Glacier scientist: I knew data hadn't been verified

Scientific fraud is not something to be ignored. How much of what's in your links is also a result of fraudulent behavior? It's NOT "just one news report." There has been a pattern of phony data reported lately.

If there is fraud going on it's not among most of the worlds scientists. I suppose all the world scientists decided in a secret meeting to create a world wide fraud. Is that it Ed?

Actual facts are just too inconvenient.

most certainly.

Too bad some didn't think the same way about WMD.

does not a countries policies make, not China's not ours. Your grasping at straws Ed, to defend and argument that has no counter claim.

because it doesn't conform to your preconceived notions. Okay.

This is only ONE of many cases of fraud in this area.

engaging in systematic fraud in all fields?

Rob

We've all been done that road.

Should be easy to do. If not why not?

The first ones a tabloid for Gods sakes LOL

http://www.tgdaily.com/

http://www.tgdaily.com/unbalanced/45550-solar-powered-bibles-to-haiti

LOL

About Prisonplanet(Speaks for itself.):

http://www.endgamethemovie.com/


The third ones a blog. blogs can be good but ...........

I am skeptical. It is not up to me to prove anything, it is up to the people making claims to prove their claims are correct. When they fake data, I am just going to be more skeptical, as you should be.

We are being pressured to spend billions of dollars to combat this "problem," so it's not a minor thing.

billions of dollars or the end of mankind as we know it, let see ... $ or people, $ or people, $ or people. That's a no brainer. I better tell you, it's the people side of the argument we should concern ourselves with.

The big deal is your trying to discredit Global Warming by using the misdeeds of one scientist to show that the scientific community is corrupt. The truth is you want to believe it is false when in "fact" it is not and will go to any length to dispute it using any half cocked and deceptive means possible to do so. In doing so you spread propaganda and sway public opinion toward a path of possible destruction. I'll stand in your path at every turn to keep you from doing that, I'll do whatever is necessary to insure that my grand children will not inherit a world of drought, famine and war.

First of all your assumption that it's "the end of mankind as we know it" is vastly exaggerated, even if the Chicken Little panic scenario turns out to be real (which it probably won't.)

I am NOT "trying to discredit Global Warming " at all (it's discrediting itself. I am just looking for truth instead of propaganda.

It's NOT "one scientist," it is many. I've provided several links to fraudulent practices by a whole bunch of "scientists". There seems to be a pattern. It cannot be ignored.

"The truth is you want to believe it is false when in "fact" it is not and will go to any length...."

Nope. Totally untrue.

"I'll do whatever is necessary to insure that my grand children will not inherit a world of drought, famine and war."

Great. I'm all for that. But faking science and stifling opposing viewpoints is not the way.

"I am surprised that they have cited an article from a climbing magazine, but there is no reason why anecdotal evidence from climbers should be disregarded as they are spending a great deal of time in places that other people rarely go and so notice the changes."

Before we find out that the UN used environmental bloggers as "data" or "sources"??

But I have consistently said, "We don't know".

We don't know if there is really warming.

If there IS warming, we don't know to what extent it is natural and to what extent it is man made.

If there IS warming, we don't know if the impact is good or bad, or both.

If there IS warming, we don't know what we can or should do about it.

It makes little sense to base policy on things we don't know or think we know, but might be very wrong. If it turns out the warming is the effect of the sun's natural cycles it won't matter how much money we spend or how much we sacrifice in terms of our own comfort.

I do think that many are using "Climate Change" to line their pockets and gain power.

I just received word that my Nieces husband has returned from Iraq
1st Nephew, three hitches in Iraq, two in Afghanistan.
Two sons, one hitch each in armed forces. One in Bahrain.
Niece, one hitch in Kuwait
2nd Nephew enlisted.

Five of the six were enlisted before 9/11

I'm sure you'll be impressed by my courage if ever we met.

To bad it hasn't been your family.

Knowledge, wisdom and foresight are not fear. Saying it is, is just more half baked propaganda.

That made absolutely NO sense at all.

Do you really not know what "Chicken Little" means?

The sky is not falling.

No more of you.

Perhaps they know the "other" version of Chicken Little, and you don't.

Depending on the version, the moral changes. In the "happy ending" version, the moral is not to be a "Chicken", but to have courage. In other versions the moral is usually interpreted to mean "do not believe everything you are told".

In either case, I find the "Chicken?" post to be over reaction to the mention of the Chicken Little story. I don't think that Ed was trying to say that Dango lacked courage.
I also have problems with the Global Warming theories. I have also been in the military, and might say that I "fear" some things, but I wouldn't say that that fear would imply something negative to someone who didn't have the same fear.

In either case, Ed had to use his "That made absolutely NO sense at all " statement, yet again.

so it does make sense if you've a heard different version of "Chicken Little"

No more of you. (over reaction by Ed?)

Or what the reference meant. But I no longer care. Ignorance is its own punishment.