Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old 20-01-2010, 11:02 PM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

From the ABC.....

The IPCC co-won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for bringing climate change
to the world's attention through a reputation for rigour, caution and
fact-checking.

Under this process, data are peer reviewed by other scientists and are
then meant to be double-checked by editors.

Well it seems that didnt happen. In their hurry to doom the world, they
published figures which suited those "ecology industrialists" (and the
term is used loosely)
Which means to me, no one is above checking, when they become the
specialists in anything.
Which reminds me of something : Corruption will always creep in when it
becomes the sole source of information. Simply because if you can have
something beyond question, then you have absolute power.
The problem is, weather has always been variable, so its easy to get the
figures wrong of fudge them. Its even harder to disprove those who say
Global warming is happening, when someone like the authority IPCC makes
a statement on Global warming. Who are we to disprove them? This is what
makes their science so dangerous... The people who made these mistakes
were either genuinely wrong, or did this deliberately. I suspect the
latter due to the billions at stake. Follow the money trail....It works
for me...


Public attack

*_In an exceptional move, the lapses came under public attack from four
prominent glaciologists and hydrologists in a letter to prestigious US
journal Science._*

They said the paragraph's mistakes derived from a report by
environmental group WWF, which picked up a news report based on an
unpublished study, compounded by the accidental inversion of a date -
2035 instead of 2350 - in a Russian paper published in 1996.

"These errors could have been avoided had the norms of scientific
publication, including peer review and concentration upon peer-reviewed
work, been respected," according to the letter, which Science released
on Wednesday, two days ahead of scheduled publication.

One of the letter's authors was Austrian specialist Georg Kaser, who
contributed to a different section of the 2007 report.

*_He said the mistake was enormous and that he had notified IPCC
colleagues of it months before publication._*

_*Despite the controversy, the IPCC stood by the overall conclusions
about glacier loss this century in major mountain ranges, including the
Himalayas.*_

The report concluded that "widespread mass losses from glaciers and
reductions in snow cover over recent decades are projected to accelerate
throughout the 21st century."

IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri defended the panel's overall work, a
position shared by other scientists, who say the core conclusions about
climate change are incontrovertible.

"Theoretically, let's say we slipped up on one number, I don't think it
takes anything away from the overwhelming scientific evidence of what's
happening with the climate of this Earth," Pachauri said.

Sceptics have already attacked the panel over so-called "Climategate,"
entailing stolen email exchanges among IPCC experts which they say
reflected attempts to skew the evidence for global warming.

The row came as the UN panel began the marathon process of drafting its
Fifth Assessment Reports, inviting scientists to lead its work.

The reports, due out in 2013 and 2014, will focus on sea level changes,
the influence of periodic climate patterns like the monsoon season and
El Nino, and forging a more precise picture of the regional effects of
climate change.

I guess with their normal form this means that this will give them time
to put some more "spin" on their project, and we will all have to put
our thermometers
near our heaters to allow proper temperatures to be measured....
Benny Hill said, "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me...."
I assumed they were right too...till other factors started to crop up....
Others are a bit slower.... I hope the IPCC are wrong in this instance.
Time will tell if the climate can be changed, but I feel its out off our
hands.
Its also time to assess what can be done to the enormous damage logging
companies, airlines, cars are doing to our climate, and it should fall
on those who export, and import needlessly.
Why can you buy goods grown thousands of miles away when the local
product is no different?
Price control would be a good start.
Stop large retail organisations who sell foods, from short changing out
local growers for a start.
There are probably other things that should be looked at....
Think globally, do locally....

  #2   Report Post  
Old 20-01-2010, 11:39 PM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,036
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?


I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement with the
issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot decide if you are a
troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine frootloop. I can decide to stop
wasting time on you. Decision made. Bay at the moon all you like.

David

  #3   Report Post  
Old 21-01-2010, 01:34 AM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

Its obvious you are the one.
You're so intellectually gifted.
Yet you cant get it all together yourself.
Baying at the moon has some finer qualities.
When something obviously is fishy, don't you check this all out ? I may
have a better sense of smell.
As a Technician I certainly do.
And you appears to take the word of scientists when in the past, due to
heinous mistakes they made you still side with them, is something akin
to Sun worship to me.
Discrediting me at all points when you yourself know damn well there are
lots of issues with this Global Warming Theory being man made or by itself.

Only a damn fool wouldnt ask questions, and when the scientists
themselves are asking questions, you take sides.
Are you sure you're the same David Hare Scott who is so smart that he
can ignore all the hoo haa that's developed lately.
You cant make nature bend your will
Can you admit they've got something to worry about and its not
financially motivated.
Of course you cant...
Seeing you suggested it, if I bay at the moon, and I'm sure to get a
reply from you.....Doing the same.

End of reply to a goofball You did seem intelligent at one time.


On 21/01/2010 9:39 AM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement
with the issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot decide
if you are a troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine frootloop. I
can decide to stop wasting time on you. Decision made. Bay at the
moon all you like.

