUpBird
Unfortunetly, if was politcally expedient, yes. I swear the pols in DC have forgot about what is good for their constituents and substituted what's best for them.

124 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:23:38pm

re: #120 pingjockey

Heh.

(I was a clumsy child)

125 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:23:49pm

re: #122 WindUpBird
Ok.

126 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:23:50pm

re: #118 pingjockey

Yes. However, this makes sense! I still don't know how the HCR is going to work and I was against it. No tort reform. But we need our own backyard energy supplies.

It makes a little sense. It's not as much as Boehner, or I for that matter, would like. I'm not a politician, I can give him partial credit, but boehner is a politician which means it's his job to whine.

127 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:25:11pm

re: #126 RogueOne
See my 123. It's got to the point where I'm ready to say "A pox on both your houses."

128 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:25:39pm

re: #126 RogueOne

It makes a little sense. It's not as much as Boehner, or I for that matter, would like. I'm not a politician, I can give him partial credit, but boehner is a politician which means it's his job to whine.

I think some of this is the proximity to health care reform passing. Both Obama's announcement AND the fact that Boehner can't come out in favor of it. A lot of gamesmanship!

129 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:25:50pm

Just the facts. Ma'am

Guardian Media Group lost $144 million in the last year I have seen FT reports for. The Guardian and the Sunday Observer are siad to be losing $150,000 every day - which is why there are ongoing redundancies. This year's annual loss is expected to be bigger - and there is no longer any buffer of cash.

The whole Group appears to be kept afloat by revenues from a car-dealer magazine.

....


And this week the UK newspaper The Independent - similar views to the Guardian, has been sold for the princely sum of $1.50., Half the price of a MacDonald. Otherwise it was facing closure - as would the Guardian, but for cross-subsidies.

Shame, I was a Manchester Guardian reader for a long time, but latterly the Guardian has been a mockery.

130 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:27:15pm

re: #129 JohninLondon

Whats a "MacDonald", human slavery of Scots?

131 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:29:30pm

re: #129 JohninLondon

How about the 'facts' of these 'alternative' websites that are as credible as RealClimate? Were you going to be posting those?

132 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:29:48pm

Big Mac

133 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:30:55pm

re: #132 JohninLondon

I like my answer better >>

134 JohninLondon  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:31:52pm

RealClimate is utterly biased towards the AGW camp. It has nil pattern of publishing anything by sceptics.

So it is just as "extrem" and biased as WattsUpWithThat - which reprints plenty of scientific papers from the other side of the aisle.

135 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:33:21pm

re: #119 WindUpBird

Well, for example, every Democrat didn't oppose the Iraq war...

Drilling offshore is a center-to-center-right position, your reversal doens't make sense.

Think of it more like this: Would the Democratic leadership savage a Republican president who came out in favor of federal gay civil unions?

It does make sense and your use of the Iraq War example makes them look even worse since they were much more vitriolic about that decision than lifting the drill ban. Let me help you out:

Bush lifts one ban on offshore drilling (7/2008)
[Link: www.mcclatchydc.com...]


Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives strongly oppose more drilling and called instead for releasing part of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and expanding cleaner energy alternatives and greater efficiency. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., branded Bush's plan a "hoax," while House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., labeled it "a political stunt."

The only good thing about this drilling plan is the dems will actually allow it to go through since it was a dem president that proposed it. This is why our system is so screwed up. If we actually want spending increases it had better be a repub president otherwise the repubs in congress will block it. If it's oil or war policy we need we better hope a dem is in office otherwise the dems in congress will try to block it.

All it means is 75% of the time we're screwed.

136 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:34:35pm

re: #135 RogueOne

In fairness, (man I use that term alot) Obama's drilling plan is substantially different in scope and location than the ones the Bush admin floated.

137 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:35:20pm

re: #134 JohninLondon

RealClimate is utterly biased towards the AGW camp. It has nil pattern of publishing anything by sceptics.

