The publicly posted material includes years of correspondence among leading climate researchers, most of whom participate in the preparation of climate-change reports for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the authoritative summaries of global climate science that influence policy makers around the world.
A partial review of the emails shows that in many cases, climate scientists revealed that their own research wasn't always conclusive. In others, they discussed ways to paper over differences among themselves in order to present a "unified" view on climate change. On at least one occasion, climate scientists were asked to "beef up" conclusions about climate change and extreme weather events because environmental officials in one country were planning a "big public splash."
Fellow scientists who disagreed with orthodox views on climate change were variously referred to as "prats" and "utter prats." In other exchanges, one climate researcher said he was "very tempted" to "beat the crap out of" a prominent, skeptical U.S. climate scientist.
In several of the emails, climate researchers discussed how to arrange for favorable reviewers for papers they planned to publish in scientific journals. At the same time, climate researchers at times appeared to pressure scientific journals not to publish research by other scientists whose findings they disagreed with.
2. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 22,2009 @ 7:02AM
Ratings:-17+25
Will Al Gore's disciples admit their foolishness and blind faith? Or are they so committed to their religion that American White Males are killing the earth that they refuse the facts?
In 2007, a British High Court judge ruled that Al Gore's global warming film contained nine significant errors and should no longer be screened in schools unless accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views.
3. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 22,2009 @ 7:13AM
Ratings:-17+25
When the name of the crisis was changed to 'Climate Change', it really should have been renamed Global Liberal Fool Crisis.
"I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report," Jones writes. "Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
In another, Jones and Mann discuss how they can pressure an academic journal not to accept the work of climate skeptics with whom they disagree. "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal," Mann writes.
4. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 22,2009 @ 7:20AM
Ratings:-18+24
Yes, Mr. President. As the letter writer said, you really should travel to the Global Fool's Convention to rule the climate. A convention of fools is a perfect place for you.
6. Comment by Wayne B. (rain)— November 22,2009 @ 7:51AM
Ratings:-3+12
The http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/ is down!
7. Comment by Steve G. (sgodwin)— November 22,2009 @ 8:41AM
Ratings:-24+14
A shortage of Eggo waffles is significantly more important than Sarah Palin's book tour. A nicely toasted Eggo is warm, inviting, and satisfying. Sarah....is not.
8. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 8:48AM
Ratings:-10+15
Some people are really confused! Reproductive "health" simply means your reproductive organs are in good working order, not that healthy couples are having families.
Reproductive 'rights' mean that you and you alone may decide what to do, or not, with your own organs.
This applies to both men and women. A man should be able to get a vasectomy because he wants to without any political or religious group forbidding it and a woman should be able to get any procedure done as she wants it without the same groups making noise and silly rules.
Always remember that when you give any governing body the right to prohibit abortion, contraception and vasectomy you have, de facto, given them the right to enforce the same.
We had a good bumper sticker in the 70's: "Keep Your Laws Off My Body!!" Seems we need to reissue it!
Peggie Dearden
............................................
With the exception of the last five decades, your definition of reproductive "rights", particularly abortion, would have been rejected by the majority of men and women the world over. Those same people KNEW that once the act of procreation was consummated, a new life shared the protective environment of that mother's womb; new game, new rules.
I can appreciate a person not wanting a religious organization interfering in their life if they don't place any faith or trust in that organization. That however does not remove the responsibility the same religious organization has to instruct the faithful on how to best live in conjunction with the Commandments of God.
Just as you are free to reject religious instruction, religions are free to communicate their message(s).
If you have no reason to seek religious instruction you wont and even if you do, many people simply do what they want anyway.
As far as "silly rules" are concerned, that will be made perfectly clear upon your and each person's death; they may have been in fact, very useful guidelines.
9. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 8:56AM
Ratings:-9+18
Are the td's for post #1 because the emails are tangible proof that global warming aka climate change aka algore revenge and boondoggle for losing his Presidential bid, may not be "solid science" after all?
10. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 9:02AM
Ratings:-9+14
7. Comment by Steve G. (sgodwin) — November 22,2009 @ 8:41AM
Ratings: -0 +1
A shortage of Eggo waffles is significantly more important than Sarah Palin's book tour. A nicely toasted Eggo is warm, inviting, and satisfying. Sarah....is not.
