IndoDX

I have a suggestion: Why not create a special thread just for Tom P.? That way he can drive by whenever he wants to and post his questions. Perhaps there could even be a way to link his e-mail address to feed directly into the special thread. climateaudit.org/2010/02/26/mcintyre-submission-with-figures/#comment-224408. [RomanM: This thread is called "UK Parliamentary Hearings Today" and is NOT the place to continue your inconsiderate OT quest.

Source: http://climateaudit.org/2010/03/01/uk-parliamentary-hearings-today/

Second, there is an enormous amount of climate data available freely via the web. See the "Data Sources" tab on the top of the main page. Third, you are wrong on "the worst that can happen"--it can be used by those without the A small point, but the quote from Jim does not advocate withholding data. He even suggests where data can be found on the web. He is stating the fact that data can be misused. His personal animosity toward McIntyre is very clear and unfortunate.

Source: http://climateaudit.org/2010/02/26/mcintyre-submission-with-figures/

I don't know exactly how the scientific interchange should be organized (except that it be open and transparent, of course), but if the aim is to guide policy, then the effort should be undertaken in sequential steps to answer the . To quote the danish woman “let's get it (over and )done (with). Keep up the good work steve. Gerald Smith. Posted Feb 10, 2010 at 5:15 PM | Permalink | Reply. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by

Source: http://climateaudit.org/2010/02/10/what-to-do-with-the-ipcc/

He then decided to create his own archive using the Mac's Finder utility “Compress/Archive” and it built a new zip file containing the __MACOSX info and added the UTC time stamps (when done this way the user never actually uses unix . Gavin Schmidt's Official NASA Supported Blog Guide to Climate Legality. And, regarding his other comment re: “Whistleblowing only works if you are revealing illegal activity”…Uh, Gavin, they found illegal activity but it was past the

Source: http://climateaudit.org/2010/02/05/guardian-and-ctm/

Just like attacking home-grown scientists with his “voodoo science” quote, which got him lots of bad press. risky business. You know who. Posted Jan 31, 2010 at 9:45 AM | Permalink | Reply. But there's no time to write papers. But talking about it on ClimateAudit is trash? Tom Ganley. Posted Jan 31, 2010 at 5:08 PM | Permalink | Reply. “This is trash.” You right, it is. That's why people that want to be taken seriously don't write trashy novels, because it produces

Source: http://climateaudit.org/2010/01/30/return-to-almora/

Maybe I should consider moving to western Canada. Wacky oddball climate-changed-induced weather doesn't appear to happen there. It all sounds like the TV Guide narrative of an I Love Lucy episode. Maybe NWF has some 'splaining to do. . Ken, thank you for that quote. Annex 2 was adopted by the IPCC in 2003 and allows them to cite from the “gray literature” which I suppose includes publications by WWF. I think this was a bad decision because it looks like the IPCC was

Source: http://climateaudit.org/2010/01/28/odd-ball-winter-weather-caused-by-global-warming-nwf/

I think a good case can be made that Jones, et Al “conspired” to mislead public perception of climate history – but that's political advocacy / public relations / propaganda. It's not likely a criminal offense. . One might use the public e-mails as a guide for creating new specific requests for information to instances where the e-mails reasonably indicate their intent to improperly w/hold information. If performed in coordination w/an appropriate prosecutoral

Source: http://climateaudit.org/2010/01/27/jonathan-leake-of-the-sunday-times-and-the-jones-et-al-amendment/