This entry was posted
on Friday, November 27th, 2009 at 6:43 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
164 Responses to “General Debate 27 November 2009”
KiwiGreg – of the 4% who voted for Winston First last year, probably a quarter have shuffled off this mortal coil, and another quarter will have done so by the 2011 election. If Goff is so desperate for media attention that he has to out-Winston Winston, it does not bode well for the Labour Party.
I suspect Keys strategy is to stop the country going bankrupt during the economic crisis thats about halfway through (while dealing with all of the billions of social liability that Hels & Mikey racked up trying to buy a 4th term.
Yeah Greg, that GLOBAL economic crisis thats been ’solved’ by printing masses of cash GLOBALLY – nothing to deal with now, move along, problem solved. Mmmmm. I dont know about you but I have a bad feeling about the resolved crisis we hear so much about in the press.
John Key… what a spineless C U Next Tuesday. Aboloshing the provocation defense without changing the whole murder laws is F&^king retarded. We all know that there are murders that are far less worse than others and deserve to be treated as such. Now the likes of Clayton Weatherston are going to plead not guilty to manslaughter and murder and still bad mouth the deceased in court… effectively achieving nothing that the retarded nats intended to. It astounds me how bloody stupid the nats really are. John Key almost makes me feel nostalgic for Helen.
KiwiGreg – The economic crisis is far from over if we are borrowing $250 million a week to sustain exhorbinant government spending. Its funny, the nats are actually increasing spending by over a billion a year, I thought we voted such stupidity out.
@ CharlieBrown dont confuse NZ government overspending with the global economic crisis. That’s just poor government. All of the leading indicators are showing significant positive growth. Most of the reported news and anecdotal evidence is similarly strong. Unemployment is likely to continue to rise but it has always been a lagging indicator so is pretty irrelevant (unless you happen to be part of the left hand side of the bell-shaped curve).
@ expat – the crisis is over. I’m not saying there will never be another one or that there wont be a reckoning for some countries’ taxpayers when it comes time to pay the bills, US unemployment will probably continue to rise, my ghuess is 500 more US banks (out of more than 8000) will be sold by the FDIC, we will see blips like Dubai World as various houses of cards come crashing down, but the current one, in terms of economic contract is definately over and has been for some time.
Come back, the Government is in crisis. It has blown the honeymoon, annoyed the climate sceptics and the rednecks, infuriated the liberals and shown that it is hypocritical.
Key is nowhere to be seen. Smith has been leading for the past week and the country is ready to revolt.
Where is a good spin doctor when you need one?
[DPF: Is that the tenth time this year you have predicted honeymoon is over? You really should look up a dictionary.]
I looking for for an article that might explain the setting by China of an emission goal, in the hope of some comparison with that set by USA. I would like to see where NZ stands in respect to those, and if, for some ‘high moral ground reason’ the New Zealand Government is yoking us peasants with a burden away out there beyond what other countries will carry.
But as unlikely as it would be to find any information like this, Reuters devote their article on China’s initiatives only to the financial implications – it seems to ALL be about the fucking money . . .
” The U.S. and China moves provided a “very positive” further boost to what would be a record year for clean energy investment in 2010, consultants New Energy Finance predicted.
“I would not be surprised to see a $The U.S. and China moves provided a “very positive” further boost to what would be a record year for clean energy investment in 2010, consultants New Energy Finance predicted.
“I would not be surprised to see a $200 billion year,” said New Energy Finance head Michael Liebreich. Investment would reach $160-$200 billion in 2010, compared with expected funding this year of about $125 billion, down from last year’s record of $155 billion, Liebreich told Reuters. 00 billion year,” said New Energy Finance head Michael Liebreich. Investment would reach $160-$200 billion in 2010, compared with expected funding this year of about $125 billion, down from last year’s record of $155 billion, Liebreich told Reuters. “
Too little too late. The mainstream media are part of the scam. All modern journalists are made traitors to their craft by means of their allegiance to socialism.
Anyone with any doubts as to their partisan political attachements only has to observe their extreme reluctance to report on Warmergate.
If they had been real journalists, and not propagandists for Progressivism, this scam would have been exposed before it even got started.
The editors and newsroom staff of all major NZ news outlets should be standing in the docks along with the charlatans from CRU (and NIWA).
<blockquote<China announced Thursday that it will cut its economy's carbon intensity by up to 45 percent by 2020, the state news agency Xinhua said, and that Premier Wen Jiabao will participate in international climate negotiations in Copenhagen next month.
The move by the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter to set a near-term target of a 40 to 45 percent reduction, coming a day after President Obama set U.S. climate goals for the talks, suggests a possible breakthrough in Demark next month in the long-stalled climate negotiations. But the State Council's announcement that China will cut its carbon output relative to economic growth, using 2005 as a baseline, fell short of the 50 or 55 percent cut many world leaders had hoped Beijing would make.
Michael Levi, the David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, called the announcement "disappointing," because the Energy Information Administration estimates that existing Chinese policies will already cut the nation's carbon intensity by 45 to 46 percent.
Not, it hasn’t. The carousing in bed continues, but it’s the Maori Party which is nailing (pun intended) the National Party this time, and the emasculated Tories seem to be enjoying the ride.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
“Well, as it said so in an AP article 5 years ago it must be true.”
Obama ran for the senate as a Kenyan born American. This is not he only article that makes such references.
Just as the corrupt mainstream media covered up for Warmergate liars, so are they covering up for Obama’s lack of Constitutional legitimacy.
All that has to happen for this to go away is for Obama to provide a legitimate certified long form birth certificate showing the hospital he was born in.
Rather than do this, he has spent $1.3 million denying Americans this information, along with the information contained in so many other records of his past that have been sealed (by Presidential decree) from public scrutiny.
The mainstream media that took court action to obtain George Bush’s dental records and sent reporters to Alaska to rummage through Sarah Palin’s garbage has refused to investigate why Obama has sealed off his past.
The western world is awash in leftist corruption and this corruption is never more evident than it is within the mainstream media.
AP allocated two reporters to “fact check” the senate and house health care bills – one reporter for every 2000 pages.
AP allocated eleven reporters to “fact check” Sarah Palin’s book – one reporter for every 39.3 pages.
The left have corrupted just about everything: the public service, media, academia and now.. science.
Angus – The Listener allocated ONE reporter to fact-check Witi Ihimaera’s latest offering, and the one fact that emerged was that Ihimaera is a rip-off merchant
Yvette at 7:59 am I looking for for an article that might explain the setting by China of an emission goal, in the hope of some comparison with that set by USA.
<blockquote<China announced Thursday that it will cut its economy's carbon intensity by up to 45 percent by 2020, the state news agency Xinhua said, and that Premier Wen Jiabao will participate in international climate negotiations in Copenhagen next month.
The move by the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter to set a near-term target of a 40 to 45 percent reduction, coming a day after President Obama set U.S. climate goals for the talks, suggests a possible breakthrough in Demark next month in the long-stalled climate negotiations. But the State Council's announcement that China will cut its carbon output relative to economic growth, using 2005 as a baseline, fell short of the 50 or 55 percent cut many world leaders had hoped Beijing would make.
Michael Levi, the David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, called the announcement "disappointing," because the Energy Information Administration estimates that existing Chinese policies will already cut the nation's carbon intensity by 45 to 46 percent.
The best mechanism, sadly, is to (a) stop assuming it’s the truth and then (b) get information from elsewhere and (c) suggest others do likewise. The liberal bias in Wikipedia is oppressively odious these days.
“provide a link in which Obama is quoted as saying “I am a Kenyan born American. “
So where did AP get the story from?
Furthermore, many independent observers have seen this exchange on on C-Span and there is at present a major thrust to try and recover the original tape after the admission was edited from later showings.
” This report explains the context of the oft cited debate, between Obama and Keyes in the following Fall, in which Keyes faulted Obama for not being a “natural born citizen”, and in which Obama, by his quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”, self-admitted that he was not eligible for the office. Seeing that an AP reporter is too professional to submit a story which was not based on confirmed sources (ostensibly the Obama campaign in this case), the inference seems inescapable: Obama himself was putting out in 2004, that he was born in Kenya.”
but the exchange is recorded in many other places.
Many C-Span watchers have recalled seeing the live show where this comment was made. Unfortunately it was cut from archived versions.
I concede that without a copy of the tape the evidence remains weak, however to me, the anecdotal evidence seems strong enough.
Keep up the good work though Andy and its nice to see a leftist asking questions. Trouble is they never ask the right questions, as Climategate shows well enough.
I’ve had a Google as-it-happens alert set up on ‘CRU’ for the last 8 days. It’s facinating to watch the transition of story from climate blogs, then to major blogs, then to fringe MSM and now… to the regular MSM. The latter mostly have adopted an atitude of ‘bit naughty, but nothing really to worry about, move along’. I hope events like this hasten their demise.
Also, I spoke with a 23yr old family friend yesterday. She’s an environmentalist (just finished related degree) and Green voter. She’s pretty perplexed, and said something along the lines of this (won’t quote bueacuse can’t recall actual words) ‘Every lesson on environmental stuff since I was at primary school included things about us causing the world to heat up and for that to lead to disaters. My uni lecturers quoted these CRU scientists and I’ve read plenty of their papers and IPCC reports. Was it all rubbish?’. A good question. You can imagine my response to her!
I wish the Auckland Library would refuse to allow dirty, smelly vagrants inside.
Goodness knows why it is that being a poor person goes hand in hand with ignorance about soap and water, but it appears to be so, and I am astounded these creatures do not take better care of themselves.
I am particularly surprised that these chaps do not find inspiration from me – a chap wearing a nicely tailored suit and clean shirt (also tailored); I suppose that pigs are pigs, however…
“..There is more to being green than driving a Prius and buying local produce.
Duncan Clark sheds further light on the eco-friendly messages we’ve come to take for granted
1. What they tell you: Turning off the lights saves CO2
What they don’t tell you: It makes sense for individuals to use less electricity to help reduce the emissions of British power stations.
However, it’s worth bearing in mind that the total amount of CO2 that can be released by power plants and other industrial facilities across the EU between now and 2012 is fixed by the European Emissions Trading Scheme.
This means that if the UK power sector reduces its emissions, extra carbon permits get freed up for use elsewhere..
.. such as German power stations or French cement plants.
In other words, the same amount of CO2 will be released, just from different sources.
If you want to ensure that your electricity savings do make a real environmental difference, join Sandbag ..
.. a charity that will remove CO2 permits from the EU scheme to stop your good work being traded away on the carbon markets.
2. What they tell you: Buy a greener car
What they don’t tell you: If you definitely need a new car, it makes perfect sense to buy a small, super-efficient model with low CO2 emissions.
However, making a new car – including mining and processing the metals and manufacturing and assembling the components – takes a huge amount of energy.