...............................................
Steve, you should have kept on with your insight by including the current Congress and the President himself.
11. Comment by Dan F. (standupdouble)— November 22,2009 @ 10:22AM
Ratings:-14+8
#9 That's a good question. I often wonder at people motives when they rate comments.
I gave it a TD because it is a ridiculous internet conspiracy theory based on something quoted out of context by someone who obtained private documents through a criminal act.
Why would anyone trust what these unethical hackers have to say.
12. Comment by Lindsey S. (Lindsey TS)— November 22,2009 @ 10:28AM
Ratings:-9+17
"I think my biggest disappointment has been Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. She has been portrayed as a Blue Dog Democrat, but her voting record has not shown that to be true."
Phyllis Brockhaus
I agree, Phyllis - her voting for the Cap and Trade tax and the "health care reform" bill is exactly why I will vote for anyone who runs against her next year.
13. Comment by Lindsey S. (Lindsey TS)— November 22,2009 @ 10:32AM
Ratings:-11+13
Peggie writes:
"Always remember that when you give any governing body the right to prohibit abortion, contraception and vasectomy you have, de facto, given them the right to enforce the same.
16. Comment by Joseph M. (ClrCrk)— November 22,2009 @ 11:41AM
Ratings:-4+11
In the absence of parental authority to take them out back of the woodshed for stern disciplinary measures, it appears that both sides in the Israeli Palestinian conflict will continue forever to behave as destructive unruly children.
On Saturday Hamas' rulers in Gaza announced that the territory's militant factions had agreed to halt rocket attacks against Israel, but that was after a rocket launch earlier in the day.
On Sunday Israel retaliated with air strikes against Gaza.
Both sides in this conflict have way too much blood on their hands already and there is no sign of progress toward resolving their differences. Many of their victims are guilty of nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
18. Comment by Ross J. (5973)— November 22,2009 @ 1:50PM
Ratings:-6+9
John #8 With the exception of the last five decades, your definition of reproductive "rights", particularly abortion, would have been rejected by the majority of men and women the world over.
The fact is that abortion was legal in this country at the time the Constitution was written, and for many decades thereafter.
19. Comment by Jerrod M. (Sandhill)— November 22,2009 @ 3:12PM
Ratings:-7+7
ll Dan F:
Let me ask: Did you approve of Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, even though the publication was of quotes "out of context by someone who obtained private documents through a criminal act"?
It doesn't matter how the emails were obtained, or by whom. The content is what matters.
21. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 4:30PM
Ratings:-0+2
#18 Ross
Abortion may have been legal but the majority of men and women knew it to be the taking of life and found it unacceptable. Few people thought that a mother's "right" to do as she wished with her womb
took precedent over the newly created life.
Abortion on demand is a recent phenomenon and abortion being used as an after the fact mode of birth control is a post Roe v Wade genocide.
It is only in the last five decades that public opinion
favored abortion and that appears to be reversing itself. More and better scientific information is partly responsible, and the efforts of the pro life movement have shed light upon an industry that
is anything but forthright and transparent. More and more women who have suffered through the painful psychological aftereffects are speaking up and the reality that for many women the surgery itself can be and was life threatening, also contributes to the change in public opinion.
..........................................
A brief Google search found the following;
Abortion History
A brief history of the abortion controversy in the United States
By Jone Johnson Lewis, About.com Guide
In the United States, abortion laws began to appear in the 1820s, forbidding abortion after the fourth month of pregnancy.
Through the efforts primarily of physicians, the American Medical Association, and legislators, most abortions in the US had been outlawed by 1900.
Illegal abortions were still frequent, though they became less frequent during the reign of the Comstock Law which essentially banned birth control information and devices.
22. Comment by Jerrod M. (Sandhill)— November 22,2009 @ 4:47PM
Ratings:-1+4
11 Dan F calls the exposure of the warmongers' emails a "ridiculous internet conspiracy theory".
This is not an argument; it's just name-calling.
There are over 60 Mb of data, which Phil Jones, director of the CRU (Climate Research Unit) acknowledges to be real.
