climategateFollow

Isn't the Telegraph a notorious rag in the UK? I could be wrong, of course...

I do. Though oddly enough, I imagine you don't approve of NPR.

Meh.

Out of something like 1,000 e-mails and 3,000 documents (I don't know where the column author got his much smaller numbers), they came up with less than a half dozen quips in a 13 year period -- most of which are out of context (the 'travesty' remark is complaining about the lack of tracking in some regions and the need for a larger network), scientifically irrelevant ("that guy's a jerk") or frankly not that shocking. Yay?

I have to admit, I'm torn on the global warming thing. I believe that everyone should try to go more green, if not for global warming, then for the simple fact that a lot of what we've dumped into the ground and sky is killing our planet. And it seems like I've heard so much information going both ways - "yes the planet is warming" "no, we've noticed no warming in the last XX years". I guess at this point, I'm not really that upset by it. But I recycle, I try and conserve energy and water when I can, and when I'm able, I'm going to get a more fuel efficient car. But I've always been this way, even back when it wasn't cool. But I was never country

He also writes glowing articles about his books and then puts quotes from his article on the book as 'critical acclaim' from the news organization.

I found that pretty funny.

I saw this a few days ago and came up with pretty much the same conclusion as Jophiel: so out of over a decade of evidence and thousands of private messages, there were a dozen or so snippets (mostly taken out of context) that express doubt about climate change?

Does that mean that 99.5% of the evidence was FOR climate change? Oh yeah, now I'm convinced.

It's the same mindset you have in Six Day Creationists. You take a massive body of scientific work involving tens of thousands of data points and then say "Piltdown Man was a hoax! This early equus fossil was found deeper than eohippus and is larger than it! You can't explain why! Evolution is a fraud!" and then, from there, make the jump to "Since I have proven evolution wrong, my ideas are the correct ones!"

Come to think of it, this is the same mindset you get from 9/11 "Truthers" as well. "You can't explain why this toilet isn't melted so that means the government is lying and covering up the whole event!"

Doesn't matter if you believe in climate change or whatever, consumption habits can in fact save the planet. If you consume more than what you give back to the environment you are destroying it, specially when you take that one person's bad habits and multiply it for a whole city, country, etc. In some cases nature can and does make up that difference but you keep growing a population and it'll start to deplete faster than it recovers. If you put enough holes in a bucket it eventually won't hold any water at all. Doesn't matter if you ignore it or not.

I lol'd.

I new that.

The contention was never over whether there was an effect, but whether that effect was significant. We're not going to ban jump rope just because it shifts the earth's orbit.

Hell, even if you ignore any environmental damage we're doing, it'd be better if we learned to do as much as we can with as few resources as possible to prolong the amount of time we have them. You never know when an emergency will hit and we'll be wishing we had more of some resource.