According to an expert at the Stockholm Environment Institute, the production of a typical modern car causes around 8 tonnes of CO2 ..
.. equivalent to driving 23,000 miles.
Because of this, unless you currently drive a lot in a highly inefficient car ..
.. it will often be greener to stick to your existing vehicle .. than to sell it and buy a new one.
3. What they tell you: Going veggie cuts emissions
What they don’t tell you: It’s true that animal products tend to have much higher carbon footprint than food produced from plants.
Hence vegetarianism tends to be a good idea from an environmental point of view.
The devil is in the detail, however ..
.. because certain dairy products are more “carbon intensive” than some meats.
In particular hard cheese, which takes a lot of milk to produce, can have a bigger footprint per kilo than chicken.
So while cutting out meat – especially beef and lamb – definitely makes ecological sense ..
.. the benefit will be reduced if you make up the calories by consuming more dairy.
The most effective way to reduce the emissions of your diet is to go vegan –
philu: “yvette is whinging about increased investment in new/developing clean/green industries..?”
read it more carefully: I was whinging about the lack of simple information relating to a comparison between China’s deal and that of USA, and wanting to relate those to New Zealand’s position – what it means to the people who are going to be paying. But all there is is financial comment – what investors can make out of GW. Figure out yourself where the emphasis is.
And isn’t “a new benchmark has been set in craven stupidity” just slightly overstating your opinion – how does my stupidity display abject cowardice?
China announced Thursday that it will cut its economy’s carbon intensity by up to 45 percent by 2020 and that Premier Wen Jiabao will participate in international climate negotiations in Copenhagen next month.
The move by the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter to set a near-term target of a 40 to 45 percent reduction, coming a day after President Obama set U.S. climate goals for the talks, suggests a possible breakthrough in Demark next month in the long-stalled climate negotiations. But the State Council’s announcement that China will cut its carbon output relative to economic growth, using 2005 as a baseline, fell short of the 50 or 55 percent cut many world leaders had hoped Beijing would make.
Michael Levi, the David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, called the announcement “disappointing,” because the Energy Information Administration estimates that existing Chinese policies will already cut the nation’s carbon intensity by 45 to 46 percent.
Philu -
substantiate any of your ‘facts’ with figures and preferably sources.
Those “denying/arguing against these environmental realities” are generally those seeking actual facts and believable sources relating to the matter.
I haven’t denied some global warming may be occurring and steps should be taken to kerb it – I just want to know why New Zealand has to ‘lead’ at unwarranted expense: like pay, while polluters here can carry on what they are doing with little incentive to change.
Okay, now you fuckers can have it back for your Global Warming / Whoar / Obama / 911 conspiracy / whatever.
Heh, wasn’t someone suggesting that Philu was part of a conspiracy to identify/incriminate dissenters to the Labour government? The Whoar Conspiracy, sounds like a great book.
Sir Christopher Meyer, then British Ambassador to the US, told the Iraq Inquiry that Mr Blair would have been more influential if he had attached pre-conditions to British support at the Crawford ranch meeting — which was six months before Hans Blix began looking for weapons in Iraq.
“I think that would have changed the nature of American planning,” he said. “By the time you get to the end of the year it’s too late. . . I did say to London that we’re being taken for granted.
“The real problem, which I did draw several times to the attention of London, was that the contingency military timetable had been decided before the UN inspectors went in under Hans Blix. So you found yourself in a situation in the autumn of 2002 where you could not synchronise the military timetable with the inspection timetable.”
“We found ourselves scrabbling around for the smoking gun,” he said. “And we — the Americans, the British — have never really recovered from that because of course there was no smoking gun.”
Does anyone know of any rational basis for the whipping Mike Pero has received this week? As far as I can see they’re flogging an innocent man. Is it a case of he’s-rich-therefore-he-must-be-evil?
1)easy target, 2)ex-mortgage sales weasel, 3) air nz pr gimps trying to cover up their token commemoration flight (lets be honest that event is an open festering sore on their corporate psyche).
As usual it looks like a few greedy buggers stuffing their pockets and stuffing the system.
Incompetent lawyers undermining legal aid system – review
A damning review of legal aid says a sea change is needed to fix a system undermined by incompetent, unscrupulous and sometimes corrupt lawyers looking after their own interests.
Dame Margaret Bazley headed the review and pulled no punches in the report.
“There is a small but significant group of lawyers, and some defendants, who are abusing the system to the detriment of clients, the legal aid system, the courts and the taxpayer,” she said.
“When someone as experienced in providing services to the public as Dame Margaret talks about system-wide failings, a system open to abuse, and appalling behaviour, we know we have a problem,” Mr Power said.
“What she has identified goes to the very centre of the integrity of our legal system. Things must change, and fast.”
All this “leading” talk is just more hot air. The EU has had an ETS scheme 2005. I am afraid we are already laggards.
It’s true that whatever we do makes an insignificant contribution to emission reductions globally, but if we are not seen to be pulling our weight our trade will suffer.
And we should do what is right, not just what is the least painful, which is our new pathway under the National/Maori scheme.
What these e-mails tell us is that prominent figures have been selecting facts that accord with their theory and suppressing others that do not. This means that the current consensus of climate science has been developed on a highly selected set of data. It means that the consensus is not worth the paper it is written on.
How about you run that comment past Gavin Schmidt at Real Climate? At the moment you are just wallowing in a largely self-selecting cess pit of conspiracy theorist distortionistas.
In fact, just running through the existing comments threads on that site largely puts everything in context, including this as a lead in to examining the infamous Trenberth email:
Trenberth: You need to read his recent paper on quantifying the current changes in the Earth’s energy budget to realise why he is concerned about our inability currently to track small year-to-year variations in the radiative fluxes.
Personally, I fully understand why some scientists were so keen to not give any oxygen to the uncertainty cellar dwellers, and this should not have been of concern to them, but the fact remains the science is still in place and this is an uproar only on the fringes.
Generally, I urge non-posters who cruise these threads to go to the IPCC reports, the <a href="http://copenhagendiagnosis.org/"<Copenhagen Diagnosis and Real Climate
These sites sort out the wheat from the chaff, answer FAQs, and dispel the wilder notions that infest the blogosphere and Fox News.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I agree that Air NZ is unlikely to thump Pero because he’s rich. I’m saying that the media and relatives may be thumping him (in part at least) because he’s rich.
How come I lose most of the 3 min editing time just waiting, tick tock, waiting, tick tock…etc then it sits saving for so long that the time runs out and the changes don’t go through.
It’s enough to make a man want to throw a hammer at the screen!
But I don’t. I don’t think insurance would cover that, somehow, and SWMBO would not be impressed
You know Luc, every time you mention Real Climate it reminds me of the guy who is shagging the next door neighbour and gets caught by the wife. He in a fit of panic says “it’s not what it looks like”. Well that is Real Climate, any shred of creditability they ever had is now gone. Only the deluded will continue to support their lost cause.
Scientists yesterday rubbished claims from New Zealand climate-change sceptics that temperature data from around the country had been deliberately tampered with to show a higher degree of warming.
The Climate Conversation Group and the Climate Science Coalition have released their own analysis . CCG convener Richard Treadgold claimed the results were “shocking”.
Renwick, Salinger and Niwa chief climate scientist David Wratt hit back at the claims of manipulation.
Wratt said Niwa climate scientists had previously explained to members of the coalition why such corrections had to be made. He was disappointed they continued to ignore that and present misleading analyses.
Renowden, of blog site Hot Topic, said the timing was deliberate. “I have no doubt that all of this is part of a concerted campaign to discredit climate science and prevent action on reducing emissions. I don’t believe New Zealand’s climate sceptics are necessarily part of an American PR campaign, but I do think they play along with it.”
The temperature analysis had “zero credibility”, he said.
CL, didn’t notice your above post, sorry. Go to real Climate and look for yourself. and go through the comments threads, as I say above.
Assuming you still are not convinced, what’s your explanation for the non-controversial ETS scheme in place in the EU, the latest commitments by the largest polluters, China and the US to reduce their emissions, the fact that both leaders of those two countries are attending the Copenhagen Conference, and the fact that another 190 nations are sending their leaders and/or delegations to that conference?
Banana Llama, the last time this happened we weren’t around. If the planet undergoes that again humans will be reduced to pockets of desperate existence in the few inhabitable places. The Hobbesian nightmare of a “nasty, brutal and short life”.
Humans have only flourished in the last 10,000 years because of the beneficial climate. If we destroy that climate, we won’t survive in any recognisable form.
The simple fact is, if the EAIS is melting, we are in big trouble. Let’s hope it is short term variation, but do what we can anyway to mitigate it.
And Say Goodbye to Hollywood – if I am attacked and consider that I have subject to this kind of distortion, I would hope my answers are taken seriously. You obviously have an agenda so have jumped on this short term bandwagon. Enjoy it while you can, but the rest of the world will work to save you and your descendants from as much GW as we can manage.
Breaking News, the German Nato officer who ordered that infamous air strike on hijacked petrol tankers and killed, not the hijackers, who had just wandered off when they got stuck, but villagers who were happily, and understandably, sucking out the fuel, has resigned!
No because it won’t happen the only time it has happened in written human history is during the great flood if you are inclined to believe creation theory, hence i’d worry more about a meteor strike than dramatic rises in sea level.
Andrew, fair comment. I’ll try to get around it. My main point is still that those screaming the loudest actually don’t check with the email authors, not even for the full context (see the Trenberth link above).
The most damaging emails are those concerning attempts to withhold details of contradictions and uncertainties, not the basic science which is well established and not under threat.
If any good comes out of this episode, it will be an awareness amongst scientists that openness is best in the long term.
PS I see in Australia the Libs are tearing themselves apart over the issue – must be something in the air over there
That wouldn’t save you. We have a computer in every room!
Anyway, I did do it, years ago, when I got a new computer I took the old, old, slow, slow freeze happy one up the back and happily put my sledgehammer through it. Very satisfying.
Because RealClimate had their pants pulled down and now their balls are dangling for everyone to see. And it’s not a sight which corresponds with what they said about it.
Chicken Little, you are referring to the initial comments thread which real Climate closed at 1092 posts and started up this one
The CRU hack:
Context
Filed under: Climate Science
gavin @ 23 November 2009
This is a continuation of the last thread which is getting a little unwieldy. The emails cover a 13 year period in which many things happened, and very few people are up to speed on some of the long-buried issues…
CL, Comments are open on this thread. I suggest you express your concerns there before you jump to conclusions.
It’s rather like when scientology got blown wide open and the story of Xenu and people flying to earth in Boeing 787s. Only now, the Warmists have had their cult blown open and it was all smoke, mirrors and dodgy data.
I wonder how the government will sell us whatever bullshit they cook up in Copenhagen, thanks to the dastardly internet and their email releases.