Canada's leading climatologist says of this revelation: CO2 never was a problem and all the machinations and deceptions exposed by these files prove that it was the greatest deception in history, but nobody is laughing. It is a very sad day for science and especially my chosen area of climate science. As I expected now it is all exposed I find there is no pleasure in “I told you so.” Source
23. Comment by John W. (johnnyw74)— November 22,2009 @ 6:29PM
Ratings:-0+7
With all the questions on abortions, my wife had her first sonogram last week. I saw the babys heart beat and the baby move around after two months how is that not a life?
26. Comment by Mick D. (4324)— November 23,2009 @ 9:06AM
Ratings:-0+0
I am against Abortion. But that being said, If you elect to have an abortion, you pay for it. It is an elective proceedure and should not be paid for by my money. I do not believe I should have to pay for your election. Remember you all say it is a Choise. SO CHOOSE TO PAY FOR IT WITH YOUR OWN MONEY. Defunding abortion from the healthcare bill does not outlaw abortion.
We've added a feature to the comments pages - the ability to easily add paragraph breaks, boldface type and a few other typographical aids to your comments. Launch toolbar
Use single or double carriage returns to put line breaks or paragraph breaks in your comments.
At the same time, we removed the ability to put HTML coding into the comments. People were misusing that feature by pulling in cartoons, photos and other copyrighted materials from publications elsewhere. We won't allow you to use our pages to violate other publications' copyrights.
We've added a story to the site that includes a few tips to resolve common problems. You can use the comment thread attached to that story for practice and testing of the markup tools: Go to story | Go to the practice thread
General Instructions
Welcome to the story comments section of StarNet. Here are some helpful hints with you:
You must be logged in to comment or rate comments. Log in or create an account through our registration system.
All comments are subject to our guidelines (listed below) and our user agreement.
Comment Reporting
You can report other users' comments that are in violation of the StarNet User Guidelines. Users are limited to three (3) reports per day and are not allowed to report their own comments.
Any comment that has been reported will be moderated by StarNet. The comment will either be approved or rejected. Approval or rejection is based solely on the StarNet User Guidelines. Comments are only able to be reported once and are not viewable while awaiting moderation.
If you are a registered site user and are logged in, you can vote thumbs up or thumbs down on the comments.
The total votes of approval and disapproval on that comment will be updated when you vote — including your vote and any other votes that have been cast since your browser last loaded this page.
Votes by users who have been banned from commenting don't count in the totals.
User Guidelines
We welcome your comments on articles, editorials, columns, other topics on StarNet or any subjects important to you. Commentary submitted to StarNet (www.azstarnet.com) may be published or distributed in print, electronically or other forms. Opinions expressed in www.azstarnet.com's comments reflect the opinions of the author, and are not necessarily the opinions of the Star, StarNet, or its parent company. See terms of service for more information.
Our guidelines prohibit the solicitation of products or services, the impersonation of another site user, threatening or harassing postings and the use of vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language, defamatory or illegal material. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. It's fine to criticize ideas, but ad hominem attacks are prohibited. Users who violate those standards may lose their privileges on azstarnet.com.
Don't violate other publications' copyrights.
Do we edit user comments? No. The writers are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. StarNet reserves the right to remove comments that violate our guidelines policy.
Letters to the editor
'Capitol Link' tracks DC actionCaught red handed!
The 'science' of global warming is not.
And as a matter of fact, it is a conspiracy.
Hacked Emails Show Climate Science Ridden with Rancor
The publicly posted material includes years of correspondence among leading climate researchers, most of whom participate in the preparation of climate-change reports for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the authoritative summaries of global climate science that influence policy makers around the world.
A partial review of the emails shows that in many cases, climate scientists revealed that their own research wasn't always conclusive. In others, they discussed ways to paper over differences among themselves in order to present a "unified" view on climate change. On at least one occasion, climate scientists were asked to "beef up" conclusions about climate change and extreme weather events because environmental officials in one country were planning a "big public splash."
Fellow scientists who disagreed with orthodox views on climate change were variously referred to as "prats" and "utter prats." In other exchanges, one climate researcher said he was "very tempted" to "beat the crap out of" a prominent, skeptical U.S. climate scientist.
