Has your opinion of global warming been changed by the climate gate scandal?

I'll likely get voted down, but oh well.

There was no 'climate-gate' except that tiny except, a few emails, which was torn screaming out of an overwhelming avalanche of data on the subject. The idea of Global Warming has been around for a long time, decades even. The idea that we're burning so much fuel and it having no effect whatsoever is absurd. The idea that this is 100% made up is boggling to me.

Why would anyone make this stuff up? To what purpose?

The only people who are making money off the idea of global warming are people who are conserving energy for future use. They are inventing and perfecting technology that reduced our dependence on purchasing oil from other countries. Heck, even they aren't making much money, as money put into research doesn't always turn around an make a profit.

So, tell me, who exactly is making all this money off Global Warming?

Everyone benefits from advances in technology that reduces greenhouse emissions. Solar farms reduce the amount of coal we have to burn. Houses and energy plants that are more energy efficient reduce YOUR energy bill. Or maybe we should just do away with insulation in houses altogether and depend entirely on the energy company to keep your home warm, I'm sure they'd prefer to charge you more.

Not at all.

It has been blindingly apparent since 1998 that the model does not work.

I have, however, had one question answered. It is possible to make an overwhelming case for reducing and eventually eliminating the use of fossil fuels, without ever mentioning global warming. Why, then, have the anthropogenic global warming enthusiasts not simply made that case instead of inviting opposition by hanging the whole thing on man-made global warming? We now know. Those behind it have placed "being perceived as right" ahead of accomplishing their stated goals.

Shame on them.

follow the money.. that is all you need this whole thing has and always will be about the money

Started with a Russian scientist trying to get money for his research on tree rings. and the rest as they say is history... it took on a life of its own based on bad data.

Scandals don't change science.

As an environmental scientist, my colleagues and I have been aware for some time about the bad smell coming from the CRU, now we know the exact cause.

Although it has had less publicity, I think that, by far, the most serious problem revealed is the corruption of the peer review process, because its function is to keep science honest, open and accurate.

not really,they only confirmed what we skeptics have been saying the past 3 or 4 years on this site( tree ring data is not an accurate temperature proxy etc.) and that top climate scientists were well aware of this & were manipulating & suppressing data to hide it or just plain lieing about it publicly.

the warmers are only following their instructions & repeating whatever dogma the global warming propaganda machine presents them with, so we will never know what they actually think privately.

so don't expect anything to change.

It has made it abundantly clear that the 'skeptics' are denialists with absolutely no interest in science. They engaged in malicious quote mining and other tactics that are the stable of all denialists movements.

Yes.... I went from being skeptical to being Very Skeptical.

What does it tell you about those who only worry that the fraud was revealed. Dana, Pegminer, Bob and Benjamin should feel shame for pretending that the probem is from the whistleblowers. These clowns were manipulating and hiding data that they were using to make conclusions and recommendations that might involve trillions of dollars. I realize that it doesn't matter too much to those that might benefit from some of those trillions but to the rest of us that may get it consfiscated, it matters. The emails were not personal. They get 80 per cent of their money from taxpayers. There was not one email to a girlfriend, not one to a spouse. Many were to other researchers telling them to delete their emails, to collude, to suppress. I realize that their side has to depend on this sort of thing. They cannot depend on a fair review of data. They cannot allow the light of day to see their ridiculous theories that CO2 is causing significant or harmful warming. Their little doomsday cult and careers would fall apart like a house of cards.

Yes, I've come to realize how desperate and morally bankrupt the denial side is.

EDIT: I don't consider computer hackers to be "whistle-blowers." Do you realize why it's only deniers and blogs that are still going on about "climategate"? It's because major news organizations and scientific organizations undertook their own thorough studies where they actually tried to UNDERSTAND the emails, and found no fraud or data falsification. Deniers are still going on about the same 5 or 6 emails that they take out of context, but have showed us no proof of anything except that Stephen McIntyre can be very annoying and apparently is more interested in demanding data than doing anything with it once he gets it. Perhaps he should go back to his job in the oil and gas industry....or perhaps he never left it.