Page 1 of 1
Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:05 am
by Zebuddi123
Not 4 AGW`ists
http://www.sott.net/article/259645-Clim ... n-released
Mr FOIA releases password for Climategate (all.7z) archive
Climategate 3.0 has occurred - the password has been released
Anthony Watts
WattsUpWithThat.com
Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:12 CDT
A number of climate skeptic bloggers (myself included) have received this message yesterday. While I had planned to defer announcing this until a reasonable scan could be completed, some other bloggers have let the cat out of the bag. I provide this introductory email sent by "FOIA" without editing or comment. I do have one email, which I found quite humorous, which I will add at the end so that our friends know that this is valid. Update - the first email I posted apparently was part of an earlier release (though I had not seen it, there are a number of duplicates in the all.zip file) so I have added a second one.- Anthony
===========================================================
Subject: FOIA 2013: the password
It's time to tie up loose ends and dispel some of the speculation surrounding the Climategate affair.
Indeed, it's singular "I" this time. After certain career developments I can no longer use the papal plural
If this email seems slightly disjointed it's probably my linguistic background and the problem of trying to address both the wider audience (I expect this will be partially reproduced sooner or later) and the email recipients (whom I haven't decided yet on).
The "all.7z" password is [redacted]
DO NOT PUBLISH THE PASSWORD. Quote other parts if you like.
Releasing the encrypted archive was a mere practicality. I didn't want to keep the emails lying around.
I prepared CG1 & 2 alone. Even skimming through all 220.000 emails would have taken several more months of work in an increasingly unfavorable environment.
Zebuddi.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:05 pm
by Zach
and the point of this is......
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 10:41 pm
by Zebuddi123
for those interested as stated who dont know that the password was released and the emails unlocked !
and your point ? zach
Zebuddi.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:06 am
by SFSxOI
and the point of this is..... ?
I mean the real point of climategate.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:25 am
by Zach
All I see is some emails talking about a bunch of shit I don't really understand
So yeah... the point is?
Doesn't look like anything nefarious, not even sure why he would highlight those two emails posted on the site.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 7:05 am
by Zebuddi123
We are all being conned out of $1000000000000000000000000000000 i wont point out other facts some people might not agree dont wish to start a flame war here, as i said it was posted for those that are interested and aware of what the world goverments are doing (NWO). we are entering a dalton or maunder minimum (mini ice age) = true,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... along.html
http://www.iceagenow.info
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/category/climate/ imaginary physics of the greenhouse effect
plenty more to places to research should you wish.
zebuddi.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:01 pm
by SFSxOI
Tabloid journalism and/or subjective conspiracy, opinion, or actions is research?
news to me.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 8:17 pm
by Danilo
SFSxOI wrote:Tabloid journalism and/or subjective conspiracy, opinion, or actions is research?
I think it is a mix of all of the above. We don't know yet, and such opposite things get discussed for years
till we know more sure. Just getting warmer or suddenly turning into little ice age... nobody knows for sure, as we
don't understand the whole system yet.
It is good IMO to read about both sides without taking one as the ultimate truth. Nonetheless I think man
should not pollute air and land endlessly without thinking about it.
Even if it has no considerable effect on the whole system, we just can't breathe anymore with all the smog.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:42 am
by Zach
I think it is the height of arrogance to assume that we can even begin to understand the weather system of a planet that is 4+ billion years old; and on top of that some of us, have the audacity to claim we are the cause of a global temperature increase and it cannot possibly be a natural cycle.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:29 pm
by Zebuddi123
it`s a cycle ! the Earth has been here many times before. As programmers who here could even imagine (as a team) contemplating programming a climate modeling tool
the shear amount of variables and interactions
and claim you can predict to the year 2100
IPPC UEA et al
look up (Piers Corbyn meteorologist astrophysicist) fantastic predictions 3-4 weeks out, who uses solar, luna, magnetic & solar particles as part of his calculations, he makes the Met Office look like they are using some sort of divining rod to predict the weather.
Personally i think you only need a few good working brain cells and a bit of logic to see through the smoke screen of the TPTB as to whats happening (ie cooling planet) But as to why ?
Zebuddi.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:28 am
by El_Choni
Predicting the weather is different from predicting the climate, as weather is different from climate. Climate dynamics are not completely understood yet, but scientists have made enough research the last hundred years to be confident when they say that the climate is warming, and we are doing it.
