Sarnian, what will it take to get deniers to see the light you ask?

Hmmm let me think... perhaps a visit to Tim Flannery's WATERFRONT COTTAGE where they can discuss rising sea levels and similar imminent disasters. Now THAT should convince them, huh?

Leo Lane
Michael Mann has been exonerated at least five times by different inquiries into the so-called Climategate affair. The crime, of course, was stealing emails but you lot don't talk about that, do you? Nor do you talk about the death threats and threats to families that climate scientists endure almost daily from the likes of you. Who are the criminals? Not Michael Mann, that's for sure.

popnperish jumps the shark and dredges up "deaththreats"; like these deaththreats:

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/pathological-exaggerators-caught-on-death-threats-how-11-rude-emails-became-a-media-blitz/

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2012/05/10/the-dog-ate-my-death-threats-ii/#comments

How ironic anyway coming from someone who thinks there are too many of us.

Can this get any weirder?

Mann has never been cleared, popnperish, and no one who has read the emails would seriously consider that he could be.

Typical of the pretenced “Inquiries” clearing Mann was one conducted by the mendacious warmist Lord Oxburgh:

“The Oxburgh panel did not assess the reliability of CRU’s science. Its scope of inquiry was limited to reviewing papers provided to it only for evidence of deliberate misconduct. Many of those papers selected for examination by UEA were obscure, never having been challenged by critics—while others that had been criticized were not presented for review at all.

Lord Oxburgh’s final report stated that the papers were chosen “on the advice of the Royal Society”, however this was apparently untrue. In fact many or all of those papers were reportedly selected and cleared by CRU’s director, Phil Jones, a central figure in the ClimateGate controversy.

Although at least one committee member voiced serious concerns about how the CRU science had been conducted and incorporated into IPCC documents, no word of this was reported in the proceedings. And contrary to strong recommendations from committee members, no public interviews were conducted, no formal notes were taken, and no recordings or transcripts of interviews were made available to the public.

The remarkably short five-page Oxburgh report generously concluded that it found CRU scientists to be merely an innocent “small group of dedicated, if slightly confused, researchers.”

http://blogs.forbes.com/larrybell/2011/06/28/michael-mann-and-the-climategate-whitewash-part-one/

Tim Ball is one good honest scientist that I've been following since 2009.He speaks the simple truth which most still refuse to acknowledge.

Dear Tim Ball,

Here is my problem.

I, like many other lay people, do not have the science, experience, or the knowledge to fully grasp and judge the arguments made when one scientist challenges another.

What we can do however is make an assessment of the veracity we should be give to each based on their expertise or more specifically their qualifications and their areas of study. How they are regarded by their peers is of course important as is the manner with which they conduct themselves in public.

Addressing the last point first I certainly find it unseemly to have you attack a fellow scientist with such viciousness. That surely is the role for us plebs out here in the public where the politics is hashed out, why not leave the muckraking to us? Also it certainly appears you accuse Mr Hansen of political activism while engaging in just that yourself.

James Hansen wrote a brilliant paper in 1981 describing projections based on leading edge climate science and strong physics. He had a thorough background in the study of planetary atmospheres, the type of discipline that allowed NASA to land Curiosity so successfully. “He obtained a B.A. in Physics and Mathematics with highest distinction in 1963, an M.S. in Astronomy in 1965 and a Ph.D. in Physics, in 1967” (Wikipedia).

I would have thought a good physics background was a prerequisite for an understanding of Global Climatology.

You sir appeared to have presented for your Ph.D. A paper titled “CLIMATIC CHANGE IN CENTRAL CANADA: A Preliminary Analysis of Weather Information from the Hudson's Bay Company Forts at York Factory and Churchill Factory, 1714-1850”.

Speaking only as a layperson for me historical climatology doesn't quite cut it against global climatology.

Source Watch says of you;

“Dr. Timothy Ball is Chairman and Chair of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP). Two of the three directors of the NRSP - Timothy Egan and Julio Lagos - are executives with the PR and lobbying company, the High Park Group (HPG).”

Cont...