Reid, that’s not a review, it’s a promotion:
Planet Earth’s climate, indifferent to puny human interventions, will simply continue on its majestic way – irrespective of ministrations that we might or might not attempt. Watch this film, and use the knowledge that you will gain to lobby your Senator to vote against the Australian emissions trading bill.
George Monbiot’s name has been thrown around here as one who has supposedly joined the camp of the deniers because of the emails. In fact, this is his take here:
(Quote) It’s no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging(1). I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.
Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released(2,3), and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request(4).
Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics(5,6), or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(7). I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.
But do these revelations justify the sceptics’ claims that this is “the final nail in the coffin” of global warming theory?(8,9) Not at all. They damage the credibility of three or four scientists. They raise questions about the integrity of one or perhaps two out of several hundred lines of evidence. To bury manmade climate change, a far wider conspiracy would have to be revealed…(end of quote)
The remainder of the post is a giant pisstake at the expense of the conspiracy theorists.
Here’s an email for you LUC – produced in full of course, we can’t have things taken out of context, can we?
From: “Michael E. Mann”
To: Tim Osborn , Keith Briffa
Subject: update
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:51:53 -0500
Reply-to: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Cc: Gavin Schmidt
guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we
put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre
thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go
there personally, but so I’m informed).
Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way
you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about
what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any
questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you
might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold
comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think
they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d
like us to include.
You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a
resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put
forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our
best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC
comments as a megaphone…
Being right wing meat eating intelligent people, we are far too wise for him.
Not a hard achievement however, as I believe that small micro-organisms living in the eternal dark of the bottom of the world’s oceans are also wiser and more knowledgeable than Phool.
What happened to the Colonel Master’s resolution of the 23rd of starving Phool of attention btw? There was actually some good adherence to that for a few days.
“..Phillip Ure (the phool) said “i actually know not enough about the specifics/detail to make any comment ..”
on Kiwiblog on 24/11/09 in GD re GW..”..”
pentwig repeats this total lie..
my response was to being asked to comment on the content of the leaked emails..
does being rightwing means you just make shit up..?
Luc, I have yet to read ANYTHING the convinces me about man-made global warming; what convinced you?
What makes us skeptical (for one) is all the lying by those involved with trying to prove warming – the submitted papers based on data – that once checked – turns out to be untrue when rechecked by peers; not the least of which the infamous manufactured ‘hockey stick’ graph by Mann et al. Also the many ‘facts’ now proved to be inaccurate in Al Gore’s movie.
If there was serious data to support the claim, and a willingness for data to be earnestly reviewed and shared – a transparent cooperation between those coming at the issue from both sides and funding given to whoever genuinely wanted to research the issue (rather than just grants to those who are believers in warming to start with) I would be more likely to believe. Instead the warming believers seem to be mounting a ‘believe us or else’ war, where the opinion of ‘deniers’ (that’s a charged word right there) is flagged aside and scoffed at.
In my opinion, real world samples that describe the geological history of our planet tell a story – a story that cannot be matched by a computer simulation that is already proving unreliable.
Are the National socialists now gulping down hand fulls of retard pills?. Why remove the defence of provocation?. Are they worried that if they provoke us enough we might do something silly?. Perhaps they fear the worm has turned, I do hope so.
Buzzzzzzzzz. Sorry, wrong again phool. I suspect those that rated the Manawatu River as one of the most polluted in the world obtained their figures from the CRU. Probably one of those cases where if you put the cash down you get the result you desire. Perhaps you should also consider the possibility that the vast amount of pollution comes from a city, shock, horror, not the evil farmers fault, dropkick.
I have posted on this previously here, but again this is the Real Climate reply to queries on this email:
44. One purported email says:
“guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go there personally, but so I’m informed).
Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d like us to include.
You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC comments as a megaphone…”
I’m not a sceptic (far from it…I’ve been involved in climate science for a long time and have been convinced about AGW for years) but I do think that this sends a pretty crap message to everyone. If RC is screening posts to push a particular point then it’s not that much better in that regard than a lot of the sceptic sites.
[Response: This is a moderated site, and always has been. We do screen out a lot of the random squawk of the blogosphere and the baseless accusations of malfeasance that are commonplace on open forums. We do that unapologetically in order to maximise the signal-to-noise ratio in threads. When there are technical issues that we aren't qualified to judge, we often ask people more involved to comment - and these comments appear inline with the questions so that the answers are not lost and are provided at the same time as the question appears. This leaves a record for later readers that is much easier to follow. We don't screen out comments just because they disagree with us (as is evident in any comment thread). - gavin]
Comment by san quintin — 20 November 2009 @ 2:01 PM
And here is another one that has been causing a ruckus:
26. The email which describe the peer review process, leaning on editors, etc. has done much to discredit science as a whole. I have reviewed papers. What I see in those emails is very disappointing.
[Response: The paper and journal in question were indeed a scandal. But the scandal was that it was ever published. Six editors of the journal resigned in protest at the publication, not because of pressure. - gavin]
So far a total of 1854 comments have been posted on the website, many highly critical, and many replied to by Real climate employees, mainly Gavin Schmidt.
The Catholic Church in Ireland covered up widespread allegations of “evil” child sex abuse by priests for decades, according to a damning report released today.
Four archbishops routinely protected abusers and failed to inform police of the allegations, according to a three-year investigation into the Dublin Archdiocese, the country’s largest.
The judicial probe discovered that the archbishops did not report abuse to police until the 1990s as part of a culture of secrecy and an over-riding wish to avoid damaging the reputation of the Church.
The report said: “All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities.”
@ Luc – how do you regard either of those comments as “responses”. The first one basically says we edit out the unbelievers and the second says the published paper was crap. Neither comment even tries to rebut the inference that a reasonable person would draw from the offending emails. To me they reinforce the view of the missionary zeal with whcih the warmists attack the unbelievers.
God you are desperate Luc. At what stage in your pitiful life will you take off your blinkers. For fucks sake do you think if this issue was put to a jury could you honestly say AGW would escape the firing squad. What does it take to get through to you dickheads that you have been had. Failing that I have a nice little drawbridge in London I’m trying to flock off, would you be interested.
The first one basically says we edit out the unbelievers
You never wondered why there are never any posts there along the lines of ‘WHy are you trying to destroy my country you and you neo-communist overlords should go ak to the URSR you BASTARDS!!!’? You also seem to think that no comments go through which question the posts on the site, for some reason.
Nasa scientists have produced the most compelling evidence yet that bacterial life exists on Mars.
It showed that microscopic worm-like structures found in a Martian meteorite that hit the Earth 13,000 years ago are almost certainly fossilised bacteria.
Journalists, printers and sales staff at the Southland Times are striking today in protest at Fairfax’s refusal to offer a wage increase, and will join thousands of low paid public sector workers in their nationwide day of action against the pay freeze.
Two things: since when were journalists public sector workers, and b) that should improve the quality of the Southland Times no end tomorrow.
Fletch, you asked: Luc, I have yet to read ANYTHING the convinces me about man-made global warming; what convinced you?
That’s a fair question and I will answer as best I can. Until about 4 years ago, when I met my wife, I was a skeptic, but not a denialist – I just didn’t know but it all seemed a bit far fetched. But my wife got into my ear and asked me, what if they are right? That made me think, and I listened to the scientists, mainly in the MSM, and opened my mind to the possibility. I checked up on Bjorn Lomberg, The Skeptical Environmentalist, reputed to be a skeptic but, in fact, actually not. His main argument is for technological innovation rather than carbon taxes etc.
But the turning point was coming to Kiwiblog. The skeptic arguments were just so vociferous, filled with ad hominems – usually a give away for a bad argument – that I felt compelled to see if they were right or not. They supplied all the links to organisations I had never heard of, primarily the IPCC and Real Climate. I used these sites, and NIWA and NASA and many others that I came across in my journey, checking out the FAQ’s, most common myths etc etc, assiduously researched arguments presented here by the skeptics and denialists and conspiracy theorists and ended up totally convinced that AGW is real, it’s here and it’s a major problem.
I understand how the uncertainties arise, and think that trying to hide them is wrong, but the broad brush painted by, as George Monbiot says, hundreds of lines of scientific enquiry, is simply too compelling to be denied. That’s my honest opinion.
Four years ago I was single, hedonistic, and not too concerned with the future. My circumstances have changed and I want to do what I can to ensure we don’t wreak havoc on our planet for future generations.
Fletch, I trust this answers your question, and thank you for asking.
Science:
(a) it ignores evidence from geological record showing that temp fluctuations are natural
(b) it ignores the possibility that the sun is a major contributor to those cycles
(c) it ignores evidence that suggests that CO2 is NOT a greenhouse gas
Propaganda (If it looks like a duck, etc.):
(d) uses classic propaganda techniques: e.g. immediately adopted the emotive label for dissenters as “deniers” (an extreme and loaded label used elsewhere the application and penalty of which is an unequivocal declaration that dissent won’t be tolerated and your career is at risk if you work in the relevant field – history or in this case, science)
Politics:
(e) the debate came from nowhere to global calamity in less than 5 years with lock-step cross-party precision – name another
(f) it entails the biggest wealth-transfer in history
(g) warmaholic science receives biased degrees of govt funding and growing disparity as we speak – name a major govt-funded “denier” institute
I mean, who knows, but it sure as hell looks like a duck, and every day that goes by reinforces that.
The liberal bias in Wikipedia is oppressively odious these days.
Item 3] on Conservapedia’s list of “Examples of Bias in Wikipedia”:
Wikipedia’s article on engineering[2] features a photo of … an offshore wind turbine, which is an inefficient liberal boondoggle and certainly not a representative example of engineering. None even exist off the shores of the United States because they are not competitive.
Getstaffed, I’m sure you don’t take Conservapedia seriously, but can you give an example of what you speak of? Not on something totally subjective like a US talkshow host or on climate change (as neither of us has any first-hand or professional knowledge on that subject).
I just checked the “Engineering” article on Wikipedia. It still has a picture of an off-shore wind-turbine. Shockingly it also has a picture of Leonardo da Vinci; a well known homosexualist and certainly not an American.
Redbaiter 8.15 am. Most of these ‘journalists’, and repeaters have a litmus test for their stories. Will it advance the cause of Socialisim, or won’t it? Once that’s figured out, they act accordingly.
Reid,
(a) AGW recognises that there are natural climate fluctuation.
(b) Solar forcing is recognised as a forcing and included.
(c) I’d love to see your evidence that CO2 is not a Greenhouse gas.
(d) Meaningless, AGW supporters think that the denialists/deniers base their rejection of the possibility of AGW being real on factors other than an objective assessment of the science. For that reason “sceptic” is not an appropriate term to use to describe them.
(e) That comment suggests you believe it’s an orchestrated conspiracy. A view that speaks for itself.
(f) What’s that got to do with it? Assuming that’s actually true.
