We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
It is notable that the WHO committee that decided that bacon, hot dogs and red meats cause cancer is lead by militant vegans who have a history of false claims about meat. I am pleased that the report has been met mostly with derision and ridicule by most people who are finally catching on tho the latest scientific fraud de jour.
The AGW fraud is different in a significant way. This isn't about some fairy tale about veganism being healthy. This is about big buck, trillion$$, and power, world domination power. Those who want this want it badly and are willing to bribe, destroy, lie and steal to get what they want. They aren't going to give up. This is a large and diverse group of special interests who lust for money and power and they will not be denied. The only difference now vs 18 years and 8 months ago is NOW more people have caught onto the scam and NOW the warmies are desperate (which means dangerous). They aren't going to roll over.
Did Federal Agency Commit Climate Fraud? Sure Looks Like It
There's no evidence of fraud.
satellite temperature readings are the most comprehensive and thus the most accurate.
False. Being comprehensive doesn't make something more accurate. In any case, satellites don't measure surface temperature, but radiation from the troposphere. Temperature has to be inferred, which is done through "extensive data manipulation and tinkering".
Their change didn't come from actual temperature readings. It came from extensive data manipulation and tinkering.
Nearly all scientific data is subject to statistical analysis to determine trends. You can only refute the specifics by dealing with the specifics. We look forward to the scientific refutation by Congress.
Curious, he subpoenaed NOAA for research documents related to the study.
No. They didn't subpoena research documents, but internal emails, which are generally considered private.
The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time: Do they think we don't know about that data? The UAH data are here. http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/10/uah-v6-0-global-temperature-update-for-sept-2015-0-25-deg-c/
UAH shows +0.124°C per decade from 1995 to 2005, which is consistent with surface measurements.