Climate Change: Here's what a lie really looks like
 

A lie is a willful act to change material facts or evidence, typically in a way that gives some artificial advantage to the individual making the change.

Here's what a lie really looks like.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/eart...ndal-ever.html

Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record – for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained – has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.

The global warming crowd has continued to compromise themselves. Its truly sad.

Is the earth warming? Since the sources of evidence are subject to manipulation, not only is the case harder to make because many of these "individuals of science" and the records they maintain have credibility issues but what then to we actually make of the data? The question gets much harder to objectively answer.

As it always has for me, it calls into question to motivation of those who want to use the levers of government to stifle honest debate on the issue, insist that such warming must be caused largely by human activity, and drain off precious national resources in their crusade.

The left loves to play the rhetorical game and accuse their political opponents of being "anti science". But is making a leap of faith based on highly questionable data any more scientific?

As you yourself were so eager to point out in another thread yesterday, it's an op ed.

Major climate change occurring here. Winter cold to top-down warm.

A "big lie" is when somebody keeps repeatedly scaring the public with apocalyptic visions of total economic and social collapse (that never seem to bear much fruit beyond the local and the temporary) that can, allegedly, only be solved through the decimation of an opposing political ideology.

Seems to me there is plenty of that to go around. Just go to any political propaganda outlet or blog, right or left, and witness this in full swing.

Dave

That being said, anyone who hasn't noticed the squirrely weather of late.............

I'm just sayin'.

Dave

No, yesterday was a blog, which is a bit lower on the pecking order of journalism. As you yourself were quick to point out yesterday, these are still facts. In this case, its also not an editorial. It is in the "News" section.

Been a pretty normal winter here. Cold, snow, etc. Its Michigan in the winter, so no real surprises.

No kidding. Over the last hour or so clouds have rolled in killing the top-down weather. High temp prediction lowered five degrees.

And there's that thing with the annual Alaska dog sled race---.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

All true, whell. You caught me but does this mean you've revised your standards for authoritativeness? After all, the principle sources in that op ed were previous posts from a blogger.

And, regardless of where the article is positioned, it's an op ed. I mean, read the fucking thing! Careful use of quotation marks around words like "adjustments", putting loaded language like "fiddling" right in the "biggest science scandal ever" right in the head and referring to a respected and accomplished scientist as a "fanatic".

Of course, none of this is in the least bit surprising. After all, The Telegraph is the UK equivalent to the Moonie Times.