(g) You’re starting off with the assumption that this is some sort of them vs us battle, there are no institutions funded by governments to prove AGW exists, rather the institutions are funded to study possible climate change that’s the result of anthropogenic factors, after studying the science, most institutions, and individuals in those institutions have concluded that AGW is occurring.
It looks like a duck to you because you want it to be a duck, I hope you’re not a deer hunter, because I sure wouldn’t want to be in the same forest.
AndrewW,
(a) no, it doesn’t, across geologic time records
(b) no, it doesn’t and isn’t
(c) I’d love to see your unequivocal evidence it is, for your side depends on it
(d) spoken like a true believer (you weren’t a member of the CPSU were you, for that’s the same tactic)
(e) but it’s a fact, isn’t it?
(f) it is true, but as per usual, naive believers haven’t bothered to familiarise themselves with the actual real consequences
(g) it is an us vs them, apparently you’re on the side of them, thanks for identifying yourself, forgive me if I ignore future contributions on this subject from you for I now know where to place them
Did anyone see Closup tonight? An architect Richard Gage (sp) was on talking about the 911 and how the twin towers and #7 came down by controlled explosives. He was certain the planes did not bring the towers down but they were only a diversion. Infact he didn’t call it a conspiracy because conspiracy means theory, shit, he just said they came down by explosives. This was on tv tonight. Hope some of you out there calling us nutcases and crackpots saw this especially #7. When I saw that go down, that is what created the doubt in my mind that it involved terrorist. Richard Gage is asking to reopen the investigation. . Going on public tv and saying this is terrific news but I am worried because if this build momentum, his life will be in danger. It takes guts to say this publicly
jackp, yes I did, and I’m disappointed Gage choked on the critical moment, when he could have done a slam dunk, and shown the subset of Close Up viewers with intelligence (who aren’t many these days thanks to the fact Sainsbury usually fronts it), there are in fact, important unanswered questions.
It will be just another lost opportunity, but good on you Richard, for having the guts and the patriotism to raise questions about the giant holes that exist in the official 911 smokescreen that only useful idiots who are thicker than a whale omelet could possibli believe.
MNIJ
I’ll believe it when all those in the Catholic church all over the world who did the same (incl in NZ) and hid/obfusecated and denied what they knew went on, get put before the courts.
I know of one case here in WTN where the bishop moved a guy to another parish and didn’t tell anyone what he’d done and he did the same to a mate of mines son.
The Bishop should be doing 10 yrs inside and the Cardinal instead they made my mates family go through hell for causing trouble.
The Catholic church in NZ is a disgrace to society and has no right to speak on social or moral matters until they hand over the f@ckers who hid it all.
Well if Lindsay Freer, Catholic communication coordinator, is any example of the Catholic church here in NZ then the whole lot need to sort their shit out. She is the fruit loop who threw a wobbly over the South Park episode with the menstruating statue of the virgin Mary.
She had obviously never watched an episode of the programme in her life. As much as it is crude at times, at the end of every episode of South Park there is always a positive moral to the story. Usually about prejudice, bigotry, discrimination etc. The Catholic Church, like many others are hypocrites.
it is an us vs them, apparently you’re on the side of them, thanks for identifying yourself, forgive me if I ignore future contributions on this subject from you for I now know where to place them
Reid, at least it is a start. This is truly the first time I heard anyone come out like that and explain things. Of course, your right, too many people don’t think to ask questions that might lead to something frightening. Especially in the states. They don’t’ have a clue what is going on. If they started asking questions then that would lead to more questions. I think you get the picture.
Yes, yes, the recession is over, which is why privately owned finance companies are taking advantage of taxpayers money offered to them by Key. Cheers John, just what I voted for you to do, increase my family debt levels. What happened to capitalism? Where did this bullshit “no fail because we’ll just take it off the taxpayer and give it to private businesses” system come from? What a joke.
jackp, many millions in the States have gotten the accurate picture, thanks to the internet. But when you get journalists who pretend the questions don’t even exist and prefer to spend their time on useful things like celeb gossip, what can people like you and I do?
It’s incredible these “professionals” have abrogated their duty. Imagine any other profession doing the same.
The legal system in this country is disgraced by a reported 200 lawyers rorting the legal aid system. This is much, much worse than a couple of scientists fiddling climate change data. Nearly 200% worse, actually.
It’s quite clear that the legal system cannot be justified by rational enquiry. But getting rid of it is going to be a battle. It has friends in high places, all over the world, as do all conspiracies.
I’m going to do my bit by just pretending it isn’t there – it doesn’t exist. Call me a denier, if you will.
Just caught the headline of today’s Huruld – no doubt the bedwetters of Editing the Huruld will have been phenomenally asspained at the idea of them besmirching their beloved Liarbore leader. A pox on thee! Why aren’t you like alternet yet?!
“join thousands of low paid public sector workers ”
I wonder how whoever reported this determined they were low paid. Most would be on well above the average and indeed median income. And I suspect on a risk-weighted and hours actually worked basis, pretty well paid indeed.
Reid, it is a loosing battle. Back in the 70’s the major government defense contractors muscled their way into the News media. I remember when General Electric was allowed by congress to buy one of the major networks. There was no internet then. Then Westinghouse, another major defense contractor bought ABC (not sure which one anymore). Then they bought out the major newspapers CNN followed suit and no longer became the rogue news station because Ted Turner got kicked out. This is what is killing the states. Dumbing down the public. You have to remember, these major defense contractors have a vested interest in wars and can sway public opinion very easily. It is done here by the EPMU. The labour unions run the news which is why they are terribly slanted and look for stories that will strengthen the union. The public doesn’t have a clue what is happening.
November 27th, 2009 at 6:49 am
First.
Okay, now you fuckers can have it back for your Global Warming / Whoar / Obama / 911 conspiracy / whatever.
November 27th, 2009 at 6:50 am
Goff going for the NZ? First vote. Always the big risk in Keys “divide Maori and Labour party (while fucking over the country)” strategy
November 27th, 2009 at 7:01 am
KiwiGreg – of the 4% who voted for Winston First last year, probably a quarter have shuffled off this mortal coil, and another quarter will have done so by the 2011 election. If Goff is so desperate for media attention that he has to out-Winston Winston, it does not bode well for the Labour Party.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:02 am
I suspect Keys strategy is to stop the country going bankrupt during the economic crisis thats about halfway through (while dealing with all of the billions of social liability that Hels & Mikey racked up trying to buy a 4th term.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:02 am
Of course global warming and the scam being exposed in New Zealand as well look here for a short summary: http://www.solopassion.com/node/7106
November 27th, 2009 at 7:03 am
Good article from Jim Hopkins this morning.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=10611930
November 27th, 2009 at 7:10 am
“during the economic crisis thats about halfway through”
It’s over. Has been since Q3.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:13 am
LOL SGTH. Great article
November 27th, 2009 at 7:20 am
I’m with expat thanks SGTH – made me laugh out loud
November 27th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Yeah Greg, that GLOBAL economic crisis thats been ’solved’ by printing masses of cash GLOBALLY – nothing to deal with now, move along, problem solved. Mmmmm. I dont know about you but I have a bad feeling about the resolved crisis we hear so much about in the press.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:28 am
John Key… what a spineless C U Next Tuesday. Aboloshing the provocation defense without changing the whole murder laws is F&^king retarded. We all know that there are murders that are far less worse than others and deserve to be treated as such. Now the likes of Clayton Weatherston are going to plead not guilty to manslaughter and murder and still bad mouth the deceased in court… effectively achieving nothing that the retarded nats intended to. It astounds me how bloody stupid the nats really are. John Key almost makes me feel nostalgic for Helen.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:31 am
KiwiGreg – The economic crisis is far from over if we are borrowing $250 million a week to sustain exhorbinant government spending. Its funny, the nats are actually increasing spending by over a billion a year, I thought we voted such stupidity out.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:42 am
It is cool charlie we have a fiat banking system and can just wave our magic wand to produce more goods err i mean money.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:43 am
And I thought the Liarbour Lickspittles were bad. John Boy Wee and his timid bluecoats are pc cowboys, useless as tits on a bull.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:47 am
@ CharlieBrown dont confuse NZ government overspending with the global economic crisis. That’s just poor government. All of the leading indicators are showing significant positive growth. Most of the reported news and anecdotal evidence is similarly strong. Unemployment is likely to continue to rise but it has always been a lagging indicator so is pretty irrelevant (unless you happen to be part of the left hand side of the bell-shaped curve).
@ expat – the crisis is over. I’m not saying there will never be another one or that there wont be a reckoning for some countries’ taxpayers when it comes time to pay the bills, US unemployment will probably continue to rise, my ghuess is 500 more US banks (out of more than 8000) will be sold by the FDIC, we will see blips like Dubai World as various houses of cards come crashing down, but the current one, in terms of economic contract is definately over and has been for some time.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:49 am
..move on goof and stop shit stirring ya hypocrite…
November 27th, 2009 at 7:49 am
DPF
Come back, the Government is in crisis. It has blown the honeymoon, annoyed the climate sceptics and the rednecks, infuriated the liberals and shown that it is hypocritical.
Key is nowhere to be seen. Smith has been leading for the past week and the country is ready to revolt.
Where is a good spin doctor when you need one?
[DPF: Is that the tenth time this year you have predicted honeymoon is over? You really should look up a dictionary.]
November 27th, 2009 at 7:55 am
Country is ready to revolt.
Dream on Micky
November 27th, 2009 at 7:56 am
Charlie, thats because Labour lied about PREFU
November 27th, 2009 at 7:59 am
I looking for for an article that might explain the setting by China of an emission goal, in the hope of some comparison with that set by USA. I would like to see where NZ stands in respect to those, and if, for some ‘high moral ground reason’ the New Zealand Government is yoking us peasants with a burden away out there beyond what other countries will carry.
But as unlikely as it would be to find any information like this, Reuters devote their article on China’s initiatives only to the financial implications – it seems to ALL be about the fucking money . . .
” The U.S. and China moves provided a “very positive” further boost to what would be a record year for clean energy investment in 2010, consultants New Energy Finance predicted.
“I would not be surprised to see a $The U.S. and China moves provided a “very positive” further boost to what would be a record year for clean energy investment in 2010, consultants New Energy Finance predicted.
“I would not be surprised to see a $200 billion year,” said New Energy Finance head Michael Liebreich. Investment would reach $160-$200 billion in 2010, compared with expected funding this year of about $125 billion, down from last year’s record of $155 billion, Liebreich told Reuters. 00 billion year,” said New Energy Finance head Michael Liebreich. Investment would reach $160-$200 billion in 2010, compared with expected funding this year of about $125 billion, down from last year’s record of $155 billion, Liebreich told Reuters. “
November 27th, 2009 at 8:07 am
I can’t wait for NIWA’s explaination as to why they altered New Zealands temperatures records to show an increase in temerature when there wasn’t one.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:14 am
Murray, apparently it’s because they moved the weather station from Kelburn in 1938.
