Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate!

[RandallM <randallm () fidmail com>]

> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:17:47 -0500
> From: "Larry Seltzer" <larry () larryseltzer com>
> Subject: Re: [funsec] Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the
>        Debate!
> To: "Gadi Evron" <ge () linuxbox org>, "funsec" <funsec () linuxbox org>
> Message-ID:
>        <9B9E7EA67E1B1342B2D25F3FD1B3293002F618EF () BE35 exg3 exghost com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> I'll take a stab at actually answering the question:
>
> Yes, absolutely it was justified to leak these e-mails because the
> implications of this issue are huge for the economy and the livelihood
> of millions.
>
> Some people may think that the science is settled and any questions are
> trivia but not everyone thinks that way and there are experts in the
> field among them. We read of these experts and efforts to suppress their
> opinions in the e-mails and we read of efforts to cook the data in them.
>
>
> We're being asked to impose what are, in effect, huge taxes on the
> economy with this science given as a justification. We're entitled to a
> full examination of the science and how it was approached and these
> e-mails are revealing in that regard.
>
> Larry Seltzer
> Contributing Editor, PC Magazine
> larry_seltzer () ziffdavis com
> http://blogs.pcmag.com/securitywatch/
>
> PS - If you haven't guessed it already, I think that climate science is
> largely full of crap. Put aside for the minute that the models can't
> explain why we've had *cooling* for the last 10 years; why would you
> think that you can look at ice cores and use them to recreate
> temperatures to within fractions of a degree? You can only prove the
> accuracy of such methods by comparing them with actual temperatures and,
> of course, we can't do that. I've had the sense for a long time that
> these guys know a whole lot less about this stuff than they claim to.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------

Gosh Larry, that makes you "subhuman"


> I look down with contempt on the inferior creatures who are dumb enough to fall for this denialist nonsense.  They 
> belong with the creationists, the flat-earthers, and other subhuman primates who lack the intelligence required for 
> classication as "homo sapiens".  Perhaps they should consult their horoscopes, or have their fortunes read, or 
> worship their laughable gods, instead of concerning themselves with matters far beyond their pitifully feeble 
> intellects.
>
> ---Rsk


-- 
been great, thanks
a.k.a System

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.