In several of the emails, climate researchers discussed how to arrange for favorable reviewers for papers they planned to publish in scientific journals. At the same time, climate researchers at times appeared to pressure scientific journals not to publish research by other scientists whose findings they disagreed with.
Report this comment
Will Al Gore's disciples admit their foolishness and blind faith? Or are they so committed to their religion that American White Males are killing the earth that they refuse the facts?
New Documentary Challenges Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' on Global Warming
In 2007, a British High Court judge ruled that Al Gore's global warming film contained nine significant errors and should no longer be screened in schools unless accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views.
Report this comment
When the name of the crisis was changed to 'Climate Change', it really should have been renamed Global Liberal Fool Crisis.
"I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report," Jones writes. "Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
In another, Jones and Mann discuss how they can pressure an academic journal not to accept the work of climate skeptics with whom they disagree. "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal," Mann writes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102186.html?hpid=moreheadlines
Report this comment
Yes, Mr. President. As the letter writer said, you really should travel to the Global Fool's Convention to rule the climate. A convention of fools is a perfect place for you.
Report this comment
Abortion kills a living human being !
The difference between an abortion and all the other reproductive health matters is that the baby's body is not your body.
Like black people a century ago, we deny constitutional rights to a human being by simply calling him/her not human (yet).
Report this comment
The http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/ is down!
A shortage of Eggo waffles is significantly more important than Sarah Palin's book tour. A nicely toasted Eggo is warm, inviting, and satisfying. Sarah....is not.
Report this comment
Some people are really confused! Reproductive "health" simply means your reproductive organs are in good working order, not that healthy couples are having families.
Reproductive 'rights' mean that you and you alone may decide what to do, or not, with your own organs.
This applies to both men and women. A man should be able to get a vasectomy because he wants to without any political or religious group forbidding it and a woman should be able to get any procedure done as she wants it without the same groups making noise and silly rules.
Always remember that when you give any governing body the right to prohibit abortion, contraception and vasectomy you have, de facto, given them the right to enforce the same.
We had a good bumper sticker in the 70's: "Keep Your Laws Off My Body!!" Seems we need to reissue it!
Peggie Dearden
............................................
With the exception of the last five decades, your definition of reproductive "rights", particularly abortion, would have been rejected by the majority of men and women the world over. Those same people KNEW that once the act of procreation was consummated, a new life shared the protective environment of that mother's womb; new game, new rules.
I can appreciate a person not wanting a religious organization interfering in their life if they don't place any faith or trust in that organization. That however does not remove the responsibility the same religious organization has to instruct the faithful on how to best live in conjunction with the Commandments of God.
Just as you are free to reject religious instruction, religions are free to communicate their message(s).
If you have no reason to seek religious instruction you wont and even if you do, many people simply do what they want anyway.
As far as "silly rules" are concerned, that will be made perfectly clear upon your and each person's death; they may have been in fact, very useful guidelines.
JT
Report this comment
Are the td's for post #1 because the emails are tangible proof that global warming aka climate change aka algore revenge and boondoggle for losing his Presidential bid, may not be "solid science" after all?
JT
Report this comment
7. Comment by Steve G. (sgodwin) — November 22,2009 @ 8:41AM
Ratings: -0 +1
A shortage of Eggo waffles is significantly more important than Sarah Palin's book tour. A nicely toasted Eggo is warm, inviting, and satisfying. Sarah....is not.
...............................................
Steve, you should have kept on with your insight by including the current Congress and the President himself.
Leggo my eggo,
JT
Report this comment
#9 That's a good question. I often wonder at people motives when they rate comments.
I gave it a TD because it is a ridiculous internet conspiracy theory based on something quoted out of context by someone who obtained private documents through a criminal act.
Why would anyone trust what these unethical hackers have to say.
Report this comment
"I think my biggest disappointment has been Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. She has been portrayed as a Blue Dog Democrat, but her voting record has not shown that to be true."
Phyllis Brockhaus
I agree, Phyllis - her voting for the Cap and Trade tax and the "health care reform" bill is exactly why I will vote for anyone who runs against her next year.
