Is the climate gate community in denial? Are alarmists the real deniers?

Yes they are the real deniers, and have been all along.

"climate gate community"? Wouldn't that be people who called the hacked e-mails 'Climate Gate'?

If so, then yes.

Are alarmists in denial? No.

I should qualify that... I'm not an alarmist. Not many people on here are what I would consider alarmist. I also don't see any Climate Change Realists denying any of the found mistakes in the IPCC reports, such as the Himalayan glacier issue. That in itself should tell you that they are not in denial.

The article is well written on scanning it, but not worth reading all the way through. It obviously biased, but written to seem unbiased.

_

It neglected to mention that the supposed "body blows dealt to the evidence" didn't negate the evidence. Wasn't the whole so-called "climate gate" affair only relevant to paleoclimate data anyway (not relevant to the global evidance of recent and current warming)?

Then this statement about Inhofe...

"In a sign of how dramatic the reversal of fortune has been for the climate campaign, it is now James Inhofe, the leading climate skeptic in the Senate, who is eager to have Gore testify before Congress."

Gee... amazing what over $500,000.00 in "campaign contribution" payoffs will buy in Congress... a "skeptical" congressman. And some false drama to point to in an overdramatic article that's all fluff, no content.

There was nothing of substance in the first page, in fact, if you read it carefully they're very carefull not to make any claims that any evidence has surfaced that climate change is not happening, so I didn't bother continuing. It's just more propaganda intended for consumption by the easily led, who will not discern the careful weasel wording that implies issues with climate change science without ever coming out and revealing a single point of fact. It basically amounts to, "Rah, rah, go denial!' I need to go back and see if Sarah Palin authored it.

Interesting article, not very objective!

It's funny in a way, it is almost like the two are changing places, with the alarmists become deniers and the deniers becoming alarmists.

I say just give me the facts and leave out all the window dressing about the poor polar bears and the conspiratorial communists.

All climate gate did was show personal and private communication between different parties. When a conversation is private quite often things are said that are not meant or things are said where both parties will know the meaning while outside parties will not. I'm sure if anyone listened into any of your conversations. That being said, many of the items that were spoken about were cherry picked and misread or misinterpretted by the general media. Things were also said about keeping several parts out of the media dealing with climate change that in the end weren't. Anti-AGWers merely use what was said not what was meant or what actually occurred.

You can only believe that if you are scientifically illiterate and have accepted ignorance as your chosen lifestyle or if you are an anti-science political wanker.

I agree they are denial and they get answers removed they don't like here. lol. The alarmists are the real deniers. you are totally correct.

Excellent article and really clearly gives valid points against what the IPCC is peddling.

"climate-gate" exposed misconduct among some of the scientists. It didn't negate the evidence.

Climategate exposed the manipulation of the data. It didn't change the evidentiary balance, but that's because the data that they had didn't prove man-made warming.

Their betting you can't think for yourself. Gives them edge, being most people accept regimented doctrine more readily than freedom or conscious thought. They don't even believe their own crap, now they want to sell you an extended warranty.