Quote from mookie427 :

so, those biased towards climate change don't want anyone who may hold a different opinion being involved....

The article gives the impression that the enquiry will be made by someone associated with the university? That doesn't seem right to me.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

The article gives the impression that the enquiry will be made by someone associated with the university? That doesn't seem right to me.

yeah, not a hint of bias there

I don't wanna get into this...

Just wanna say it's great to read you Sam. Choice of words is great and you seem to hit on target every single time. I think you represent the silent majority of "deniers". The moderate ones we never see/hear in the mass media.

Quote from PhilS13 :

I don't wanna get into this...

Just wanna say it's great to read you Sam. Choice of words is great and you seem to hit on target every single time. I think you represent the silent majority of "deniers". The moderate ones we never see/hear in the mass media.

Yeah props to Sam for being so much more eloquent than me

Quote from Electrik Kar :

The article gives the impression that the enquiry will be made by someone associated with the university? That doesn't seem right to me.

again failing to understand the basics
those people arent public figures as such theyre paid for by the university so if they dont do their jobs properly they really have no one but their bosses to answer to

Quote from wien :

Fair enough. These threads just leave me all sarcastic and spiteful.

While water vapour is indeed a very strong greenhouse gas it also returns to the earth as rain within about a week (on average) of being released. CO2 needs between 50 - 200 years to do the same round trip. Any CO2 we release today will come in addition to the CO2 we released over the last 50 - 200 years, and that way it's concentration increases. The vapour consentration of the air is also almost exclusively dependent on the temperature. Water vapour does not cause warming in itself, it's concentration just follows along as the temperature changes.

For your information CO2 is heavier than Air(oxygen and nitrogen) and is also cooler than air, so please tell me where this CO2 is going, because I don't see it at my feet.

Quote from Shotglass :

again failing to understand the basics
those people arent public figures as such theyre paid for by the university so if they dont do their jobs properly they really have no one but their bosses to answer to

and of course, there won't be a single tiny jot of conflict of interest there will there?

Quote from BlueFlame :

cooler than air

Since when have different substances had 'fixed' temperatures?

probably meant lighter or heavier than air?

Quote from 5haz :

Since when have different substances had 'fixed' temperatures?

So CO2 is still at it's peak temperature whilst it floats around under the ozone layer? What I meant was that the CO2 does not stay above air in temperature and it's heavier than air, thus it would fall, (especially since air is less and less dense the higher you climb).

Quote from xaotik :

How does the UK climatology industry work and to what does it aim at? What is it that they are manufacturing (either tangible or intangible) that is worth all this?

Historical temperature reconstructions could be seen as products (and are sometimes refered to as such), and these are being produced by various climate departments around the world. These constructions differ from the raw data outputted from the various sources from which they are derived as the data goes through various processes (accounting for all kinds of things which are meant to reduce biases in the data). The final 'product' is a value added reconstruction produced by the department.

The main historical temperature records currently in use are HadCRUT, GISSTemp (NASA), UAH and RSS (both satellite derived), and these are all non-fixed, meaning that they are able to be adjusted at any place in the record at any time, for whatever reason.

To illustrate the sometimes marked difference between raw and adjusted data, here's a graph showing the dif ... final data for the USHCN (a US based) network.

Here's how the GISS temperatur ... changed from 1999 to 2008.

There was a story recently about the difference between the raw and final data collected by New Zealand's NIWA (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric research).

So yeah.. The product can change over time, sometimes in fairly 'mysterious' ways. :hide:

(maybe the product is getting better and better??)

Quote from mookie427 :

and of course, there won't be a single tiny jot of conflict of interest there will there?

irrelevant its not a public office so there is no one other than their dean rector or whatever the leaderhsip position of the particular university is called to answer to

Quote from BlueFlame :

So CO2 is still at it's peak temperature whilst it floats around under the ozone layer? What I meant was that the CO2 does not stay above air in temperature and it's heavier than air, thus it would fall, (especially since air is less and less dense the higher you climb).

