.
Whatever that's supposed to mean in this context ... you know who you are. Is this "accredited" enough for you?
http://wallstreetpit.com/12324-fear-and-loathing-in-global-warming
You can have ONE comment.
Just to give you a start - some short quotes from the CRU emails:
to hide the decline.
we can’t account for the lack of warming
this isn’t about truth
Leave it to you to delete as appropriate!
I will be hiding behind them.
get him ousted.
It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip
cut the last few points off ... as that’s trending down
“it is time to pull the curtain down on this crap and start locking up all of the proponents - starting with AL GORE.”
The assumption of false figures in models in order to boost future projections is fraudulent.
If you want contexts for those, go read the article.
Morg
.
.
2 comments:
Hi Morg,
These are snippets that could mean anything, and could be from anyone at anytime. Let's look at just one of these cheery picked lines: " we can’t account for the lack of warming" So isn't this just as likely to refer to the office now the heating engineer has said the heating is back Or the line: "Leave it to you to delete as appropriate!" The Christmas menu for the office party, please delete the main course you don't want. And what about the line " I will be hiding behind them." Behind the bins when the bin-man comes for his Christmas tip. Any of those lines could refer to just about anything.
And no the website you linked to is not an accredited scientific site, it's a political blog with a political axe to grind. As I keep saying: if you want the scientific truth about Climate Change then go look at an accredited scientific site (see the links in my posts above).
From
Chris Hill
(Lancaster)
Sorry that last reference to the links was in error. Please find them below.
"National Snow and Ice Data Center"
"Check out Professors Peter Wadhams CV at Cambridge University here"
"Now check out Professors Peter Wadhams predictions here"
Chris Hill
(Lancaster)
Post a Comment