Report this comment
Peggie writes:
"Always remember that when you give any governing body the right to prohibit abortion, contraception and vasectomy you have, de facto, given them the right to enforce the same.
Abortion kills an innocent unborn baby.
Report this comment
#11-Why would anyone trust ANYTHING AlGore and his Church of Climate Change lemmings have to say??
He has been proven to be a liar.
And why would anyone take anything seriously that "The One" has to say?
He is also a proven liar-among other things.
Report this comment
#11
And why would anyone trust what algore, the biggest hypocrite I can think of, has to say?
The earth cools and warms - it's been doing so for eons.
Report this comment
In the absence of parental authority to take them out back of the woodshed for stern disciplinary measures, it appears that both sides in the Israeli Palestinian conflict will continue forever to behave as destructive unruly children.
On Saturday Hamas' rulers in Gaza announced that the territory's militant factions had agreed to halt rocket attacks against Israel, but that was after a rocket launch earlier in the day.
On Sunday Israel retaliated with air strikes against Gaza.
Both sides in this conflict have way too much blood on their hands already and there is no sign of progress toward resolving their differences. Many of their victims are guilty of nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Report this comment
#16
There is a big difference - Israel just wants to protect itself against those who would wipe them off the planet.
Report this comment
John #8 With the exception of the last five decades, your definition of reproductive "rights", particularly abortion, would have been rejected by the majority of men and women the world over.
Report this comment
ll Dan F:
Let me ask: Did you approve of Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, even though the publication was of quotes "out of context by someone who obtained private documents through a criminal act"?
It doesn't matter how the emails were obtained, or by whom. The content is what matters.
Click here for lots of links and analysis. Full searchable text is here.
Report this comment
I should have mentioned in 19 that the emails, like the Pentagon Papers, were not "private documents."
Report this comment
#18 Ross
Abortion may have been legal but the majority of men and women knew it to be the taking of life and found it unacceptable. Few people thought that a mother's "right" to do as she wished with her womb
took precedent over the newly created life.
Abortion on demand is a recent phenomenon and abortion being used as an after the fact mode of birth control is a post Roe v Wade genocide.
It is only in the last five decades that public opinion
favored abortion and that appears to be reversing itself. More and better scientific information is partly responsible, and the efforts of the pro life movement have shed light upon an industry that
is anything but forthright and transparent. More and more women who have suffered through the painful psychological aftereffects are speaking up and the reality that for many women the surgery itself can be and was life threatening, also contributes to the change in public opinion.
..........................................
A brief Google search found the following;
Abortion History
A brief history of the abortion controversy in the United States
By Jone Johnson Lewis, About.com Guide
In the United States, abortion laws began to appear in the 1820s, forbidding abortion after the fourth month of pregnancy.
Through the efforts primarily of physicians, the American Medical Association, and legislators, most abortions in the US had been outlawed by 1900.
Illegal abortions were still frequent, though they became less frequent during the reign of the Comstock Law which essentially banned birth control information and devices.
Report this comment
11 Dan F calls the exposure of the warmongers' emails a "ridiculous internet conspiracy theory".
This is not an argument; it's just name-calling.
There are over 60 Mb of data, which Phil Jones, director of the CRU (Climate Research Unit) acknowledges to be real.
Canada's leading climatologist says of this revelation:
CO2 never was a problem and all the machinations and deceptions exposed by these files prove that it was the greatest deception in history, but nobody is laughing. It is a very sad day for science and especially my chosen area of climate science. As I expected now it is all exposed I find there is no pleasure in “I told you so.” Source
Report this comment
With all the questions on abortions, my wife had her first sonogram last week. I saw the babys heart beat and the baby move around after two months how is that not a life?
Report this comment
All the best, John. What a wonderful Thanksgiving present!
Report this comment
#23
Congratulations John, to you and your wife - I wish your and your family all the best!!
Report this comment
I am against Abortion. But that being said, If you elect to have an abortion, you pay for it. It is an elective proceedure and should not be paid for by my money. I do not believe I should have to pay for your election. Remember you all say it is a Choise. SO CHOOSE TO PAY FOR IT WITH YOUR OWN MONEY. Defunding abortion from the healthcare bill does not outlaw abortion.
Report this comment