So you mean C02 is denser than air when its at the same temperature as air, which would make sense?

Wont C02 up in the atmosphere be the same temperature as the atmosphere around it? (the ambient temperature)

Quote from Shotglass :

again failing to understand the basics
those people arent public figures as such theyre paid for by the university so if they dont do their jobs properly they really have no one but their bosses to answer to

Shot, forgive me- but this controversy isn't simply limited to employees of the University of East Anglia. People refered to in these emails are staffed at different places around the world including other universities, NASA, etc. It really needs to be examined thoroughly by an independent 3rd party, with utmost neutrality and without a possibly tainted connection to any of the universities or parties involved.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

Shot, forgive me- but this controversy isn't simply limited to employees of the University of East Anglia. People refered to in these emails are staffed at different places around the world including other universities, NASA, etc.

while that may all be well and true it doesnt change the simple fact that its not a criminal offense as far as i can tell (and as far as the response has been thus far with even the americans not yet threatening to sue anybody as far as ive heard) which means there simply isnt anyone else but their emloyers to answer to
its really that simple

Quote from Shotglass :

its not a criminal offense as far as i can tell

Hacking data is a criminal offence. FOI obstructions due to withholding or deleting information are serious offences which need to be investigated. Which basics am I failing to understand?

Quote from 5haz :

Wont C02 up in the atmosphere be the same temperature as the atmosphere around it? (the ambient tempreature)

Yes, therefore it would fall back to the earth.

Quote from BlueFlame :

Yes, therefore it would fall back to the earth.

But it wouldn't be cooler would it?

Quote from 5haz :

But it wouldn't be cooler would it?

No, but I am told the reason CO2 rises is because of the other particles attached to it that carry heat.

Yeah it'll rise because its warmer than the surrounding air, but it'll rise and cool until it reaches the temperature of the surrounding area, its convection basically.

The atomic weights of O2, CO, CO2 and N2 are fairly similar, and the overriding influence of convection and localised air pressures (and a myriad of other reasons) keeps them mixed. If 'air' behaved as a still liquid, then we'd have distinct layers of each gas, which wouldn't be very healthy for humans.

Stop trying to derail the thread with posts that are clearly beyond your level of comprehension Blueflame.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

Hacking data is a criminal offence. FOI obstructions due to withholding or deleting information are serious offences which need to be investigated. Which basics am I failing to understand?

Hacking is. Whistleblowing or leaking information isn't (yet!) although it will in all likelihood lose you your job.

As far as conflicts of interest go, if the people doing the enquiry come from the place at the epicentre of all of this, that is a major conflict.

Best article i've seen from the MSM on the issue yet, all very clearly laid out.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t ... onment/article6936289.ece


One point though..

Quote :

This weekend it emerged that the unit has thrown away much of the data. Tucked away on its website is this statement: “Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites ... We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (ie, quality controlled and homogenised) data.”

This has been known for about two months.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

Hacking data is a criminal offence. FOI obstructions due to withholding or deleting information are serious offences which need to be investigated. Which basics am I failing to understand?

unless im mistaken the hacking was done by someone outside their group and being a research group naturally brings the possibility to come up with something patentworthy (although very unlikely in a field such as climatology) so being able to not give out all your information is a basic requirement for a research group to function

Quote from Shotglass :

unless im mistaken the hacking was done by someone outside their group

"Security experts" suggest that you probably are mistaken. They believe that the way the information was released suggests it was a whistleblower. They say "outside" hackers tend to spread information about their hacks far and wide, claiming bragging rights etc. (not in evidence). This was more typical of an insider with an understanding of the context of the content, because the information was passed to an FTP server in Russia only after an attempt to upload to an academic journal's FTP server failed (was rejected by the server administrator). The file was linked in one, single climate change discussion forum post, and it has spread virally since then.