Homestead mailing list

[DSanner106 AT aol.com]

I try to watch international news on this type of story and BBC America  
showed the interview, I think about a week ago. I have attached a UK news 
story  on the press release over there. US media is not going to pick up this 
sort of  thing of course, but other countries are reporting it.In re-reading 
the written  article I now see they destroyed source data up to 150 years old.
 
_http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece_ 
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece) 
 
I was not implying that private sector funding is perfect, that is not  
involved here so not important. I was merely pointing out that there are 
obvious  problems with government funding when politics are involved. We 
should be 
able  to take science at face value but cannot as long as data is 
manipulated to  assure government favored results are reached. Though I 
remember 
other things I  distrusted released info on during the Bush years, I really 
don't remember a big  anti global warming push supported by fake science, as 
we 
see here. 
 
We need an independent scientific academy, not funded by political dollars, 
 but operating from a pool gathered from ALL public and private research  
entities. Similar things exist in other countries and essentially apply a 
seal  of approval that the scientific method has been followed and the study 
is 
 legitimate. No conclusions drawn, merely sanctioning the study. Studies 
that are  not run through the academy would not carry the same degree of 
faith.
 
Drew
 
 
In a message dated 12/11/2009 2:55:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
lurine AT com-pair.net writes:

DH is a  news junkie.  He watches all the channels.  Where did you see the  
interview where the director is supposed to have said they destroyed data?  
I'd like to read the transcript.

So, what would you prefer, private  industry funding?  Cookie sales?

The ol' follow the money applies  to ALL scientific research!  And, during 
the Bush years the  scientists that were cheered on said that global 
warming 
didn't  exist.

Lynda
--"I'm fascinated by the hard line you're drawing over  religion -- It gets
used too much, as an excuse, a fall guy, a weapon, a  con.  A lot of people,
maybe most, don't mean it except when it suits  them."  Dallas
----- Original Message ----- 
From:  <DSanner106 AT aol.com>


> It is true, I saw an interview with  the director who said they had
> destroyed all gathered data from the  80's  forward that they used to 
draw 
> their
> conclusions  from. This is the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Scientists 
>  who
> disagreed were fired and silenced. Papers with opposing views were  not
> published. We will see a wave of scientists with opposing views  coming 
> forward.
> I even saw Al Gore, verbally admit that in  the past the rise in CO2 
> levels
> followed, rather than  proceeded global warming and may be a result rather
> than a  cause.
>
> As the son of a top research scientist, I can attest to  many occasions on
> which he was upset over the manipulation of data to  assure further 
funding
> of  projects. Climatologists have had to  scratch out funding in the 
past, 
> but
> their  profession  is hot right now and the sky is the limit on funding as
> long as  the  crisis continues. I lived through the whole "CO2 levels are
>  causing the coming  of the next ice age" scare in the 70's. My father  
said 
> that
> was fake and sure  enough, it was. Now the  same data is being rolled out 
> as
> proof of global   warming. The real shame of this is we have no idea which
> scientists to  trust  going forward. Science is supposed to be pure and
> politics  should not play a  role, but as long as government funding is 
>  used to pay
> for the research we will  have conflicts of  interest.
>
> Drew
>
>
> In a message dated  12/10/2009 3:27:02 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> cayadopi AT yahoo.com  writes:
>
> Chris  writes:  "...However, that is NOT to  say that anthropogenic
> greenhouse  warming is NOT a  problem.  I think that it clearly has been 
> shown...  "
>
>
> I disagree.  I do not believe it has been   "clearly shown".  The whole
> scandal in "climate-gate", the hacked  e-mails  from the global warming
> scientists are at the beginning  phase of unraveling a  collusion by 
> climate
> scientsist  to WITHHOLD information that contains any data  contrary to 
>  their global
> warming theory.  Withholding scientific data   leads me to instantly 
> question
> the results of their  conclusions.  How can  you arrive at specific
> conclusions  based on one-sided data?
>
> When I  first posted  "climate-gate" there wasn't any US media coverage
> besides   Fox.  This a/m I'm seeing it on NBC news.   So it seems that at 
 
> least
> 1 other regular TV station is reporting the  scandal  besides Fox.   I've
> been out of town most of  the last 5 weeks,  and I'm behind on some 
things,
> especially TV  watchings, which I don't do much  of anyway.
>
> Now it will  be interesting to see what comes of the latest  rumor, the
>  reports that scientists from the E. Aglia Climatic Research Unit  have  
> admitted
> to destroying the raw data used to arrive at their  conclusions,  which 
> means
> other scientists can not check  their  work.
>
>  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece
>
>
>  ________________________________
> From:  Chris Clarke  <hstead AT nc.rr.com>
> To:  homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
>  Sent: Thu, December 10, 2009 2:10:50  PM
> Subject: Re: [Homestead]  Climate-Gate
>
> However, that is NOT to say  that  anthropogenic greenhouse warming is 
NOT 
> a
> problem.  I  think that  it clearly has been shown.
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Homestead list  and  subscription:
>  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead
> Change  your  homestead list member  options:
>  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/homestead/dsanner106%40aol.com
>  View  the archives  at:
>  https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Homestead list and  subscription:
>  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead
> Change your  homestead list member options:
>  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/homestead/lurine%40com-pair.net
>  View the archives at:
> https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead  

_______________________________________________
Homestead list and  subscription:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead
Change  your homestead list member  options:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/homestead/dsanner106%40aol.com
View  the archives  at:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead