Comments on: Oxburgh and Davies

By: GLORIA NELSON

GLORIA NELSON — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 17:18:38 +0000

GENE, IS THAT YOU?GLORIA

By: Clive Menzies

Clive Menzies — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:03:07 +0000

Hi Steve

I wasn’t sure how best to contact you but figured here was as good as place as any. I made a submission to the Inquiry and have received my copy.

I do have a certain sympathy with the Committee, given the pressure to get a quick result; anything controversial would potentially have a seismic effect on the election. However, the Inquiry was rushed, superficial and biased, not least because there was not a balance of evidence weighed orally and if people don’t read the submissions in full, you miss most of the evidence.

Having skimmed the findings and read the press, I’ve been ploughing through all the evidence again with a view to de-constructing the findings in the context of evidence presented.

I’ve already written to my MP requesting that the Inquiry be reopened or a new Inquiry called, after the election. This one can hardly be regarded as adequate in the light of the burden of policy and expenditure riding upon it.

Would you please contact me off-list with a view to preparing a formal submission to the Inquiry.

Regards

Clive

By: Eugene WR Gallun

Eugene WR Gallun — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 10:05:26 +0000

Hide the decline — I don’t think this has been explained correctly to the public. Past temperature records are based largely on tree rings. Tree rings are “nature’s thermometer”. But are they really accurate? We can check tree rings against the recorded temperatures of the last 150 years and they should match. If they don’t match it means one of two things. 1)Tree rings don’t record past temperatures accurately and thus we have no idea of what temperatures were in the past thus no way of saying current temperatures are extraordinary or 2)the tree rings are accurate and the recent record of rising temperatures is false data. Either way global warming gets blown out of the water. That is why they had to “hide the decline” in temperature that recent tree ring samples were showing. Either tree rings are useless for establishing what temperatures were in the past or the current temperature data used to promote global warming is false. EWRG

By: Traduire RSS

Traduire RSS — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 20:59:02 +0000

[...] (129) Oxburgh et Davies [...]

By: TraVotez

TraVotez — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 19:03:06 +0000

[...] (62) Oxburgh y Davies [...]

By: Julian

Julian — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:39:13 +0000

Lunatic conspiracy theories. Is that what you are reduced to these days, Steve?

By: Sleeper

Sleeper — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:35:31 +0000

Re: thefordprefect (Mar 29 13:26), First we had hundreds of thousands of pages of raw data, now we have tens of thousands of biased scientists. You sure do like big numbers Mike. Here's another one: there are billions of people on this planet. I bet we can come up with a few scientists capable of understanding the issue who don't have their hand in the cookie jar.

By: thefordprefect

thefordprefect — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 18:26:19 +0000

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/2053842/Scientists-sign-petition-denying-man-made-global-warming.html
Scientists sign petition denying man-made global warming
More than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition denying that man is responsible for global warming. …
The academics, including 9,000 with PhDs, claim that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane are actually beneficial for the environment.

Well that’s 31k to 37k (depending on source) that cannot stand in any unbiassed committee

By: Al Gored

Al Gored — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 04:36:22 +0000

Wow. The corruption here just keeps looking worse and worse. Thanks for continuing to expose it. Sure hope the truth still matters.

By: AJC

AJC — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 12:51:00 +0000

“a more fruitful way forward would be to ask who on these existing inquiry panels is acceptable”.

No. The sensible approach is to shine a spotlight on anything in their backgrounds which compromises any of the panelists.

Everyone keep digging!