I’m convinced…
November 27th, 2009 at 8:15 am
“Good article from Jim Hopkins this morning.”
Too little too late. The mainstream media are part of the scam. All modern journalists are made traitors to their craft by means of their allegiance to socialism.
Anyone with any doubts as to their partisan political attachements only has to observe their extreme reluctance to report on Warmergate.
If they had been real journalists, and not propagandists for Progressivism, this scam would have been exposed before it even got started.
The editors and newsroom staff of all major NZ news outlets should be standing in the docks along with the charlatans from CRU (and NIWA).
November 27th, 2009 at 8:15 am
Of course… how foolish of me. I see the light now.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Red through the looking glass.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:18 am
How do you remove lies from Wikipedia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Hart
Re: Popeye Lucas.
Absolute bullshit.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:22 am
Exactly Red.
Where was he before?
November 27th, 2009 at 8:22 am
Associated Press declares Obama born in Kenya-
http://web.archive.org/web/20040627142700/http://eastandard.net/headlines/news26060403.htm
November 27th, 2009 at 8:22 am
<blockquote<China announced Thursday that it will cut its economy's carbon intensity by up to 45 percent by 2020, the state news agency Xinhua said, and that Premier Wen Jiabao will participate in international climate negotiations in Copenhagen next month.
The move by the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter to set a near-term target of a 40 to 45 percent reduction, coming a day after President Obama set U.S. climate goals for the talks, suggests a possible breakthrough in Demark next month in the long-stalled climate negotiations. But the State Council's announcement that China will cut its carbon output relative to economic growth, using 2005 as a baseline, fell short of the 50 or 55 percent cut many world leaders had hoped Beijing would make.
Michael Levi, the David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, called the announcement "disappointing," because the Energy Information Administration estimates that existing Chinese policies will already cut the nation's carbon intensity by 45 to 46 percent.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/26/AR2009112600519.html?hpid=topnews
November 27th, 2009 at 8:27 am
“It has blown the honeymoon,..”
Not, it hasn’t. The carousing in bed continues, but it’s the Maori Party which is nailing (pun intended) the National Party this time, and the emasculated Tories seem to be enjoying the ride.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:30 am
The Maori Party sing welcome to my world and I am not allowed in the forest to grab my Christmas tree!!
November 27th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Be a wonderful time to ‘out’ Obama while we are on a roll with the Gorebull Warming scandal.
I’m sure it’s all connected.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Yes WebWrat, I’m sure it is all connected, the global warming probably started in Kenya. Red will have documents to prove it.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:34 am
” Sunday, June 27, 2004″
“Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate”.
Well, as it said so in an AP article 5 years ago it must be true.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Just a thought Pete.
I’ll let you dribble away all day about it.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:52 am
Mickysavage said “and the country is ready to revolt. ”
micky – the only thing that revolts the country is seeing airbrushed pictures of Dear Former Leader when we know what the real thing looks like ….
November 27th, 2009 at 8:54 am
“Well, as it said so in an AP article 5 years ago it must be true.”
Obama ran for the senate as a Kenyan born American. This is not he only article that makes such references.
Just as the corrupt mainstream media covered up for Warmergate liars, so are they covering up for Obama’s lack of Constitutional legitimacy.
All that has to happen for this to go away is for Obama to provide a legitimate certified long form birth certificate showing the hospital he was born in.
Rather than do this, he has spent $1.3 million denying Americans this information, along with the information contained in so many other records of his past that have been sealed (by Presidential decree) from public scrutiny.
The mainstream media that took court action to obtain George Bush’s dental records and sent reporters to Alaska to rummage through Sarah Palin’s garbage has refused to investigate why Obama has sealed off his past.
The western world is awash in leftist corruption and this corruption is never more evident than it is within the mainstream media.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:54 am
How to remove lies from wikipedia?
You shut down wikipedia.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:58 am
“Obama ran for the senate as a Kenyan born American. ”
Fair enough, now provide a link in which Obama is quoted as saying “I am a Kenyan born American. “
November 27th, 2009 at 8:59 am
Mickey must have been reading some of Redbrokenrecord’s revolting posts. Funny that those two are together on this.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:02 am
AP allocated two reporters to “fact check” the senate and house health care bills – one reporter for every 2000 pages.
AP allocated eleven reporters to “fact check” Sarah Palin’s book – one reporter for every 39.3 pages.
The left have corrupted just about everything: the public service, media, academia and now.. science.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:05 am
Angus – The Listener allocated ONE reporter to fact-check Witi Ihimaera’s latest offering, and the one fact that emerged was that Ihimaera is a rip-off merchant
November 27th, 2009 at 9:16 am
Yvette at 7:59 am I looking for for an article that might explain the setting by China of an emission goal, in the hope of some comparison with that set by USA.
<blockquote<China announced Thursday that it will cut its economy's carbon intensity by up to 45 percent by 2020, the state news agency Xinhua said, and that Premier Wen Jiabao will participate in international climate negotiations in Copenhagen next month.
The move by the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter to set a near-term target of a 40 to 45 percent reduction, coming a day after President Obama set U.S. climate goals for the talks, suggests a possible breakthrough in Demark next month in the long-stalled climate negotiations. But the State Council's announcement that China will cut its carbon output relative to economic growth, using 2005 as a baseline, fell short of the 50 or 55 percent cut many world leaders had hoped Beijing would make.
Michael Levi, the David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, called the announcement "disappointing," because the Energy Information Administration estimates that existing Chinese policies will already cut the nation's carbon intensity by 45 to 46 percent.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/26/AR2009112600519.html?hpid=topnews
November 27th, 2009 at 9:17 am
The best mechanism, sadly, is to (a) stop assuming it’s the truth and then (b) get information from elsewhere and (c) suggest others do likewise. The liberal bias in Wikipedia is oppressively odious these days.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:18 am
“provide a link in which Obama is quoted as saying “I am a Kenyan born American. “
So where did AP get the story from?
Furthermore, many independent observers have seen this exchange on on C-Span and there is at present a major thrust to try and recover the original tape after the admission was edited from later showings.
” This report explains the context of the oft cited debate, between Obama and Keyes in the following Fall, in which Keyes faulted Obama for not being a “natural born citizen”, and in which Obama, by his quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”, self-admitted that he was not eligible for the office. Seeing that an AP reporter is too professional to submit a story which was not based on confirmed sources (ostensibly the Obama campaign in this case), the inference seems inescapable: Obama himself was putting out in 2004, that he was born in Kenya.”
The above is from this web page-
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/ap-declares-obama-kenyan-born/
but the exchange is recorded in many other places.
Many C-Span watchers have recalled seeing the live show where this comment was made. Unfortunately it was cut from archived versions.
I concede that without a copy of the tape the evidence remains weak, however to me, the anecdotal evidence seems strong enough.
Keep up the good work though Andy and its nice to see a leftist asking questions. Trouble is they never ask the right questions, as Climategate shows well enough.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Was that a no Red?
November 27th, 2009 at 9:33 am
I’ve had a Google as-it-happens alert set up on ‘CRU’ for the last 8 days. It’s facinating to watch the transition of story from climate blogs, then to major blogs, then to fringe MSM and now… to the regular MSM. The latter mostly have adopted an atitude of ‘bit naughty, but nothing really to worry about, move along’. I hope events like this hasten their demise.
Also, I spoke with a 23yr old family friend yesterday. She’s an environmentalist (just finished related degree) and Green voter. She’s pretty perplexed, and said something along the lines of this (won’t quote bueacuse can’t recall actual words) ‘Every lesson on environmental stuff since I was at primary school included things about us causing the world to heat up and for that to lead to disaters. My uni lecturers quoted these CRU scientists and I’ve read plenty of their papers and IPCC reports. Was it all rubbish?’. A good question. You can imagine my response to her!
November 27th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Good post from Homepaddock showing how National are just as fiscally irresponsible as Labour.
http://homepaddock.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/we-cant-keep-going-on-like-this/
Time to rid ourselves of these liars and compromisers.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:41 am
That opportunity isn’t for another two years.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:44 am
No, Homepaddock points out the figures for the five years from 2004 are due to Labour but National has responsibility to reverse them.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:45 am
is that right..?
yvette is whinging about increased investment in new/developing clean/green industries..?
more manawatu rivers..!
eh yvette..?
(good grief..!..
a new benchmark has been set in craven stupidity..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 9:45 am
I wish the Auckland Library would refuse to allow dirty, smelly vagrants inside.
Goodness knows why it is that being a poor person goes hand in hand with ignorance about soap and water, but it appears to be so, and I am astounded these creatures do not take better care of themselves.
I am particularly surprised that these chaps do not find inspiration from me – a chap wearing a nicely tailored suit and clean shirt (also tailored); I suppose that pigs are pigs, however…
http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com
November 27th, 2009 at 9:46 am
I’ve been active on kiwiblog in the past on the topic of AGW, so not wishing to appear to avoid the topic when it doesn’t suit me, here’s my position on “Climategate”.
http://www.macdoctor.co.nz/2009/11/25/global-warping/comment-page-1/#comment-6397
November 27th, 2009 at 9:51 am
Redbaiter (7963) Vote: 0 0 Says:
November 27th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Good post from Homepaddock showing how National are just as fiscally irresponsible as Labour.
http://homepaddock.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/we-cant-keep-going-on-like-this/
Time to rid ourselves of these liars and compromisers.
and replace with????
November 27th, 2009 at 9:52 am
shit..!..i find myself in agreement with hide/garrett..!
the repeal of the/any provocation defence is the most braindead/knee-jerk-reaction..in many a long year..
that people found wetherstons’ (laughable) attempt at using that defence highly objectionable..is understandable..
but to use that as a reason to deny there is ever provocation..
and to prevent provocation to be considered as an essential nuance in any justice system..
just fails the most basic logic-tests..
and as hide noted..wetherstons’ attempt at ‘using’ provocation..as the reason for his unimaginably vile crime..
was an abject failure..
so where is the/any problem..?
and does this mean battered women will no longer have that as a defence/mitigating factor/fact..?
wrong..!..wrong..!..wrong..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 9:55 am
“..I suppose that pigs are pigs, however…”
yes..indeed..!
there are ‘dirty’ pigs..
..and fat/clean/troughing pigs..eh..?
a ‘better class’ of ‘pig’..?
old chap..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 10:00 am
(any prius drivers out there..?..patting themselves on the back..?)