So it is just as "extrem" and biased as WattsUpWithThat - which reprints plenty of scientific papers from the other side of the aisle.

is that sorta how NASA is biased against guys who think the moon landing was faked? :D

138 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:36:03pm

re: #137 WindUpBird


No legitmate papers about how the earth is flat are ever posted by the biased science sites!
139 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:36:28pm

re: #134 JohninLondon

Oh dear god, John. A biology website has no need to publish creationist idiocy in order to be credible. A climate science website doesn't need to publish denier idiocy to be credible.

A quick look at WattsUpWithThat will show anyone that it's obviously a denier website. When it does reference a credible paper, it does so to mock or deride it.

This is sad, man.

140 pingjockey  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:36:30pm

re: #137 WindUpBird
But the flag was waving in the breeze! I saw it move!

141 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:36:56pm

re: #135 RogueOne

It was a hoax and a political stunt, in regards to the drilling having an effect on oil prices.

142 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:37:02pm

re: #135 RogueOne

Democrats voted for the war! How is it they're vitriolic about something they voted for?

Later it was made into a football, of course.

143 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:37:37pm

re: #141 Obdicut

Damn, good point. Comes back to that canard about 'it'll take 10 years to develop so lets do it now!'

144 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:37:37pm

re: #137 WindUpBird

One of the main posts on wattsupwiththat right now is a total misrepresentation of NASA climate data, so that's rather appropriate.

145 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:37:50pm

re: #138 windsagio

It's a cover up, those bastards think we're saps

146 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:38:25pm

re: #138 windsagio

No legitmate papers about how the earth is flat are ever posted by the biased science sites!

And that is how you know they are biased! You can just look out your window and see that the Earth is flat! It's just common sense, like noticing how cold it is outside and realizing that if I am in a snow storm, there can't possibly be "global warming."

147 Uninformed Opinion  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:38:51pm

I find it a shame that the natural gas lobby is pathetic. We have tons of it and its way cleaner than coal.

148 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:40:04pm

TMI post:

If you ever have problems cleaning out your pipes, there's nothing like a good triple espresso to get things going. (afk)


/yes I'm a gross person sometimes.

149 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:40:18pm

re: #139 Obdicut

Oh dear god, John. A biology website has no need to publish creationist idiocy in order to be credible. A climate science website doesn't need to publish denier idiocy to be credible.

A quick look at WattsUpWithThat will show anyone that it's obviously a denier website. When it does reference a credible paper, it does so to mock or deride it.

This is sad, man.

Watts is a respected scientist! How dare you criticize his "fair and balanced" reporting of important scientific principles! He goes out of his way to let those lying AGW lunatics have their say before he proves that they are lying by appealing to basic common sense and none of that IVY LEAGUE mumbo jumbo! You sir are a commie environazi!

150 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:40:39pm

re: #136 windsagio

In fairness, (man I use that term alot) Obama's drilling plan is substantially different in scope and location than the ones the Bush admin floated.

Substantially smaller. We could probably argue back and forth about the appropriateness of drilling in Alaska but it makes no sense to leave the Gulf out of it since no one else is. Like I said, (I use that a lot too) I give him partial credit in this decision.

151 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:41:27pm

re: #147 Uninformed Opinion

I find it a shame that the natural gas lobby is pathetic. We have tons of it and its way cleaner than coal.

ooc/

It is true that it is less messy than coal.

But if you burn it, you still get CO2. There is no way around that. Switching over to burning methane will not solve the issues.

152 Uninformed Opinion  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:45:44pm

re: #151 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

ooc/

It is true that it is less messy than coal.

But if you burn it, you still get CO2. There is no way around that. Switching over to burning methane will not solve the issues.

Much, Much, less of everything else though. We cant just keep building coal plants, and we cant depend solely on nuclear to get us to the eventual "green" goal.

I also live in a natural gas state.

153 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:46:11pm

re: #151 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

It is better than not burning the methane and still releasing it, though.

154 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:48:26pm

re: #142 WindUpBird

Democrats voted for the war! How is it they're vitriolic about something they voted for?

Later it was made into a football, of course.

