Russian secret service agents admitted yesterday that the hacked ‘Warmergate’ emails were uploaded on a Siberian internet server, but strenuously denied a clandestine state-sponsored operation to wreck the Copenhagen summit.
The FSB - formerly the KGB - confirmed that thousands of messages to and from scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit were distributed to the world from the city of Tomsk, as revealed by The Mail on Sunday last week.
Now, it has emerged that IT experts specialising in hacking techniques were brought in by the Russian authorities following this newspaper’s exposure of the Tomsk link.
They have gathered evidence about how and where the operation was carried out, although they are not prepared to say at this stage who they think was responsible.
A Russian intelligence source claimed the FSB had new information which could cast light on who was behind the elaborate operation.
‘We are not prepared to release details, but we might if the false claims about the FSB’s involvement do not stop,’ he said. ‘The emails were uploaded to the Tomsk server but we are sure this was done from outside Russia.’
The Kremlin’s top climate change official, Alexander Bedritsky, denied the Russian government was involved in breaking into the CRU’s computer system.
‘You can post information on a computer from any other country. It is nonsense to blame Russia,’ he said.
Slogan/motto:
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, Whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report;
Reputation:
December 13th, 2009, 06:53 PM
Makes me wonder what else they're lying about like maybe evolution.
They surely do have a lot of money invested in this thing.
"Myths are not lies," Tolkien countered, among the swaying trees of Magdalen Grove. Materialistic progress leads only to the abyss, Tolkien said, but the myths we tell reflect a fragment of the true light. He argued the Christ story functions as a myth, just like the Scandinavian myths they had loved, with one difference: The Christian myth was true.
Makes me wonder what else they're lying about like maybe evolution.
Who, the Russians?
Quote:
They surely do have a lot of money invested in this thing.
Is there no end to what these Russians will do? Some people have a financial stake in the monies generated by global warming research and the like...and there are billions upon billions of dollars on the other side of the issue, found in the industries that would be affected by additional regulation and curtailment of expansion. Which one do you think can buy more of what it wants by way of opinion, can more readily organize and fund "grass roots" organizations and put its spin out coupled with a threat of economic hardship should its enemies prevail? Hint: cigarette companies had scientists testifying to their safety and non addictive nature once upon a time.
The book is worth the money. He shows you what they find. The raw data. Just like warming, which doesn't show warming, and they have to "hide the decline".
Here are a few nuggets many people don't know about, because what palentology has found, isn't taught in schools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Brown
Darwin then explained that he thought that these gaps existed because of the “imperfection of the geologic record.” Early Darwinians expected the gaps would be filled as fossil exploration continued. Most paleontologists now agree that this expectation has not been fulfilled.
Quote:
“And we find many of them [Cambrian fossils] already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists.” Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (London: W.W. Norton & Co., 1987), p. 229.
Quote:
“Evolutionary biology’s deepest paradox concerns this strange discontinuity. Why haven’t new animal body plans continued to crawl out of the evolutionary cauldron during the past hundreds of millions of years? Why are the ancient body plans so stable?” Jeffrey S. Levinton, “The Big Bang of Animal Evolution,” Scientific American, Vol. 267, November 1992, p. 84.
Quote:
Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn’t changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin’s time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of darwinian change in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information—what appeared to be a nice simple progression when relatively few data were available now appears to be much more complex and much less gradualistic. So Darwin’s problem has not been alleviated in the last 120 years and we still have a record which does show change but one that can hardly be looked upon as the most reasonable consequence of natural selection. David M. Raup, “Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology,” Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, Vol. 50, January 1979, p. 25.
Quote:
“But the curious thing is that there is a consistency about the fossil gaps: the fossils go missing in all the important places. When you look for links between major groups of animals, they simply aren’t there; at least, not in enough numbers to put their status beyond doubt. Either they don’t exist at all, or they are so rare that endless argument goes on about whether a particular fossil is, or isn’t, or might be, transitional between this group or that.” [emphasis in original] Hitching, p. 19.
Quote:
“There is no more conclusive refutation of Darwinism than that furnished by palaeontology. Simple probability indicates that fossil hoards can only be test samples. Each sample, then, should represent a different stage of evolution, and there ought to be merely ‘transitional’ types, no definition and no species. Instead of this we find perfectly stable and unaltered forms persevering through long ages, forms that have not developed themselves on the fitness principle, but appear suddenly and at once in their definitive shape; that do not thereafter evolve towards better adaptation, but become rarer and finally disappear, while quite different forms crop up again. What unfolds itself, in ever-increasing richness of form, is the great classes and kinds of living beings which exist aboriginally and exist still, without transition types, in the grouping of today.” [emphasis in original] Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West, Vol. 2 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1966), p. 32.