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/top-10-green-living-mythscertain-dairy-products-are-more-carbon-intensive-than-some-meats/
November 27th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Razork
Maybe he wants them replaced with Rodney and his merry performing troupe of list MP’s from the Association of Consumers and Taxdodgers
November 27th, 2009 at 10:08 am
philu: “yvette is whinging about increased investment in new/developing clean/green industries..?”
read it more carefully: I was whinging about the lack of simple information relating to a comparison between China’s deal and that of USA, and wanting to relate those to New Zealand’s position – what it means to the people who are going to be paying. But all there is is financial comment – what investors can make out of GW. Figure out yourself where the emphasis is.
And isn’t “a new benchmark has been set in craven stupidity” just slightly overstating your opinion – how does my stupidity display abject cowardice?
November 27th, 2009 at 10:11 am
GetStaffed – “The liberal bias in Wikipedia…”
Sounds like something I read in Conservapedia
http://www.conservapedia.com
tee hee
November 27th, 2009 at 10:20 am
yvette..
fact:..china pollution per person..as against america..?..(america twenty to one..)
fact:..we are really hig pollutors..(per head..)
fact:..china is hands down winning the new/green technology race..(in both investment and outcomes/new green widgits..)
fact:..those denying/arguing against these environmental realities we are facing..
are indeed ‘cowards’ of the worst sort..
and the damage caused by their successful delaying of anything ‘being done about it’..
will..in the future..
reap them approbrium of which ‘craven’ will be but an appettiser..
(and yes..john key/this government/the maori party..will be high on that hate/shit-list..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 10:29 am
November 27th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Philu -
substantiate any of your ‘facts’ with figures and preferably sources.
Those “denying/arguing against these environmental realities” are generally those seeking actual facts and believable sources relating to the matter.
I haven’t denied some global warming may be occurring and steps should be taken to kerb it – I just want to know why New Zealand has to ‘lead’ at unwarranted expense: like pay, while polluters here can carry on what they are doing with little incentive to change.
November 27th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Heh, wasn’t someone suggesting that Philu was part of a conspiracy to identify/incriminate dissenters to the Labour government? The Whoar Conspiracy, sounds like a great book.
November 27th, 2009 at 10:48 am
November 27th, 2009 at 10:57 am
do your own research yvette..
it’s all out there..
and..we aren’t ‘leading’..
we are enabling our worst pollutors to just ‘carry on’..forever..
(more manawatu rivers..?..anyone..?..’clean ‘n green’..?..)
and all the mug-punters will carry the chain for them..
and the planet will fry..
how worse/more of a bad/sick joke could it be..?
will key go down in the history books as ‘dirty-john’..?
probably..
(how could he not..?..he knows the realities..
and for short-term political gain..has chosen to do a neville chamberlain..
‘emmissions-reform..in our time..!’..)
and why are you/is everyone demanding ‘more evidence’..?
how much more do you fucken need..?
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/worlds-last-bastion-of-stable-ice-now-thawing/
it’s just one of the delaying/do nothing ‘cos it will cost me school of thought/denial..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 11:00 am
btw..yvette..
in that context/meaning of the word/sound..
..it’s ‘curb’..
(you’re welcome..!..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Does anyone know of any rational basis for the whipping Mike Pero has received this week? As far as I can see they’re flogging an innocent man. Is it a case of he’s-rich-therefore-he-must-be-evil?
http://kiwipolemicist.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/please-leave-mike-pero-alone/
November 27th, 2009 at 11:11 am
Is it a case of he’s-rich-therefore-he-must-be-evil?
Why would Air NZ care if he’s rich or not?
November 27th, 2009 at 11:14 am
1)easy target, 2)ex-mortgage sales weasel, 3) air nz pr gimps trying to cover up their token commemoration flight (lets be honest that event is an open festering sore on their corporate psyche).
I vote 3).
November 27th, 2009 at 11:21 am
stephen:
the leftist media love to thump rich folk, and at least one relative of a victim has made a false accusation of profiteering.
expat:
whatever the sequence of events was, flying a plane into a mountain when there is no equipment failure is a total **** up to be sure.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:22 am
i vote 2..
with a dash of 3..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Vikings use to grow grapes and make wine here Phillu.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newfoundland_and_Labrador#Agriculture
Wouldn’t worry about ice thawing.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:24 am
As usual it looks like a few greedy buggers stuffing their pockets and stuffing the system.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Yvette
All this “leading” talk is just more hot air. The EU has had an ETS scheme 2005. I am afraid we are already laggards.
It’s true that whatever we do makes an insignificant contribution to emission reductions globally, but if we are not seen to be pulling our weight our trade will suffer.
And we should do what is right, not just what is the least painful, which is our new pathway under the National/Maori scheme.
In my opinion.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:32 am
“..Wouldn’t worry about ice thawing…”
could be something to do with the ensuing seven metre sea rise..
..that causes me to pause..
(and think a civil engineering degree..specialising in sea-wall building..
must be of some use in years to come..)
tho’..’seven metres’..?
whoar..!
that’s a bloody big sea-wall..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Hi Luc – Have you come up with any particular emails that are taken out of context yet?
Your friend
CL
November 27th, 2009 at 11:40 am
I am surprised nobody is talking about this
http://www.smh.com.au/national/abbott-to-challenge-turnbull-20091127-jv5c.html?autostart=1
I know it is a little different as National are actually in power here but Key better watch out if he keeps pushing socialist crap on us.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:41 am
the leftist media love to thump rich folk, and at least one relative of a victim has made a false accusation of profiteering
I said Air NZ, not the media.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:42 am
I know it is a little different as National are actually in power here but Key better watch out if he keeps pushing socialist crap on us.
There’s a bit of a difference in the poll numbers though.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:54 am
@AndrewW your link led to this extract:
What these e-mails tell us is that prominent figures have been selecting facts that accord with their theory and suppressing others that do not. This means that the current consensus of climate science has been developed on a highly selected set of data. It means that the consensus is not worth the paper it is written on.
How about you run that comment past Gavin Schmidt at Real Climate? At the moment you are just wallowing in a largely self-selecting cess pit of conspiracy theorist distortionistas.
In fact, just running through the existing comments threads on that site largely puts everything in context, including this as a lead in to examining the infamous Trenberth email:
Trenberth: You need to read his recent paper on quantifying the current changes in the Earth’s energy budget to realise why he is concerned about our inability currently to track small year-to-year variations in the radiative fluxes.
Personally, I fully understand why some scientists were so keen to not give any oxygen to the uncertainty cellar dwellers, and this should not have been of concern to them, but the fact remains the science is still in place and this is an uproar only on the fringes.
Generally, I urge non-posters who cruise these threads to go to the IPCC reports, the <a href="http://copenhagendiagnosis.org/"<Copenhagen Diagnosis and Real Climate
These sites sort out the wheat from the chaff, answer FAQs, and dispel the wilder notions that infest the blogosphere and Fox News.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Stephen:
Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I agree that Air NZ is unlikely to thump Pero because he’s rich. I’m saying that the media and relatives may be thumping him (in part at least) because he’s rich.
November 27th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
How come I lose most of the 3 min editing time just waiting, tick tock, waiting, tick tock…etc then it sits saving for so long that the time runs out and the changes don’t go through.
It’s enough to make a man want to throw a hammer at the screen!
But I don’t. I don’t think insurance would cover that, somehow, and SWMBO would not be impressed
November 27th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Earth didn’t flood out last time this happened Phillu so why worry?
November 27th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
You know Luc, every time you mention Real Climate it reminds me of the guy who is shagging the next door neighbour and gets caught by the wife. He in a fit of panic says “it’s not what it looks like”. Well that is Real Climate, any shred of creditability they ever had is now gone. Only the deluded will continue to support their lost cause.
November 27th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
November 27th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
CL, didn’t notice your above post, sorry. Go to real Climate and look for yourself. and go through the comments threads, as I say above.
Assuming you still are not convinced, what’s your explanation for the non-controversial ETS scheme in place in the EU, the latest commitments by the largest polluters, China and the US to reduce their emissions, the fact that both leaders of those two countries are attending the Copenhagen Conference, and the fact that another 190 nations are sending their leaders and/or delegations to that conference?
Banana Llama, the last time this happened we weren’t around. If the planet undergoes that again humans will be reduced to pockets of desperate existence in the few inhabitable places. The Hobbesian nightmare of a “nasty, brutal and short life”.
Humans have only flourished in the last 10,000 years because of the beneficial climate. If we destroy that climate, we won’t survive in any recognisable form.
The simple fact is, if the EAIS is melting, we are in big trouble. Let’s hope it is short term variation, but do what we can anyway to mitigate it.
And Say Goodbye to Hollywood – if I am attacked and consider that I have subject to this kind of distortion, I would hope my answers are taken seriously. You obviously have an agenda so have jumped on this short term bandwagon. Enjoy it while you can, but the rest of the world will work to save you and your descendants from as much GW as we can manage.
November 27th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Luc, if you disagree with MacDoctor, why don’t you post a comment there and tell him why?
November 27th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
llama..does not a possible seven metre rise cause you the slightest concern..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
and what evidence do you base that claim on.
gotta link/s..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Breaking News, the German Nato officer who ordered that infamous air strike on hijacked petrol tankers and killed, not the hijackers, who had just wandered off when they got stuck, but villagers who were happily, and understandably, sucking out the fuel, has resigned!
November 27th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Thanks for the comments Murray and Getstaffed.
Upon request Wkipedia have deleted the offending paragraph
I’m outta here now, GD has turned to shit as per usual.
November 27th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
No because it won’t happen the only time it has happened in written human history is during the great flood if you are inclined to believe creation theory, hence i’d worry more about a meteor strike than dramatic rises in sea level.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
“It’s enough to make a man want to throw a hammer at the screen!”
Best idea I’ve heard for yonks!
Do it!
November 27th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
For all the AGW, evangelists, have a look at Not Evil Just Wrong which tears Inconvenient Truth a new one.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Andrew, fair comment. I’ll try to get around it. My main point is still that those screaming the loudest actually don’t check with the email authors, not even for the full context (see the Trenberth link above).
The most damaging emails are those concerning attempts to withhold details of contradictions and uncertainties, not the basic science which is well established and not under threat.
If any good comes out of this episode, it will be an awareness amongst scientists that openness is best in the long term.
PS I see in Australia the Libs are tearing themselves apart over the issue – must be something in the air over there
November 27th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Luc – RealClimate appears to have turned their comments off.
I wonder why?
So anyway, all the emails that you said are taken out of context. I’m still waiting for an example. you don’t seem to have one.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
WebWrat
That wouldn’t save you. We have a computer in every room!