133 members of congress and 21 senators voted against the authorization. You and I both know that short of an attack on our soil the majority of dems are never going to vote for the authorization of force for a republican president. It didn't happen in the first Gulf War with everyone on the planet on board. Asking Dems to pass an authorization of force is like asking republicans to pass a bill authorizing money for abortion clinics, not going to happen.

155 windsagio  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:51:49pm

re: #154 RogueOne

Dude, this is probably a better subject to let lie. Otherwise we get into stupid 'WAS THE WAR JUSTIFIED?!!?!' arguments, and nobody wants that :P

156 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 3:52:32pm

re: #154 RogueOne

For honesty's sake, shouldn't you acknowledge the majority of Senate Democrats did vote for the second Iraq war?

157 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 4:00:41pm

re: #156 Obdicut

For honesty's sake, shouldn't you acknowledge the majority of Senate Democrats did vote for the second Iraq war?

29-21.

158 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 4:02:54pm

re: #157 RogueOne

Yes. That would be a majority.

159 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 4:06:05pm

re: #152 Uninformed Opinion

Much, Much, less of everything else though. We cant just keep building coal plants, and we cant depend solely on nuclear to get us to the eventual "green" goal.

I also live in a natural gas state.

If burning it is seen as a top gap on the way to building wind solar, smart grid and nuclear, I agree. If it is seen as a solution in of itself, it is not. I am afraid that putting infrastructure into methane will only cause a repeat of the mess of getting away from oil and coal.

re: #153 Obdicut

It is better than not burning the methane and still releasing it, though.

Ahh but if we release enough CO2 we get a massive methane release as well. Then it gets really bad.

160 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 4:08:10pm

re: #159 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

Ahh but if we release enough CO2 we get a massive methane release as well. Then it gets really bad.

Trust me, I know. And it may already be happening, I'm afraid.

[Link: blogs.physicstoday.org...]

161 Cato the Elder  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 6:25:33pm

re: #58 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

For the record, anything that puts more carbon up there contributes to a larger problem and your complaints about ecofascism are secondary or even tertiary at best.

You think that''s how it will be taken by the victims of eco-fascism, or what? "You can't have a car with an internal-combustion engine, you gorram Chinee, it's bad for the gorram planet!" Revolution, guaranteed.

re: #67 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

Or you could actually build and deploy alternative energy sources which are already available and viable. That way they don't suffer (now and in the future) and we don't suffer (in the future).

The[y] pay now or pay a very lot later part of the argument seems to be missing from your analysis.

Again, tell me how "pay now" vs. "pay a lot later" stops anyone from fulfilling his immediate needs, viz. getting a bigger house financed by a poisoned mortgage.

re: #111 Slightly Drooling Love Child of Beck

And as a corollary, that is why the government needs to step in, because you are correct that the companies will not do it without a nudge to.

"Nudge"? When "the companies" are the ones who own the gubmint?

Get real.

162 RogueOne  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 8:23:07pm

re: #158 Obdicut

Yes. That would be a majority.

4 over .500 doesn't even get you in the NBA playoffs. I kid, obviously it was a sweeping majority in the senate and I'm just refusing to see it. Should we get all honest and mention the house dem vote numbers? 126-82 against. Another majority. Still want to make the argument the majority of the dem party was willing to give a republican president the go-ahead to invade Iraq?

163 Obdicut  Wed, Mar 31, 2010 10:36:39pm

re: #162 RogueOne

The majority of the senators did, the majorities of the reps didn't. That was the point.

164 RogueOne  Thu, Apr 1, 2010 2:44:53am

re: #163 Obdicut

No, the point is unless there is an attack on our soil or a dem in the white house the dem party is not going to vote for an authorization to use force.

165 Obdicut  Thu, Apr 1, 2010 5:31:41am

re: #164 RogueOne

So how can you ignore that the Senate Democrats did exactly that?


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Ranked-Choice Voting Has Challenged the Status Quo. Its Popularity Will Be Tested in November. JUNEAU — Alaska’s new election system — with open primaries and ranked voting — has been a model for those in other states who are frustrated by political polarization and a sense that voters lack real choice at the ...
Cheechako
3 weeks ago
Views: 293 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2