• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

ClimateGate - A great new Website

a_unique_person said:
The meanings are completely different. The first 'quote' implies the scientists will manufacture a disaster, the other is an observation on human nature. It's true, people will usually not change their behaviour until they have no choice. That's certainly the case now. I have no idea what Al Gore has to do with the topic. You really need to get a grip.
Click to expand...

'Announce' is nowhere near the same as 'manufacture'.. In my opinion, the two quotes (the fake one and the real one) are very close cousins with a similar vibe. Sure, they're not completely analog, but they're basically saying the same thing: The public won't listen unless there's a fear of disasters.
 
mythstifieD said:
Sure, they're not completely analog, but they're basically saying the same thing: The public won't listen unless there's a fear of disasters.
Click to expand...


They won't.

ETA: Come to think of it, if it wasn't affecting their bottom line, I expect conservatives would have declared a war on global warming by now and demanded to know why Obama wasn't trying harder to hunt down the Heat Miser and waterboard him.
 
Last edited:
mhaze said:
You didn't say "Pretty Please".:)
Click to expand...
Let's conclude:
Mhaze presented a false quote; was caught doing it; throws out more quotes as if he expects to be taken seriously while being too lazy to present the primary source that took me 5 minutes to find and is now apparently too cowardly to present said quotes.

I'm actually not surprised at all.
 
a_unique_person said:
The meanings are completely different. The first 'quote' implies the scientists will manufacture a disaster, the other is an observation on human nature....
Click to expand...
Scientists will mft a disaster?

I don't see it that way.

More like an explicit encouragement of media sensationalism.
 
mhaze said:
Scientists will mft a disaster?

I don't see it that way.

More like an explicit encouragement of media sensationalism.
Click to expand...
Really? Do you have any actual evidence of this? Any at all would be really nice. Pretty please?
 
No amount of weaseling will make those quotes equivalent, mhaze.

You called the man a liar while lying about his words. It's priceless :D

Just admit it, move on, and try not to use the same fabricated quote here. I'm sure the kind of liars you associate with will provide you with other fabricated quotes to use...
 
mhaze said:
Scientists will mft a disaster?

I don't see it that way.

More like an explicit encouragement of media sensationalism.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for the quote you presented, or do you agree that the quote you presented is inaccurate?
 
Do we really need to pretend that the situation isn't made worse than it really is?

Didn't the Schneider quote show that rather well?

This has nothing to do with AGW being real or not, but with people like Al Gore making outrageous statements that hurt the actual science.
 
Tomblvd said:
This has nothing to do with AGW being real or not, but with people like Al Gore making outrageous statements that hurt the actual science.
Click to expand...

If you want to discuss Al Gore perhaps you should start a thread in the politics forum. For the record, however, Gores statements hold up quite well when compared to the actual science.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/05/al-gores-movie/

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/the-lag-between-temp-and-co2/

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/10/convenient-untruths/
 
No, I don't want to discuss Al Gore. Nor do I have any desire to defend him. I want to point out that many on the AGW side of things have made the task of convincing the public very difficult by purposely misstating and inflating the facts.

These people need to be weeded out and the science needs a fresh and transparent review.

That's all I ask.
 
Tomblvd said:
No, I don't want to discuss Al Gore. Nor do I have any desire to defend him. I want to point out that many on the AGW side of things have made the task of convincing the public very difficult by purposely misstating and inflating the facts.

These people need to be weeded out and the science needs a fresh and transparent review.

That's all I ask.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is a problem with the idea that "science is settled" thence "urgent action now" thence "convince the public" thence "lying and exaggerating is okay".

The problem with the construction A to B to C to D is that A is false, B is false, C is false, and D is false and morally reprehensible. Seems like things might be straightening out a bit in 2010 though.
 
mhaze said:
On that one, Megalodon, the spin is settled.
Click to expand...

Of course it is... You presented a fabricated quote and, when confronted with it, claimed that black was white and moved on.

I am used to your shameless dishonesty, but it is always good that newer posters get to see it first hand :)
 
Tomblvd said:
No, I don't want to discuss Al Gore. Nor do I have any desire to defend him. I want to point out that many on the AGW side of things have made the task of convincing the public very difficult by purposely misstating and inflating the facts.
Click to expand...

The problem I have is that you want us to assume he has misstated facts without any evidence to back up your claim. You are asking us to accept a political claim at face value with no supporting evidence. This despite me already having provided links to working climate scientists saying he was reasonably accurate in his representation of the facts.
 
The only issue with Al Gore is that although he meant well, for some reason undecipherable to me the batcrap-crazy wing of the Right here in the USA hates him more than they ever hated Stalin.

So, automatically. anything he says becomes false and anything he does becomes a dastardly plot to destroy civilization.

Therefore his advocacy of this issue polarized these insane right-wingers against AGW for all time.

And that is what you will find; With the exception of some AGW-deniers who are batcrap-insane far left Communists (very very few in number) almost the entire balance of AGW deniers are on the far, far Right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom