I have always been troubled by the climate change community claiming that the science is settled. There are far too many variables for any code to accurately predict future or explain past climate change. Trends are all that can be predicted. "The science is NOT settled".

The use of "fudge factors" does not trouble me too much, they can be useful in adjusting a curve to fit real data (when there are unmeasureable factors - like past global temperature data), but they are dangererous to rely on and care must be taken save the raw data for anyone wishing to check the "fudging" for truth. When fudge factors are used you never disgard the raw data to save space. That pretty much invalidates the results.

I am also deeply troubled by many of the comments I read in the exposed emails. Science is suppose to be the light that shines opening up for everyone the true beauty of nature. Intentionally hiding facts/data sets back science many years and trust is lost that may take years to get back.

I hope that people will recognize that the "scientists" involved in this global warming debacle are not "true" scientists but propagandists. The whole of the science community are better than that.

On a final note since the man made global warming issues is NOT settled it really could be true. These scientists have hurt their own cause. I personally believe there are many natural causes (like the sun) that can account for climate change, however as a good scientist (Ph.D. in chemistry) I will keep an open mind and allow the facts as they are discovered and reviewed to be the judge.

Last year, I answered a telephone poll on global warming. The pollster was a co-ed from the University of Alabama. She asked me a long list of questions, including one which made her giddy with excitement when I answered "Al Gore" when asked who had brought global warming to the forefront. When I answered "the sun" to a question as to what had the most effect on the climate, she exclaimed in horror "THE SUN?" Apparently, that wasn't on her list of options.

I fail to understand why this has not really blown up in the face of the climate change advocates and that the perpetrators are not being charged. The damage that has been done and will be done is unconscionable. The results will be devastating to the people around the globe re taxes and restraining our footsteps on the earth.

Any political leader who goes ahead and signs the treaty in Copenhagen is a traitor to his country, whichever it is. They should have the guts and integrity to stand up and state they were deceived and manipulated and that they will not participate further until science can unequivocally prove that a warming trend is upon us, then, prove that it is man-made beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The scientific community has suffered a very grave blow. How will the public know who to trust anymore? and believe me trust is everything. There is so much garbage and so many lies being foisted on all of us that one becomes cynical about everything, automatically. Surely there are people out there with integrity, and how do you know they have it? Everything seems to be tainted these days with lies,lies and more lies, quest for power and quest for money.

I pray the Lord comes soon to bring it to an end.

What amuses me the most about the issue is how some people really think they can make a difference in the Earth's temperature! Maybe we can slow down the spinning, too, and some of them can fly off due to the change in gravity.

I am not surprised. In the 70's it was global cooling. We were all going to freeze because pollution was blocking out the sun. In the 80's, it was refrigerants destroying the ozone layer. There was a hole forming and anything under the hole would perish. Now the global warming fiasco! Scientist should be politically neutral. This is politics and a power grab nothing more. WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!!!!

This story highlights a bigger problem, in my honest opinion and that is that this is the modus operandi being perpetrated in the greater scientific community, such as it is. I refer specifically to the debate between Evolutionist (aka Darwinists) and those proponents of Intelligent Design. The Evolutionists, being in a position of power, block the ID community from publishing their papers then claim they have no peer reviewed papers published and therefore are not credible. They alter data and hide inconvenient facts. Indeed, there is little difference in how the GW Alarmists behaved and how Darwinists do.

Religion is a tough nut to crack; and both AGW and Evolution have become religions.

Since the investigation of this matter is still pending, the dust hasn't yet settled. But if the allegations that the East Anglia scientists were bending the truth to support their agenda turn out to be true, it was indeed a scandalous act. We have seen scientists get the results they wanted by data selection before, and it will happen again. Scientists are human after all. But such behavior must not be tolerated -- the public good depends upon reliable conclusions. Regardless of the final outcome of this case, the misbehavior of a few scientists should never be taken as invalidation of all their work, or of the work of other scientists. To ignore a real problem because of the erosion of faith in science would be tragic for all affected, and in the case of climate change, that is all of human society.

I find the events neither surprising nor amusing but rather disgusting. Just like TV evangelists, these people have succumb to the very evil they preach against. Science is supposed to be about truth, openness and fact and once again power and greed have brought it down to a base level. These people should, if found guilty, be cast out and forever barred from holding any position of public trust ever again.

The Ozone I believed, because it was proven very easily in my eyes in the chemistry. The reaction to CFC's and O2 were pretty remarkable and quick.

Predicting the world is going to get warmer is the same as predicting the world is going to get cooler... both are true. Hell, one day the sun's gonna explode too... maybe we should add more H to it.... heh

While I think a lot (heck MOST) of scientists remarkably want to do GOOD for the world, there are always those that are more worried about the paycheck and the prestige, not for proving something and saying "Look" but for making it vague and saying "Look! (but not too closely)"

Personally I link the idea that we (as the human race) are massively changing the temperature of the WHOLE EARTH about as much as I believed my Mom when I left the door open in my youth and she said "Are you trying to cool down the whole neighborhood?!?!?" While we make make some small change, the idea that taxing businesses that are going to keep doing business and pass the tax down to the consumer until something better comes along anyway. (IE, technology that can "green" energy and better their profits better than the carbon they are using currently) is Idiotic. Then you add the "trade" to the cap and trade er... tax and trade... and yer just creating another market for Goldman Sach's... cause you know... they need more money.

Take care all

For a rigorous report on this "Climategate - an inconvenient truth?" issue see:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/Monckton-Caught%20Green-Handed%20Climategate%20Scandal.pdf

Go to and find the link to the SOHO (Solar Observatory, Heliospheric Observatory) There you'll find data explaining the current cooling trend (lack of solar activity, or solar minimum) search back and you'll find data that explains the warming they (the warmists) thought we had; a very active solar maximum. That timetable coincides with the measurements that showed a shrinking of the one polar cap on Mars. No SUV's up there. just the Sun.

It was reported on the O'Reilly Factor that the messages were accessed through a Freedom of Information Act request there. Is this a different situation or are they the same?

Dave C: I believe the "perps" have been stonewalling the FOIA requests for lo these many... The actual acquisition of this data dump is somewhat ambiguous. mariana

What amazes me is that people are surprised to learn that "reputable" scientists lie to prop up causes. Theories like evolution and ice ages have been accepted as "proven" when they never were; proponents just dropped the word "theory" and buried any disproving artifacts and arguments.

i've always wondered how the 'weathermen' cannot predict whether it's gonna rain or shine today, and the 'climatologist can predict, with absolute certainty, that we will have a ctaclysmic iceage in 100 years.

At least the weatherman will look out the window and say, "Oops, sorry, looks like we'll have a rainy day", instead of (as the climatologist) try to sell me on on some abstract theory of 'liquid sunshine'.

but than, what do i know? i'm just a common worker, who pays the bills.