Anyway, I did do it, years ago, when I got a new computer I took the old, old, slow, slow freeze happy one up the back and happily put my sledgehammer through it. Very satisfying.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Because RealClimate had their pants pulled down and now their balls are dangling for everyone to see. And it’s not a sight which corresponds with what they said about it.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Again for the warmaholics, here’s a review of Not Evil Just Wrong
November 27th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Chicken Little, you are referring to the initial comments thread which real Climate closed at 1092 posts and started up this one
The CRU hack:
Context
Filed under: Climate Science
gavin @ 23 November 2009
This is a continuation of the last thread which is getting a little unwieldy. The emails cover a 13 year period in which many things happened, and very few people are up to speed on some of the long-buried issues…
CL, Comments are open on this thread. I suggest you express your concerns there before you jump to conclusions.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
It’s rather like when scientology got blown wide open and the story of Xenu and people flying to earth in Boeing 787s. Only now, the Warmists have had their cult blown open and it was all smoke, mirrors and dodgy data.
I wonder how the government will sell us whatever bullshit they cook up in Copenhagen, thanks to the dastardly internet and their email releases.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Luc, my little friend – I repeat – REAL CLIMATE HAVE TURNED THEIR COMMENTS OFF – I WONDER WHY?
Sheeeesh, like trying to bath a cat.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Reid, that’s not a review, it’s a promotion:
Planet Earth’s climate, indifferent to puny human interventions, will simply continue on its majestic way – irrespective of ministrations that we might or might not attempt. Watch this film, and use the knowledge that you will gain to lobby your Senator to vote against the Australian emissions trading bill.
And it’s a bit late.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
George Monbiot’s name has been thrown around here as one who has supposedly joined the camp of the deniers because of the emails. In fact, this is his take here:
(Quote) It’s no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging(1). I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.
Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released(2,3), and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request(4).
Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics(5,6), or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(7). I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.
But do these revelations justify the sceptics’ claims that this is “the final nail in the coffin” of global warming theory?(8,9) Not at all. They damage the credibility of three or four scientists. They raise questions about the integrity of one or perhaps two out of several hundred lines of evidence. To bury manmade climate change, a far wider conspiracy would have to be revealed…(end of quote)
The remainder of the post is a giant pisstake at the expense of the conspiracy theorists.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Here’s an email for you LUC – produced in full of course, we can’t have things taken out of context, can we?
From: “Michael E. Mann”
To: Tim Osborn , Keith Briffa
Subject: update
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:51:53 -0500
Reply-to: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Cc: Gavin Schmidt
guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we
put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre
thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go
there personally, but so I’m informed).
Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way
you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about
what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any
questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you
might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold
comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think
they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d
like us to include.
You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a
resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put
forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our
best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC
comments as a megaphone…
mike
RC = Real Climate.
November 27th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
If the moderate centre left and Puke wail in a General Debate, but RIP made no one hear it, did they actually wail?
November 27th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
and gee hurf..
how would you know..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Yvette
Phillip Ure (the phool) said “i actually know not enough about the specifics/detail to make any comment ..”
on Kiwiblog on 24/11/09 in GD re GW..”
So the idiot admits to know nothing about AGW but still keeps up his attempts to get hits on his blogsite via kiwiblog commenters.
Being right wing meat eating intelligent people, we are far too wise for him.
November 27th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
And so modest and unconceited.
November 27th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Not a hard achievement however, as I believe that small micro-organisms living in the eternal dark of the bottom of the world’s oceans are also wiser and more knowledgeable than Phool.
What happened to the Colonel Master’s resolution of the 23rd of starving Phool of attention btw? There was actually some good adherence to that for a few days.
November 27th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
“..Phillip Ure (the phool) said “i actually know not enough about the specifics/detail to make any comment ..”
on Kiwiblog on 24/11/09 in GD re GW..”..”
pentwig repeats this total lie..
my response was to being asked to comment on the content of the leaked emails..
does being rightwing means you just make shit up..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
yeah..!..piss off back there..!..clintoiid..
(what do you call a collection/gathering of knuckle-dragging trolls..?
a ‘gulch’..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
phool
You disappoint me. You promised to ignore me because you consider me a moron.
Keep your promises!!
November 27th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Luc, I have yet to read ANYTHING the convinces me about man-made global warming; what convinced you?
What makes us skeptical (for one) is all the lying by those involved with trying to prove warming – the submitted papers based on data – that once checked – turns out to be untrue when rechecked by peers; not the least of which the infamous manufactured ‘hockey stick’ graph by Mann et al. Also the many ‘facts’ now proved to be inaccurate in Al Gore’s movie.
If there was serious data to support the claim, and a willingness for data to be earnestly reviewed and shared – a transparent cooperation between those coming at the issue from both sides and funding given to whoever genuinely wanted to research the issue (rather than just grants to those who are believers in warming to start with) I would be more likely to believe. Instead the warming believers seem to be mounting a ‘believe us or else’ war, where the opinion of ‘deniers’ (that’s a charged word right there) is flagged aside and scoffed at.
In my opinion, real world samples that describe the geological history of our planet tell a story – a story that cannot be matched by a computer simulation that is already proving unreliable.
November 27th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
pentwig..
you just repeated a fucken lie you have used before..
(and that i corrected you on..to that same ‘nyah..nyah..reaction from you..
trying to confirm for everyone just what a mindless/braindead simpleton you are..?
mission accomplished..!
dumb as dogs balls..and a moron with it..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
phool
oh boo hoo
November 27th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Are the National socialists now gulping down hand fulls of retard pills?. Why remove the defence of provocation?. Are they worried that if they provoke us enough we might do something silly?. Perhaps they fear the worm has turned, I do hope so.
November 27th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
is the manawatu river partly your doing..?
bloody-hands-bob..?
or do you pollute a lesser-tributary..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Buzzzzzzzzz. Sorry, wrong again phool. I suspect those that rated the Manawatu River as one of the most polluted in the world obtained their figures from the CRU. Probably one of those cases where if you put the cash down you get the result you desire. Perhaps you should also consider the possibility that the vast amount of pollution comes from a city, shock, horror, not the evil farmers fault, dropkick.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
I’m thinking we should investigate NIWA for taking Greenpeace money.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
oh ..!..!
so it’s those fucken jafas..!..again..!..eh..?
they are the ones who have polluted over 90% of our waterways..eh..?
who knew their reach was so long..?
and the farmers..?
‘blameless’..again/still..eh..?
d’yareckon any readers here are gullible enough to swallow that pile of cowshit..?..there..?
bloody-hands-bob..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
anyone else noticed that dubai is showing signs of going down the gurgler..
what everyone thought was built on a sea of oil..
was actually built on a sea of (now unpayable) debt..
black friday on wall st should be interesting..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 27th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Chicken Little
I have posted on this previously here, but again this is the Real Climate reply to queries on this email:
44. One purported email says:
“guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go there personally, but so I’m informed).
Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d like us to include.
You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC comments as a megaphone…”
I’m not a sceptic (far from it…I’ve been involved in climate science for a long time and have been convinced about AGW for years) but I do think that this sends a pretty crap message to everyone. If RC is screening posts to push a particular point then it’s not that much better in that regard than a lot of the sceptic sites.
[Response: This is a moderated site, and always has been. We do screen out a lot of the random squawk of the blogosphere and the baseless accusations of malfeasance that are commonplace on open forums. We do that unapologetically in order to maximise the signal-to-noise ratio in threads. When there are technical issues that we aren't qualified to judge, we often ask people more involved to comment - and these comments appear inline with the questions so that the answers are not lost and are provided at the same time as the question appears. This leaves a record for later readers that is much easier to follow. We don't screen out comments just because they disagree with us (as is evident in any comment thread). - gavin]
Comment by san quintin — 20 November 2009 @ 2:01 PM
And here is another one that has been causing a ruckus:
26. The email which describe the peer review process, leaning on editors, etc. has done much to discredit science as a whole. I have reviewed papers. What I see in those emails is very disappointing.
[Response: The paper and journal in question were indeed a scandal. But the scandal was that it was ever published. Six editors of the journal resigned in protest at the publication, not because of pressure. - gavin]
So far a total of 1854 comments have been posted on the website, many highly critical, and many replied to by Real climate employees, mainly Gavin Schmidt.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Yes Air New Zealand is acting as if they own Erebus.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
The Catholic Church in Ireland covered up widespread allegations of “evil” child sex abuse by priests for decades, according to a damning report released today.
Four archbishops routinely protected abusers and failed to inform police of the allegations, according to a three-year investigation into the Dublin Archdiocese, the country’s largest.
The judicial probe discovered that the archbishops did not report abuse to police until the 1990s as part of a culture of secrecy and an over-riding wish to avoid damaging the reputation of the Church.
The report said: “All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities.”
http://www.theage.com.au/world/sex-abuse-report-shames-irish-catholic-church-20091127-jv1g.html
If you’re a catholic, you should hang your head in shame.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
@ Luc – how do you regard either of those comments as “responses”. The first one basically says we edit out the unbelievers and the second says the published paper was crap. Neither comment even tries to rebut the inference that a reasonable person would draw from the offending emails. To me they reinforce the view of the missionary zeal with whcih the warmists attack the unbelievers.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
God you are desperate Luc. At what stage in your pitiful life will you take off your blinkers. For fucks sake do you think if this issue was put to a jury could you honestly say AGW would escape the firing squad. What does it take to get through to you dickheads that you have been had. Failing that I have a nice little drawbridge in London I’m trying to flock off, would you be interested.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
If you are involved in this then shame. It has been horrific in Ireland, but that’s not here. Not all Catholics are responsible.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Brilliant MNIJ, what a great analogy. The Irish Catholic church and AGW believers like Luc.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
ssbob, doing a victory lap now is way way premature. There are a lot of scientists and a lot of science unaffected or partially affected by CRU.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
The first one basically says we edit out the unbelievers
You never wondered why there are never any posts there along the lines of ‘WHy are you trying to destroy my country you and you neo-communist overlords should go ak to the URSR you BASTARDS!!!’? You also seem to think that no comments go through which question the posts on the site, for some reason.
November 27th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
So that is where men originated from. I wonder if they can prove where women came from yet?
November 27th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
The Constabulary are not intending to charge Richard Worth with any crime according to the NZ Herald website.
Does this mean he is ‘innocent’?
http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com
November 27th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
I posted a comment on RC once that was directed at Gavin, it took ages to appear, but when it did, it did so with Gavin’s reply.
November 27th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Journalists, printers and sales staff at the Southland Times are striking today in protest at Fairfax’s refusal to offer a wage increase, and will join thousands of low paid public sector workers in their nationwide day of action against the pay freeze.
Two things: since when were journalists public sector workers, and b) that should improve the quality of the Southland Times no end tomorrow.
November 27th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Don’t despair yet, the southerly is blowing in with light rain heading for the University Oval now. It might rescue us for a while.
November 27th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Fletch, you asked: Luc, I have yet to read ANYTHING the convinces me about man-made global warming; what convinced you?
That’s a fair question and I will answer as best I can. Until about 4 years ago, when I met my wife, I was a skeptic, but not a denialist – I just didn’t know but it all seemed a bit far fetched. But my wife got into my ear and asked me, what if they are right? That made me think, and I listened to the scientists, mainly in the MSM, and opened my mind to the possibility. I checked up on Bjorn Lomberg, The Skeptical Environmentalist, reputed to be a skeptic but, in fact, actually not. His main argument is for technological innovation rather than carbon taxes etc.
But the turning point was coming to Kiwiblog. The skeptic arguments were just so vociferous, filled with ad hominems – usually a give away for a bad argument – that I felt compelled to see if they were right or not. They supplied all the links to organisations I had never heard of, primarily the IPCC and Real Climate. I used these sites, and NIWA and NASA and many others that I came across in my journey, checking out the FAQ’s, most common myths etc etc, assiduously researched arguments presented here by the skeptics and denialists and conspiracy theorists and ended up totally convinced that AGW is real, it’s here and it’s a major problem.
I understand how the uncertainties arise, and think that trying to hide them is wrong, but the broad brush painted by, as George Monbiot says, hundreds of lines of scientific enquiry, is simply too compelling to be denied. That’s my honest opinion.
Four years ago I was single, hedonistic, and not too concerned with the future. My circumstances have changed and I want to do what I can to ensure we don’t wreak havoc on our planet for future generations.
Fletch, I trust this answers your question, and thank you for asking.
November 27th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Luc, why do you think the issue is valid when:
Science:
(a) it ignores evidence from geological record showing that temp fluctuations are natural
(b) it ignores the possibility that the sun is a major contributor to those cycles
(c) it ignores evidence that suggests that CO2 is NOT a greenhouse gas
Propaganda (If it looks like a duck, etc.):
(d) uses classic propaganda techniques: e.g. immediately adopted the emotive label for dissenters as “deniers” (an extreme and loaded label used elsewhere the application and penalty of which is an unequivocal declaration that dissent won’t be tolerated and your career is at risk if you work in the relevant field – history or in this case, science)
Politics:
(e) the debate came from nowhere to global calamity in less than 5 years with lock-step cross-party precision – name another
(f) it entails the biggest wealth-transfer in history
(g) warmaholic science receives biased degrees of govt funding and growing disparity as we speak – name a major govt-funded “denier” institute
I mean, who knows, but it sure as hell looks like a duck, and every day that goes by reinforces that.
November 27th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Item 3] on Conservapedia’s list of “Examples of Bias in Wikipedia”:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia
Getstaffed, I’m sure you don’t take Conservapedia seriously, but can you give an example of what you speak of? Not on something totally subjective like a US talkshow host or on climate change (as neither of us has any first-hand or professional knowledge on that subject).
November 27th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Luc – Go have a look at their archives and see how many threads have contrary opinions.
The point is – Owners of Real Climate –
Gavin Schmidt (NASA) and Micheal Mann (Uni of Penn, Hockey Stick)
Do you see that they may have a wee conflict of interest?
November 27th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
I just checked the “Engineering” article on Wikipedia. It still has a picture of an off-shore wind-turbine. Shockingly it also has a picture of Leonardo da Vinci; a well known homosexualist and certainly not an American.
Shameless liberals.
November 27th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
An interesting discussion between Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia founder) and Robert Cox (Conservative blogger) on the subject of political bias in Wikipedia:
http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/04/email-debatewales-discusses-political-bias-on-wikipedia111.html
Very interesting.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Redbaiter 8.15 am. Most of these ‘journalists’, and repeaters have a litmus test for their stories. Will it advance the cause of Socialisim, or won’t it? Once that’s figured out, they act accordingly.
cheers
David Prosser
November 27th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Reid,
(a) AGW recognises that there are natural climate fluctuation.
(b) Solar forcing is recognised as a forcing and included.
(c) I’d love to see your evidence that CO2 is not a Greenhouse gas.
(d) Meaningless, AGW supporters think that the denialists/deniers base their rejection of the possibility of AGW being real on factors other than an objective assessment of the science. For that reason “sceptic” is not an appropriate term to use to describe them.
(e) That comment suggests you believe it’s an orchestrated conspiracy. A view that speaks for itself.
(f) What’s that got to do with it? Assuming that’s actually true.
(g) You’re starting off with the assumption that this is some sort of them vs us battle, there are no institutions funded by governments to prove AGW exists, rather the institutions are funded to study possible climate change that’s the result of anthropogenic factors, after studying the science, most institutions, and individuals in those institutions have concluded that AGW is occurring.
It looks like a duck to you because you want it to be a duck, I hope you’re not a deer hunter, because I sure wouldn’t want to be in the same forest.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
AndrewW,
(a) no, it doesn’t, across geologic time records
(b) no, it doesn’t and isn’t
(c) I’d love to see your unequivocal evidence it is, for your side depends on it
(d) spoken like a true believer (you weren’t a member of the CPSU were you, for that’s the same tactic)
(e) but it’s a fact, isn’t it?
(f) it is true, but as per usual, naive believers haven’t bothered to familiarise themselves with the actual real consequences
(g) it is an us vs them, apparently you’re on the side of them, thanks for identifying yourself, forgive me if I ignore future contributions on this subject from you for I now know where to place them
November 27th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Did anyone see Closup tonight? An architect Richard Gage (sp) was on talking about the 911 and how the twin towers and #7 came down by controlled explosives. He was certain the planes did not bring the towers down but they were only a diversion. Infact he didn’t call it a conspiracy because conspiracy means theory, shit, he just said they came down by explosives. This was on tv tonight. Hope some of you out there calling us nutcases and crackpots saw this especially #7. When I saw that go down, that is what created the doubt in my mind that it involved terrorist. Richard Gage is asking to reopen the investigation. . Going on public tv and saying this is terrific news but I am worried because if this build momentum, his life will be in danger. It takes guts to say this publicly
November 27th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
jackp, yes I did, and I’m disappointed Gage choked on the critical moment, when he could have done a slam dunk, and shown the subset of Close Up viewers with intelligence (who aren’t many these days thanks to the fact Sainsbury usually fronts it), there are in fact, important unanswered questions.
It will be just another lost opportunity, but good on you Richard, for having the guts and the patriotism to raise questions about the giant holes that exist in the official 911 smokescreen that only useful idiots who are thicker than a whale omelet could possibli believe.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
A wink is as good as a nod when it comes to accessing funding. I need, you nod and I supply the funding to support your research into my proposition.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
MNIJ
I’ll believe it when all those in the Catholic church all over the world who did the same (incl in NZ) and hid/obfusecated and denied what they knew went on, get put before the courts.
I know of one case here in WTN where the bishop moved a guy to another parish and didn’t tell anyone what he’d done and he did the same to a mate of mines son.
The Bishop should be doing 10 yrs inside and the Cardinal instead they made my mates family go through hell for causing trouble.
The Catholic church in NZ is a disgrace to society and has no right to speak on social or moral matters until they hand over the f@ckers who hid it all.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Well if Lindsay Freer, Catholic communication coordinator, is any example of the Catholic church here in NZ then the whole lot need to sort their shit out. She is the fruit loop who threw a wobbly over the South Park episode with the menstruating statue of the virgin Mary.
http://tinyurl.com/yj3tmg2
She had obviously never watched an episode of the programme in her life. As much as it is crude at times, at the end of every episode of South Park there is always a positive moral to the story. Usually about prejudice, bigotry, discrimination etc. The Catholic Church, like many others are hypocrites.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
KiwiGreg – you reckon the recession is over? Dubai is looking pretty dodgy and nobody seems to know who has exposure to it.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10612008
The next 4 or 5 days should be interesting.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
reid said to AndrewW
it is an us vs them, apparently you’re on the side of them, thanks for identifying yourself, forgive me if I ignore future contributions on this subject from you for I now know where to place them
good idea reid. Can you do the same for me?
Cheers
November 27th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Kaya said:
The Catholic Church, like many others are hypocrites.
Kaya, ALL churches are hypocrites.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Reid, at least it is a start. This is truly the first time I heard anyone come out like that and explain things. Of course, your right, too many people don’t think to ask questions that might lead to something frightening. Especially in the states. They don’t’ have a clue what is going on. If they started asking questions then that would lead to more questions. I think you get the picture.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Yes, yes, the recession is over, which is why privately owned finance companies are taking advantage of taxpayers money offered to them by Key. Cheers John, just what I voted for you to do, increase my family debt levels. What happened to capitalism? Where did this bullshit “no fail because we’ll just take it off the taxpayer and give it to private businesses” system come from? What a joke.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10611916
November 27th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
The Keynesian assholes have been rehabilitated after thirty years in exile in the backwoods. That’s what’s happened, kaya.
November 27th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
assholes…backwoods…hmmm
Hurf, where are you from? Deliverance territory?
November 27th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
jackp, many millions in the States have gotten the accurate picture, thanks to the internet. But when you get journalists who pretend the questions don’t even exist and prefer to spend their time on useful things like celeb gossip, what can people like you and I do?
It’s incredible these “professionals” have abrogated their duty. Imagine any other profession doing the same.
November 27th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Hurf Durf – aye, I think the little cobweb-riddled, tweed jacketed fuckers will be very excited.
November 27th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
The legal system in this country is disgraced by a reported 200 lawyers rorting the legal aid system. This is much, much worse than a couple of scientists fiddling climate change data. Nearly 200% worse, actually.
It’s quite clear that the legal system cannot be justified by rational enquiry. But getting rid of it is going to be a battle. It has friends in high places, all over the world, as do all conspiracies.
I’m going to do my bit by just pretending it isn’t there – it doesn’t exist. Call me a denier, if you will.
We will see who’s right…eventually.
November 27th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Just caught the headline of today’s Huruld – no doubt the bedwetters of Editing the Huruld will have been phenomenally asspained at the idea of them besmirching their beloved Liarbore leader. A pox on thee! Why aren’t you like alternet yet?!
November 28th, 2009 at 1:17 am
WTF?
9/11 Troofers get a free pass in the media but climate change skeptics are beyond the pale?
Something is seriously fucked up in this country
November 28th, 2009 at 8:11 am
“join thousands of low paid public sector workers ”
I wonder how whoever reported this determined they were low paid. Most would be on well above the average and indeed median income. And I suspect on a risk-weighted and hours actually worked basis, pretty well paid indeed.
November 28th, 2009 at 8:44 am
Reid, it is a loosing battle. Back in the 70’s the major government defense contractors muscled their way into the News media. I remember when General Electric was allowed by congress to buy one of the major networks. There was no internet then. Then Westinghouse, another major defense contractor bought ABC (not sure which one anymore). Then they bought out the major newspapers CNN followed suit and no longer became the rogue news station because Ted Turner got kicked out. This is what is killing the states. Dumbing down the public. You have to remember, these major defense contractors have a vested interest in wars and can sway public opinion very easily. It is done here by the EPMU. The labour unions run the news which is why they are terribly slanted and look for stories that will strengthen the union. The public doesn’t have a clue what is happening.