David


--
  #4   Report Post  
Old 21-01-2010, 07:02 AM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

Its obvious you are the one.
You're so intellectually gifted.
Yet you cant get it all together yourself.
Baying at the moon has some fine qualities, compared to your attitude.
When something obviously is fishy, don't you check this out ? It may be
have a better sense of smell when something smells off..
As a Technician I certainly do.
And you appear to take the word of scientists, when in the past, due to
heinous mistakes they made, you still side with them, which is something
akin to Sun worship to me.
Discrediting me at all points when you yourself know damn well there are
lots of issues with this Global Warming Theory either being man made or
happening by itself.
So why the tax before the issues are fully known. Why did our prime
minister want an open cheque when going to Copenhagen?
I am sorry I voted for him.....at this point. Maybe he will explain
fully one day...
Only a damn fool wouldnt ask questions, and yet when the scientists
themselves are asking questions, you take sides.

It seems first theory, first accepted!
Are you sure you're the same David Hare Scott who is so smart that he
can ignore all the hoo haa that's developed lately?
You cant make nature bend your will
Can you admit they've got something to worry about and its not
financially motivated?
Of course you cant...
Seeing you suggested it, if I bay at the moon, and I'm sure to get a
reply from you.....Doing the same.

End of reply to a goofball! You did seem intelligent at one time.

It appears these guys who got a Nobel Peace prize for checking turned
around and forgot to check their facts....
Its in the News,b ut you ignored that.
Cant stand getting it wrong, so you leave off.

  #5   Report Post  
Old 21-01-2010, 03:30 PM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,358
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement with
the issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot decide if you
are a troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine frootloop. I can decide to
stop wasting time on you. Decision made. Bay at the moon all you like.


I've been wondering how long it'd take you before you came to that decision.
I'm glad you did.




  #6   Report Post  
Old 21-01-2010, 07:51 PM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

/Never argue/ with an idiot; people watching might not be able to tell
the difference. *...*

On 21/01/2010 9:39 AM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement
with the issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot decide
if you are a troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine frootloop. I
can decide to stop wasting time on you. Decision made. Bay at the
moon all you like.

David


--
  #7   Report Post  
Old 21-01-2010, 09:44 PM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,036
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

FarmI wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement
with the issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot
decide if you are a troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine
frootloop. I can decide to stop wasting time on you. Decision
made. Bay at the moon all you like.


I've been wondering how long it'd take you before you came to that
decision. I'm glad you did.


I have had my doubts about the value of responding for some time but didn't
want to let some of the absurd claims go unchallenged.

David

  #8   Report Post  
Old 22-01-2010, 12:41 AM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?



On 22/01/2010 1:30 AM, FarmI wrote:
"David wrote in message
...

I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement with
the issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot decide if you
are a troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine frootloop. I can decide to
stop wasting time on you. Decision made. Bay at the moon all you like.

I've been wondering how long it'd take you before you came to that decision.
I'm glad you did.



I was wondering that myself. He couldn't really think he's win in this
situation did he?
A lie will travel the world long before the facts are known.
I wonder how long it will be before they find other "unintentional"
mistakes.
It seems like some accept what the government feeds you on all levels.
Whether there is political interference or not. Not good enough fellers....

--
  #9   Report Post  
Old 22-01-2010, 01:07 AM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

Dont reply to me. Just read this history.
It may come as arevelation.
Stop being argumentative by asking me, the last person to ask.Ask the
scientists.
I just put this stuff in front of you.
You believe what you like....
It may seem truthful to you I dont know.


http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemans.../38574742.html


  #10   Report Post  
Old 22-01-2010, 06:56 AM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

Never argue with an idiot; people watching might not be able to tell the
difference. between you and the other...

On 22/01/2010 7:44 AM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
FarmI wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement
with the issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot
decide if you are a troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine
frootloop. I can decide to stop wasting time on you. Decision
made. Bay at the moon all you like.


I've been wondering how long it'd take you before you came to that
decision. I'm glad you did.


I have had my doubts about the value of responding for some time but
didn't want to let some of the absurd claims go unchallenged.

David


--


  #11   Report Post  
Old 22-01-2010, 08:38 AM posted to aus.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,358
Default Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking?

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
FarmI wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

I have tried treating you seriously and all I get is disengagement
with the issues and loony tunes conspiracy theories. I cannot
decide if you are a troll who is pulling my leg or a genuine
frootloop. I can decide to stop wasting time on you. Decision
made. Bay at the moon all you like.


I've been wondering how long it'd take you before you came to that
decision. I'm glad you did.


I have had my doubts about the value of responding for some time but
didn't want to let some of the absurd claims go unchallenged.


I can certainly understand that desire, but sometimes life is just too
short. There needs to be some possibility of enlightenment.




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nobel prize for caution and fact-checking? Jonno[_22_] Australia 0 20-01-2010 11:14 PM
dendrobium nobel picture ilaboo Orchids 3 22-07-2004 08:20 PM
Yahoo Fact Checking Stinks BenignVanilla Ponds 1 20-07-2004 07:02 AM
dendrobium nobel picture ilaboo Orchids 4 18-07-2004 10:03 PM
Yahoo Fact Checking Stinks BenignVanilla Ponds 2 15-07-2004 12:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:35 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017