Bravus prepares himself for the flood of retractions and apologies...

[Bravus]

...from climate skeptics: http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=1901

[doug yowell]

...from climate skeptics: http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=1901

Don't be holdin yer breath or anything,Bravus.

[GreatLakesGramma]

People believe what they want, regardless of what is true, usually whatever will allow them to continue their preferred behavior.

[phkrause]

...from climate skeptics: http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=1901

What! you think people will actually admit that they were wrong? I'd be supprised.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

...from climate skeptics: http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=1901

Don't be holdin yer breath or anything,Bravus.

Although, when N.Y.City is three feet underwater,as predicted,I'll be the first one to grovel.

[phkrause]

Although, when N.Y.City is three feet underwater,as predicted,I'll be the first one to grovel.

OK who predicted NYC was going to be 3 feet underwater?

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Although, when N.Y.City is three feet underwater,as predicted,I'll be the first one to grovel.

OK who predicted NYC was going to be 3 feet underwater?

I think it was Al Gore. And I think it was just the bottom 3 feet of NY.

[phkrause]

I think it was Al Gore. And I think it was just the bottom 3 feet of NY.

Well than, I guess we're all right. :)

[Dr. Shane]

I never jumped on the Climategate scandal band wagon. And I am an environmentalist. Yet I think it important to understand that Climategate not being a scandal doesn't prove global warming is man made. The alleged scandal was that some scientists were falsifying climate data. The alleged scandal was not a smoking gun against the global warming movement and the vindication of the scientists is not a smoking gun supporting the movement either.

The big global warming question is how much does the sun contribute to global warming verses how much man contributes to it.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

I think it was Al Gore. And I think it was just the bottom 3 feet of NY.

Well than, I guess we're all right.

Unless you've got a beach place.

[phkrause]

Unless you've got a beach place.

Not in Manhattan that's for sure. :)

[bonnie]

I never jumped on the Climategate scandal band wagon. And I am an environmentalist. Yet I think it important to understand that Climategate not being a scandal doesn't prove global warming is man made. The alleged scandal was that some scientists were falsifying climate data. The alleged scandal was not a smoking gun against the global warming movement and the vindication of the scientists is not a smoking gun supporting the movement either.

The big global warming question is how much does the sun contribute to global warming verses how much man contributes to it.

If you feel you need to lie or exaggerate to convince others you are correct,nothing you say is valid.

Most that do not believe in man made global warming have always held the position that the "scientific data" was not correct or honest

[Neil D]

If you feel you need to lie or exaggerate to convince others you are correct,nothing you say is valid.

Most that do not believe in man made global warming have always held the position that the "scientific data" was not correct or honest

I am not in the habit of defending Shanes honor, and I don't feel that it would be necessary to do so.....nor the claim that Shane is an environmentalist.. The only comment I MIGHT make would be that he tries to report from sources he feels are reliable and true and accurate..

Speaking of sources, anyone want to comment on Bonnie's sterling and unbiased sources?

[SivartM]

If you feel you need to lie or exaggerate to convince others you are correct,nothing you say is valid.

Um...

So basically I shouldn't believe anything that anyone says, right?

[GreatLakesGramma]

No, Sivart, but you need to be cautious about immediately believing everything you read or hear in the news, and also make allowance that even people you know and trust may not always have their facts straight. And always be skeptical toward those who are trying to "sell" something, especially politically. If anything is important to you, always check it out from as many reliable sources as possible, before you decide what to do about it.

[Dr. Shane]

I am not sure what Bonnie was trying to say but I don't think she was accusing me of lying or exaggerating. I think she was referring to the scientists of the Climategate scandal. I am not sure.

The scandal really hasn't changed anything is my point. The debate still revolves around how much the sun is warming the Earth verses how much man is warming the Earth.

As far as me being an environmentalist. Well, here are my credentials ---> LEED Green Associate

[Bravus]

http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=1903

[Bravus]

You're absolutely right, Shane, that debunking 'Climategate' does not prove or even really support anthropogenic global warming. The thing is, a huge number of climate skeptics believed (or pretended to believe) that 'Climategate' completely destroyed all the evidence and support for AGW, and trumpeted that loudly everywhere. And the other thing is, they will continue to do so.

It's about the truth and looking at the evidence.

[Guest]

Does this mean you're ready to apologize now?

[bonnie]

I am not in the habit of defending Shanes honor, and I don't feel that it would be necessary to do so.....nor the claim that Shane is an environmentalist.. The only comment I MIGHT make would be that he tries to report from sources he feels are reliable and true and accurate..

Speaking of sources, anyone want to comment on Bonnie's sterling and unbiased sources?

Why would you feel the need to? Unless you believe that anyone is holding Shane responsible for the e-mails and the false data.

I don't think I made this claim either...Shane is an environmentalist I don't really care if he is,so what?

I didn't feel the need to give sources to what most people can figure out,You lie and people have a tendency not to believe you the next time you make a claim. Scientists and environmentalist have lied,that was pretty clear.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

If you feel you need to lie or exaggerate to convince others you are correct,nothing you say is valid.

Um...

So basically I shouldn't believe anything that anyone says, right?

Didn't say that or imply that,now did I?

[SivartM]

Originally Posted By: SivartM

Um...

So basically I shouldn't believe anything that anyone says, right?

Didn't say that or imply that,now did I?

Unless you're saying that that only applies to certain people.

[bonnie]

Unless you're saying that that only applies to certain people.

It applies to people that have knowingly lied and falsified data to try to back up a conviction they claim.

It was fairly obvious that lies were told in the released e-mails or the willingness to do so.

[Bravus]

You did, however, claim that I was not qualified to speak on the US healthcare bill unless I had read the whole 1000 pages. So have you actually read the hacked emails themselves, directly, rather than others' spin and selective edits? After all, that's a much smaller impost to be able to speak authoritatively...

[bonnie]

You did, however, claim that I was not qualified to speak on the US healthcare bill unless I had read the whole 1000 pages. So have you actually read the hacked emails themselves, directly, rather than others' spin and selective edits? After all, that's a much smaller impost to be able to speak authoritatively...

The health care was over 2,000 pages if I recall. If you don't know what is in there you cannot refute or condone it.

Yes,I read the hacked e-mails as they were made available. They did not appear to be edited.

I don't believe there is a question but that a lot of lying was going on to further their specific agenda.

When someone needs to lie about a supposed conviction they hold to convince others,I really have little faith in them.