Saturday, November 21, 2009

Hacked emails add fuel to climate dispute

 Here’s more fuel for the “global warming” debate. Frankly I don’t know who to believe anymore. One scientist says there is global warming and another says there isn’t.

 What is a lay person, such as myself, suppose to do with this conflicting information?

Hackers steal, release electronic data from top climate research center

“Hackers broke into the electronic files of one of the world's foremost climate research centers this week and posted an array of e-mails in which prominent scientists engaged in a blunt discussion of global warming research and disparaged climate-change skeptics.”

Go to this Washington Post article via MSNBC

1 comment:

Tom Sebourn said...

Dave, I don't know who to believe either sometimes. I did see this though and it makes some good arguments.
Here's part of the article.

The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, National Public Radio, Washington Times, and other news outlets are participating in this Swiftboat-style smear campaign, following the lead of actual Swiftboat smearer and former Limbaugh and Inhofe employee Marc Morano — instead of bothering to understand what the scientists were actually talking about in the hacked emails.

However, as climate scientist Richard Somerville explained yesterday, “The ice has no agenda.” Arctic sea ice is at historically low levels, Australia is on fire, the northern United Kingdom is underwater, the world’s glaciers are disappearing, and half of the United States has been declared an agricultural disaster area. And it’s the the hottest decade in recorded history.

By asking whether “we have to stop burning fossil fuel tomorrow,” Dubner — a top blogger for the New York Times — gets to the heart of why this bizarre theory of a cabal of all-powerful climatologists is getting support from conservative media and politicians. The incontrovertible science — based not on manipulated data but on decades of basic research — is that the burning of fossil fuels is drastically reshaping our planet’s climate and acidifying the oceans. And the only known way to restore conditions to those safe for human civilization is to dramatically reduce the use of fossil fuels. Doing so, however, would affect the incredible profits and power of the oil and coal industries, and of their ideological allies.

In fact, if we stop treating our atmosphere like a sewer, the climate system will heal itself over time, potentially more rapidly than we expect. That our past inaction will continue to bear consequences into the future is a reason to act with greater swiftness, not to dither further. The longer we delay, the more difficult and expensive the challenge to reduce pollution while adapting to a hostile world becomes.

What a 96 Year Old Judge Learned from Trump When She Was 'Sidelined' By Peers

There's a judge on the Federal Circuit appeals court who is 96 years old  and she's fighting mad that her colleagues think she'...