freecounterpoint: "Scientists" playing hardball

Saturday, November 21, 2009

"Scientists" playing hardball

All on paper. With names. Heads had better fucking roll.

29 comments:

Tecumseh said...: I broke the story two posts down. Complete with standard-issue MSM reaction. And with an AlGore cartoon. But of course, it all flew by Mr Rot. Ah well, that mythical schnitzel, with VCP on the side, is waiting for me. Yes?; 11/21/2009 3:48 PM
Mr roT said...: Your schmuck: UPDATE: I particularly recommend Bishop Hill’s superb summary of some of the key points of the CRU correspondence.

He doesn't have the goods in his article now and he didn't when you posted it.

You pay up, Dr Alz., while you try to get someone you don't like thrown off a journal's editorial board.

Powwww!; 11/21/2009 3:59 PM
Mr roT said...: Tom Wigley says that von Storch is partly to blame for sceptic papers getting published at Climate Research. Says he encourages the publication of crap science. Says they should tell publisher that the journal is being used for misinformation. Says that whether this is true or not doesn't matter. Says they need to get editorial board to resign. Says they need to get rid of von Storch too. (1051190249)

Where do babies come from, Tecs?; 11/21/2009 4:02 PM
Mr roT said...: How 'bout this?

Mann tells Jones that it would be nice to '"contain" the putative Medieval Warm Period'. (1054736277)

Pretty good, eh?; 11/21/2009 4:03 PM
Mr roT said...: Juicy:

Santer says he will no longer publish in Royal Met Soc journals if they enforce intermediate data being made available. Jones has complained to head of Royal Met Soc about new editor of Weather [why?data?] and has threatened to resign from RMS.(1237496573); 11/21/2009 4:06 PM
Tecumseh said...: It was all in the article I posted, or in the the ones it links to. VCP for me.; 11/21/2009 4:07 PM
Mr roT said...: Wigley says Keenan's fraud accusation against Wang is correct. (1188557698)

Check the cartoon at the bottom of this!

Story is that Wang got some dodgy documents from China...; 11/21/2009 4:08 PM
Mr roT said...: Pretty crooked:

Mann sends calibration residuals for MBH99 to Osborn. Says they are pretty red, and that they shouldn't be passed on to others, this being the kind of dirty laundry they don't want in the hands of those who might distort it.(1059664704); 11/21/2009 4:09 PM
Mr roT said...: Check what happens after about 1950 here, top fig.; 11/21/2009 4:12 PM
Mr roT said...: Your guy inked to Bishop Hill after I did!

Pay up!; 11/21/2009 4:14 PM
Mr roT said...: This I did get from the article you posted.

What a bomb! $25M of grants to this fucking creep. He needs to go to gaol!

They've even got him trying to destroy evidence and conspiracy.; 11/21/2009 4:20 PM
Tecumseh said...: Stop diggin', Mr Rot. I'm the champ, you got in second place, while AA & MFT are sleeping at the wheel, and Pepe is skulking with a Red #5 Hurricane.; 11/21/2009 4:20 PM
Mr roT said...: The little fruit is a civil engineer by training!

Whaaaa?; 11/21/2009 4:23 PM
Mr roT said...: Tecs, you linked to a Telegraph article that's like 6 days old, man!

Get the bucket, some ice, and the bottle. Then get your ass down here, man, because you're being about as honest on this one as your buddy Phil Jones!

Powww!; 11/21/2009 4:24 PM
Mr roT said...: When do you get here, VCP-boy!? I'm thirsty!; 11/21/2009 4:25 PM
Tecumseh said...: Climategate: how the MSM reported the greatest scandal in modern science By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: November 21st, 2009

That's 6 days old? Man, that wienerpisswasser is addling your brain. I need to come by, and help you get those flasque neurons firing up again. How about Spring Break?; 11/21/2009 4:37 PM
Mr roT said...: Where are you? Obamaland?; 11/21/2009 4:43 PM
Tecumseh said...: Still in Fullerland. Not far from those warmist putzes. Jeepers, do these guys ever prove something, or simply suck their thumbs, blow hot air, and wait for the moolah to fall in their laps?; 11/21/2009 4:56 PM
Mr roT said...: Those guys don't. Their shit's too complicated and too politicized.

Bio is simpler, and though it's politicized as hell, they seem to do real science. Like they check each other's results and have fights about stuff for real.

This thing about being able to hide intermediate data is amazing! Imagine; it's public property!; 11/21/2009 4:58 PM
Tecumseh said...: How the game works:

Fellow scientists who disagreed with orthodox views on climate change were variously referred to as "prats" and "utter prats." In other exchanges, one climate researcher said he was "very tempted" to "beat the crap out of" a prominent, skeptical U.S. climate scientist.

In several of the emails, climate researchers discussed how to arrange for favorable reviewers for papers they planned to publish in scientific journals. At the same time, climate researchers at times appeared to pressure scientific journals not to publish research by other scientists whose findings they disagreed with.

Shocka!; 11/21/2009 5:03 PM
Mr roT said...: C'mon, Tecs! You've called people utter buttockses before when they disagreed with you on whether math is \xypic or \lesssim!; 11/21/2009 5:15 PM
Tecumseh said...: The Gray Old Lady throws a few bones to the knuckledragging wolves, while staunchly defending the Lysenko Party Line:

The evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to global warming is so widely accepted that the hacked material is unlikely to erode the overall argument. However, the documents will undoubtedly raise questions about the quality of research on some specific questions and the actions of some scientists.; 11/21/2009 5:38 PM
Mr roT said...: Fake but Accurate CCVIII.; 11/21/2009 5:48 PM
Tecumseh said...: Paging Dan Rather. What's the frequency?; 11/21/2009 7:58 PM
Tecumseh said...: WaPo.; 11/22/2009 5:17 AM
Mr roT said...: The WaPo chick really is nice to there scum, isn't she? You really have to Pravda-like read between the lines to get the idea that there might be a teensy weensy bit of cause for concern that there could be some scientific fraudulets involved somewhere closeby.; 11/22/2009 8:32 AM
Tecumseh said...: You're a darn skeptic, Mr Rot. Why can't you be a wide-eyed, panting sycophant like any self-respecting pinko chick (or Pepe)?; 11/22/2009 8:37 AM
Mr roT said...: You mean " 'skeptic' " (with quotes). You see, this has all been explained in the Alzheimer-Guardian post above--in the comments.

A skeptic looks at all the data, we're told, and doubts the conclusions. A denialist is one that denies the data, and those of us that are not convinced that Halliburton is frying all the polar bears are thus denialists, not skeptics.

You see? Pepethink is fun and you can get a $25 million grant!

Seethe, hühnerscheiße!; 11/22/2009 9:36 AM
Bahrul Rozak First said...: Thanks for nice information
Don't forget to visit our site :); 1/03/2022 12:24 AM

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)