Headless does public service.
...this computer program adds up to 2.6 degrees Celsius to temperatures starting in the 1970's and continuing until 2000 to give the appearance of GLOBAL WARMING! That's over 4 degrees Fahrenheit, and is a huge "fudge factor" (their word, not mine) made to show a false correlation of rising global temperature to rising carbon dioxide levels...
We hope that the above is understandable language. Headless did his best, folks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
They are already spinning this and TCO is not wavering from Cap & Tax. Clearly this was never about the climate.
Clearly this was never about the climate.
No. It's about control. What better way to keep the people under the thumb of government than to limit their movement, housing, use of energy, and travel for the sake of Gaia?
That is so not what the pilfered documents say. East Anglia has released a statement which includes refutation, sound refutation, of this point.
"One of the three temperature reconstructions was based entirely on a particular set of tree-ring data that shows a strong correlation with temperature from the 19th century through to the mid-20th century, but does not show a realistic trend of temperature after 1960. This is well known and is called the ‘decline’ or ‘divergence’. The use of the term ‘hiding the decline’ was in an email written in haste. CRU has not sought to hide the decline. Indeed, CRU has published a number of articles that both illustrate, and discuss the implications of, this recent tree-ring decline, including the article that is listed in the legend of the WMO Statement figure. It is because of this trend in these tree-ring data that we know does not represent temperature change that I only show this series up to 1960 in the WMO Statement."
If you just want to hear ideas that bolster your own opinion, do not click this link: http://bit.ly/8l0hix
Nice spin, Jimmy-Boy. No dice. the whole thing is based on lies. Just follow the money.
Umnhhhh...Jim.....
What we have here is a 'pattern of practice.' It's entirely possible that SOME of the tweaks, adjustments, interpolations and extrapolations were perfectly licit and commonplace.
But the overall tone, tenor, and content of the emails is damning. Clearly, these guys were on a mission, and to Hell with standards.
One doesn't have to be a scientist to get the drift of the emails.
And I'll take Headless' read on the stats as gospel. It's his living.
Post a Comment