Climate Depot: Everything You Need To Know About 'ClimateGate'

[abelenkpe]

Climate Depot: Everything You Need To Know About 'ClimateGate'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/20/climate-depot-everything_n_365754.html


A group of hackers recently broke into the email system at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU), one of the leading climate research centers in the world.

The emails have been leaked to the public, and are being touted by global warming deniers, including the website Climate Depot, as evidence of an alarmist global warming conspiracy.

Climate Depot is an anti-global-warming website, which promotes skepticism and disbelief about the realities of climate change. The website is similar in format to The Drudge Report, and has a particular focus on criticizing former Vice President Al Gore.

(more at link)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ugh. This stuff is all over the idiot-(R)-wing blogosphere.
What do you all think about it?
Anyone have any good detailed links to counter this global warming conspiracy madness? any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

[droidamus2]

1. All you need to know

They are rightwingers and they are compulsive liars. What else do you need to know?

[Birthmark]

2. Link:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/

Tempest in a teapot. The denialists have squat. They took some out of context quotes (as usual) and hyped them beyond reality (as usual.)

Sucks to be them.

[abelenkpe]

3. Economic boards

are going nutzo over this buying into the hype claiming the whole global warming/climate change thing is a conspiracy to enrich Al Gore and Goldman Sachs. I'm afraid we're going to hear a lot more of this kind of stuff as the debate over cap and trade begins in congress.

I just don't understand how people can look at receding glaciers and claim that climate change is fiction.

Or read that and see proof there is some sort of conspiracy.

Has the world gone completely insane?

[Birthmark]

5. It's been insane.

And they've been claiming it was a hoax for years, now, so nothing has changed really. Scientists will keep doing what they're doing. Politicians may use this nonsense to waffle on doing anything to stop AGW...but I've never believed that they were up to the challenge of AGW, anyway.

I'm already making plans to improve the chances of survival for descendants. Actually, it's kind of fun if you don't think too hard about those who *aren't* planning.

[Bonhomme Richard]

4. Yes. Global warming is a giant conspiracy that 90% of scientist

have joined, secret handshake and all, run by the Rothchilds.

[renegade000]

6. what i really don't understand

Is how this proves a global conspiracy of scientists. At worst (and it's hard to prove even this much without much more information and experience in the field), it proves that there was unethical behavior at ONE research lab. Surely the whole theory of anthropogenic global warming was not solely developed and validated at East Anglia's CRU. Scientific research is usually way more decentralized than that. Research groups from the entire world validate and build of each other's research. Unless there are hundreds of emails detailing how all the climate research groups are taking marching orders from a single source...I don't think it means what some people want to think it means.

What I also don't get is what the motivation would be for scientists to conspire to lie about the matter. Scientists aren't exactly rich, they wouldn't have much money to put on a horse in this race. They have WAY less to gain from being right than others have if they were wrong. The only tangible things that would sway a scientist to fudge results is the potential fame and prestige that comes with being a vocal advocate for a particular viewpoint. However, this would work both ways. If the evidence that anthropogenic climate change is false was really there in plain sight (as it supposedly had to be fudged to yield the opposite conclusion), why hasn't this brought up within the climatology community? Surely the climate scientist to present what should be the (supposedly) obvious conclusion would be lauded as an intellectual hero. In this sense, isn't it more surprising that there aren't MORE legitimate, climate scientists that dispute anthropogenic global warming?

[spanone]

7. they can deny it till they're dead for all i care....deny on stupid mo fo's

[abelenkpe]

9. This reminds me

of the whole birther conspiracy in it's outright nuttiness.

[SpiralHawk]

8. The pudding will arrive soon, and we will have proof beyond measure

Lots of reputable scientists have said the real consequences of global climate chaos will arrive on the scene after 2009. For my money, there is plenty of direct evidence already, but things are likely to get a lot uglier in short order. Not that reality will convince any republicons.