Quote:
“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils. ... We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life’s history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.” Stephen Jay Gould, “Evolution’s Erratic Pace,” Natural History, Vol. 86, May 1977, p. 14.
There is a lot science in reagards to the flood, in addition to the evidence of creation, all life seems to start at the same time, and without transition in the fossil record.
Slogan/motto:
Hard work never hurt anybody - but why take the chance !!!
Reputation:
December 23rd, 2009, 12:03 AM
Why do conservative Christians repeatedly maneuver the Church into the position making "creationism" vs "evolution" a litmus test of faith?
By linking the credibility of Christianity to a literal interpretation of Genesis, the Church becomes embroiled in yet another unnecessary controversy pitting theology against science (ie Galileo).
Christians should be content to simply state that they believe God created the world, but agreement as to the exact mechanics and timelines (6 days vs 4 billion years) are not essential to our faith.
The real focus of Christianity should concern itself with WHY God has placed us on this earth - engaging in repeated arguments concerning HOW we got here is a needless diversion!
The book is worth the money. He shows you what they find. The raw data. Just like warming, which doesn't show warming, and they have to "hide the decline".
Whose raw data? The same raw data that produced this? funny . .I don't see a decline in global temps.
Quote:
Here are a few nuggets many people don't know about, because what palentology has found, isn't taught in schools.
No, they don't mention half of the transitional forms that have actually been found. But the schools are always woefully behind the actual research.
Quote:
There is a lot science in reagards to the flood, in addition to the evidence of creation, all life seems to start at the same time, and without transition in the fossil record.
And its the same tired creationist claptrap, you'd think you'd come up with something actually NEW every 30 years or so . . but oh no. Gotta keep banging that same unchanging drum.
Even if the fossils appear as "suddenly" as you say, they're still separated by layers and layers of rock not to mention volcanic ash layers and appearing one after the other in orderly fashion.
Which is rather odd because if they were really created at the same time, you'd expect to find say at least occasional, cetacean or shark teeth in the cambrian fauna or Birds and mammals in the carboniferous swamps, or even flowering plant pollen in the deepest layers of rock. So essentially you've just argued for progressive creation, not YEC of the Bible. Nice Job!
Climategate goes SERIAL: now the Russians confirm that UK climate scientists manipulated data to exaggerate global warming
Climategate just got much, much bigger. And all thanks to the Russians who, with perfect timing, dropped this bombshell just as the world’s leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing us all back to the dark ages.
Feast your eyes on this news release from Rionovosta, via the Ria Novosti agency, posted on Icecap. (Hat Tip: Richard North)
A discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as “Climategate,” continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.
The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.....Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.
The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.
Slogan/motto:
"Ah, well, I am a great and sublime fool. But then I am God's fool, and all His work must be contemplated with respect." - Mark Twain
Reputation:
December 24th, 2009, 11:17 AM
Thank God for the Russians (who also hacked the e-mails to begin with)!
"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." - Thomas Jefferson
"The Hand of providence has been so conspicuous in all this, that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked, that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations." - George Washington
"What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason." - Voltaire
Slogan/motto:
Learn to do right; seek justice.
Defend the oppressed.
Take up the cause of the fatherless;
Isaiah 1:17
Reputation:
December 24th, 2009, 12:09 PM
So the same Russian group that hack the e-mails now say there's proof of actual fraud? Funny. Nobody else has confirmed any falsification or tampering with data.
A colleague working in astrophysics was expressing bemusement to me yesterday about why the reputation of British science was apparently under threat, given that no evidence had actually emerged of scientific misconduct. Her specific question was: "Has anyone found evidence of an error in a published paper or dataset?" If they had, then of course the error would need to be corrected, which happens in science all the time.
If it could be proved that figures had been deliberately altered to give a specific result then it would be very serious, but so far no evidence has emerged from these Climatic Research Unit (CRU) emails of any error in the HadCRUT instrumental temperature record at the centre of the row, never mind proof of deliberate intent to mislead. How often have you heard that repeated, clearly, by the mainstream press reporting on this incident? Even if they were reporting on Berlusconi's sex life they would be more careful. Berlusconi can afford better lawyers than Jones can.
Some people have a financial stake in the monies generated by global warming research and the like...and there are billions upon billions of dollars on the other side of the issue, found in the industries that would be affected by additional regulation and curtailment of expansion. Which one do you think can buy more of what it wants by way of opinion, can more readily organize and fund "grass roots" organizations and put its spin out coupled with a threat of economic hardship should its enemies prevail? Hint: cigarette companies had scientists testifying to their safety and non addictive nature once upon a time.
Linear Mode
