Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Danzig
do you mean like scientists who have come out and shown they don't necessarily believe in this science? that they have other, dissimilar info that these scientists then attacked? that they don't agree, that not all scientists back the u.n. findings that were supported with tricks? these same guys who destroyed data, deleted FOI requested info that is illegal to get rid of once there has been an FOI request? why do i need a scientist to tell me that these guys have some shady dealings to explain? much of the original data is GONE, destroyed by these folks. gone forever, with no way of ever going back and redoing what they did. in other words, no split sample.
|
Yes there are scientists that "don't believe" in climate change (although science isn't a belief system, and there are scientists who don't believe the earth is older than 10,000 years, either). Over the past 20-30 years, their number have dwindled as more information was obtained. They are clearly a minority opinion.
The guys are undeniably shady. I hope their Universities investigate them. The question is how relative is this to the validity of the rest of the body of knowledge in this field. It's a pretty huge field. Hundreds of scientists across the world, many countries. A right-wing blogger isn't who I would listen to regarding this.
The "original data is GONE" - from these guys, yes some data. Not all the original data about everything about climate change that's ever been done.
We will have to hope that Fox News and the Telegraph are the Woodward and Berstein of Climategate.