On Saturday, 20 August 2016 01:13:46 UTC+1, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Friday, 19 August 2016 08:03:15 UTC+1, Freddie wrote:
One for Lawrence.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/...thoroughly-fab
ricated-the-truth-about-global-temperature-data/


How firmly in your cheek was your tongue with that bag of ****?

Do you really think that respected scientists would resign/ create a plethora of blogs/ demand accountability if the problem wasn't systemic?

Does anyone think that it was really a difficult problem for Phil Jones to reply to emails?

As if he didn't have a secretary and any amount of flowerpots to do his bidding!
And finally... Did the article have anything to say about the low grade staff at the IPCC shuffling all their statistics?
And crucially:
How can any of them be trusted after the Climategate affair?
Nobody in their right minds could trust Doctor Jones unless it was to doctor records.

Michael you have really 'turned' this past year and seem to have finally fallen on one side of the discussion. There is dissent, The trouble with it all is how many either care or would have the expertise to understand of the earth temperature record and pronouncements were arrived at. Most people (especially the Hollywood luvvies who profess to care and then spew C02) if asked on -the spot to give the atmospheric break down would fail to do so.


Yes the eartyh has warmed and yes c02