GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE - Emails from UK's CRU show the conspiracy and the lie are you ready to pollute freely?

**********************************************

Which of the following did it change?

* Greenhouse gases properties of CO2

* Amount of CO2 emitted

* Temperature records

* Expected temperature trends

* Relation between temperature and greenhouse gases concentrations

* Accuracy and range given by computer models

* Anthropogenic origin of CO2 emissions

* Scientific papers from other major scientific institutions

**************************************************************

Well, it certainly appears to bring into question the HadCRUT temperature records. Plus, this suspicion is on top of the fact that CRU has refused to release their raw temperature data.

This has a ripple effect because now we can say yes to a few other items on your list since they depended on this temperature data.

***************************************************************

Question: If I were to hack the computers from Exxon and show they have an agenda, would that apply for ALL oil companies?

***************************************************************

This is a bad analogy, you don't even give an issue or agenda for context. But remember, Hadley and CRU (and GISS) are the IPCC. These scientists are IPCC authors. They are peer reviewers of important IPCC science. There are no other "climate companies". They have the monopoly.

I suppose in worldwide warming. I'm now not a scare monger, however am an environmentalist. Whether you suppose it worldwide warming or now not, this is a debate with a view to have proof each aiding it and disproving it. This dilemma is complicated and on a worldwide scale with a view to have proof that can take many years and even centuries to seem. To say it ought to be a lie centered on a couple of remoted standards is opposite to medical process. Rather taking inventory a mess of informational assets each for and in opposition to worldwide warming to come to a decision which conclusions are fair or now not is how I process the talk. I additionally am unconcerned with the political nature of the talk. It is beside the point what Gore, Clinton, or Bush say or do. Whether Gore created the Internet or now not is beside the point to worldwide warming. A lot of why I suppose worldwide warming is taking situation has to do with the affects mankind as a entire has performed on this planet from the final ice age. Nearly all human events from the Industrial Revolution to present instances, calls for power. It could also be electrical, mechanical, chemical, or something. These power assets (be it via combustion, response, or refinement) emit gases. Greenhouse fuel (GHG) emissions equivalent to carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides were growing on a worldwide scale (maybe exponentially, because of human populace development). Global GHG sinks have additionally been lowering. I could not say whether or not or now not a 33% develop in atmospheric CO2 concentrations can rationale a shift within the CO2 cycle and for this reason a floor temp develop over the years. I will say the the growing human pastime is impacting the atmosphere. The US EPA and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) each have valuable expertise at the matter. While those firms can have an curiosity in advertising hype for worldwide warming, they're way more reliable than the participants to this discussion board (myself incorporated). Stick to the talk handy and sort your ideals on reliable informational assets.

Prosperity is not achieved by going out and polluting the planet. The current lifestyles that the Western World has are totally unsustainable, whether or not Global Warming is a farce. If you don't like to believe in Global Warming, then please believe in the fact that Oil will soon run out entirely... then go tell people to "go out [and] use your boat".

Dear angry Texan,

Which of the following did it change?

* Greenhouse gases properties of CO2

* Amount of CO2 emitted

* Temperature records

* Expected temperature trends

* Relation between temperature and greenhouse gases concentrations

* Accuracy and range given by computer models

* Anthropogenic origin of CO2 emissions

* Scientific papers from other major scientific institutions

Question: If I were to hack the computers from Exxon and show they have an agenda, would that apply for ALL oil companies?

notice how the libs always attact big oil, I say THANK GOD for big oil,I wish they were even bigger,we need to DRILL now, more natural gas to, notice how they continue the montra,its been the hottest decade ever,then they show those totally unbiased reports from realscience, or nasa giss,both run by ultra liberals,and of course don't forget the highly esteemed M Mann aka Hockeystick, and don't forget God himself,the one and only Algore who is from now on known as AirbrushAL

Liberals are strange. Clearly "Global Warming" is an emotional and political issue, and has nothing to do with science.

So why not just say we should do what we can to reduce co2 like build more nuclear reactors instead of lying to the public by saying you're killing polar bears because you use a standard 60 watt light bulb?

Why do you have to lie? Is this the only way you think people will listen to you?

Why the misinformation, manufacturing of data, frightening children and the lies?

YOU NEED MENTAL HELP - if you believe anything you wrote!

The sane were already aware of this fact