Almost all scientists agree about this, so I don't understand very well why give any credit to non-scientists who try to disregard evidence-based statements as mere biased opinion or "just another side of the debate" (are there "two sides of the debate" to "the Earth is round"?). Scientists are not debating this any more - the debate was settled years ago.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:17 am
by Zach
It's pretty easy to claim "it has already been settled", but the fact people are still talking about it carries its own weight.
You can't compare this to something like the Earth being round. Because that is infinitely more easy to explain to the every day person and can be done not just with relatively simple math, but a freaking picture from space. Until the same can be done with the climate, and what the impact of Humans is on it, there will still be a large pool of skeptics.
I believe the climate is changing. But I also believe it has ups and downs, and the fact that our Sun is in one of its highest periods of activity I believe also has something to do with it. But I see nothing to make me truly believe that Humans are the defacto, or main driving force, behind any change. We only have several hundred years of weather data, and only a handful of people in the world who could probably legitimately extrapolate/study data from Ice Cores or things like that. That's a pretty small percentage to be decided what 6b+ people should believe.
The problem is there are too many interests at stake here. Social interests, Corporate Interests, and Political / Ideology based interests. Even turning to the Academic system does not guarantee the process is free of these influences, especially on the political end.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:49 am
by Danilo
Zach wrote:The problem is there are too many interests at stake here. Social interests, Corporate Interests, and Political / Ideology based interests. Even turning to the Academic system does not guarantee the process is free of these influences, especially on the political end.
Zebuddi123 did say it directly:
We are all being conned out of $1000000000000000000000000000000 i wont point out other facts
It is the real reason we will hear much more about this in the near future: US Americans realize now that
going green will cost them big money. It is same as with health insurance change from president Obama:
If it costs money, they don't want it. And those peoples protesting against it make big noise every time.
Money is the real underlying reason, but the noise against it always looks slightly different.
And yes, it costs a lot of money. We are already doing it here in Europe. Going green costs a lot of money
for the infrastructure, wind energy plants everywhere across the country, electricity tariff going up more and more every year.
Will go up even more when more people buy electric cars and hybrids.
I still think it is good to go green. Even if it would not be necessary for the climate and our mother earth,
than at least go green for ourselves and the other animals living with us on this planet.
You can smell and see the smog in every big town. Everybody knows it... we are doing something wrong. It's just too much pollution from too many people.
200 years ago we were 1 billion people. Now we are 7 billion already, over 9 billion predicted for the next decades.
Re: Climategate 3.0 if your interested (Not 4 AGW ist`s )
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 2:39 pm
by El_Choni
Zach wrote:It's pretty easy to claim "it has already been settled", but the fact people are still talking about it carries its own weight.
I'm afraid thousands of millions of people talking the issue to boredom wouldn't change the fact. You can't submit reality to a vote.
Don't you agree that it's the experts opinion the one that matters when we are talking about Physics?
Zach wrote:You can't compare this to something like the Earth being round. Because that is infinitely more easy to explain to the every day person and can be done not just with relatively simple math, but a freaking picture from space. Until the same can be done with the climate, and what the impact of Humans is on it, there will still be a large pool of skeptics.
I could defend the analogy and carry it further, but it's not my intention to caricaturize the so called climate 'skeptics' as flatearthers, so I think I'll leave it there.
Zach wrote:I believe the climate is changing. But I also believe it has ups and downs, and the fact that our Sun is in one of its highest periods of activity I believe also has something to do with it. But I see nothing to make me truly believe that Humans are the defacto, or main driving force, behind any change.
It's not a matter of faith or beliefs.
Zach wrote:We only have several hundred years of weather data, and only a handful of people in the world who could probably legitimately extrapolate/study data from Ice Cores or things like that. That's a pretty small percentage to be decided what 6b+ people should believe.
Do you really think faith can swipe away scientific evidence, just like that?
Zach wrote:The problem is there are too many interests at stake here. Social interests, Corporate Interests, and Political / Ideology based interests. Even turning to the Academic system does not guarantee the process is free of these influences, especially on the political end.
I think the problem is that some governments are being too slow in taking action to counteract global warming and greenhouse gases build up, and they're being slow because, as you say, there are corporate interests which have been lobbying the last 20 years or so to avoid urgent action to be taken -mainly, stop burning carbon and oil-. They're winning and we are all losing.