Here's a thorough debunking of many of the claims about how all the stolen emails disprove climate change.

Wikipedia's article on the incident is here. Note that it's marked controversial, so be sure to check the sources. I believe that at least some of the allegations are still under investigation.

Also note that there's no such thing as a "global warming scientist"; there's climatologists. These people study the climate regardless of its conditions. Few, if any, would be out of a job if climate change suddenly didn't need any more research. There's still hundreds of other facets of weather and climate to be studied and few, if any, of these climatologists work exclusively on "global warming".

>> ^Matthu:
I don't get global warming. I can't separate the truth from the lies in this case. It seems to me it was just a few months ago that someone obtained all kinds of documents to show that the scientists leading the charge to deal with global we're actually forging lots of their evidence. Litterally. Isn't that what happened?
There were scandalous memos detailing how to trick journalists and science magazines and so on.
Then, I didn't hear much more about that. I didn't hear their defense. I didn't hear anyone's outrage at the lies etc.
Wtf happened with that?
Also, I've heard others say what Winston said about the scientists lying about global warming to keep their jobs. Sounds likely to me. Their GLOBAL WARMING scientists if global warming was proven untrue tomorrow they'd have no job. Seems like motivation to lie.

>> ^Matthu:
I don't get global warming. I can't separate the truth from the lies in this case. It seems to me it was just a few months ago that someone obtained all kinds of documents to show that the scientists leading the charge to deal with global we're actually forging lots of their evidence. Litterally. Isn't that what happened?



Nope, only in the twisted imaginations of Fox News

There were scandalous memos detailing how to trick journalists and science magazines and so on.
Then, I didn't hear much more about that. I didn't hear their defense. I didn't hear anyone's outrage at the lies etc.
Wtf happened with that?


Those attacking the memos, calling them scandalous, were lying. People who actually looked at the emails themselves found that claims of fudging evidence was completely unfounded. See http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/

Also, I've heard others say what Winston said about the scientists lying about global warming to keep their jobs. Sounds likely to me. Their GLOBAL WARMING scientists if global warming was proven untrue tomorrow they'd have no job. Seems like motivation to lie.


Stop going to Rush Linbaugh and Fox News for your "news". If you really follow the money there are billions of dollars spent by the oil and gas industry paid to ad agencies, think tanks, lobbyists, etc. The climate scientists salaries pale in comparison.

If you want the real news http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/09/climategate-bogus-sceptics-lies

In reply to this comment by Matthu:
I don't get global warming. I can't separate the truth from the lies in this case. It seems to me it was just a few months ago that someone obtained all kinds of documents to show that the scientists leading the charge to deal with global we're actually forging lots of their evidence. Litterally. Isn't that what happened?

There were scandalous memos detailing how to trick journalists and science magazines and so on.

Then, I didn't hear much more about that. I didn't hear their defense. I didn't hear anyone's outrage at the lies etc.
If you didn't hear it, maybe you should take your fingers out of your ears:
http://www.videosift.com/search?q=tyt+climate+gate
Wtf happened with that?

Also, I've heard others say what Winston said about the scientists lying about global warming to keep their jobs. Sounds likely to me. Their GLOBAL WARMING scientists if global warming was proven untrue tomorrow they'd have no job. Seems like motivation to lie.

EDIT: I like Rachel Maddow as a journalist. I don't understand why she doesn't ask Bill Nye about the fraudulent global warming documents that were released. Has she confronted them in another video?

I don't get global warming. I can't separate the truth from the lies in this case. It seems to me it was just a few months ago that someone obtained all kinds of documents to show that the scientists leading the charge to deal with global we're actually forging lots of their evidence. Litterally. Isn't that what happened?

There were scandalous memos detailing how to trick journalists and science magazines and so on.

Then, I didn't hear much more about that. I didn't hear their defense. I didn't hear anyone's outrage at the lies etc.

Wtf happened with that?

Also, I've heard others say what Winston said about the scientists lying about global warming to keep their jobs. Sounds likely to me. Their GLOBAL WARMING scientists if global warming was proven untrue tomorrow they'd have no job. Seems like motivation to lie.

EDIT: I like Rachel Maddow as a journalist. I don't understand why she doesn't ask Bill Nye about the fraudulent global warming documents that were released. Has she confronted them in another video?

The US, like all liberal democracies (the UK, Australia, etc) have seen a steady rise in the proportional size of the public sector for the past 30 years, along with an increased tax burden. The conservative dream of a low taxing, small Government is indeed a myth in the modern era.

As Winston says, you can't buy what's not for sale - and Conservatives and Big Business have been selling the low tax small Government myth for years. Happily for them there's enough uncritical dupes still buying it.

"It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.
Winston Smith, his chin nuzzled into his breast in an effort to escape the
vile wind, slipped quickly through the glass doors of Victory Mansions,
though not quickly enough to prevent a swirl of gritty dust from entering
along with him."

>> ^Nithern:
I find that Winstonfield is simply a conservative Republican lap dog. Saying and doing anything his masters wish, with total obedience and unwavering fanatic behavior. If they told him, the sky will be yellow zig zaps, purple poka-dots, and red curvy lines, three weeks from now. He would be on here, saying so, without an ounce of evidence or proof. In fact, he would show websites devoted to this concept, which in turn, are hardly non-bias. Remember that, when you read his stuff.


Despite his untasteful arrogance, it's obvious he knows alot more about the subject than you. Forget "climate change" because that is not the real issue. The issue is money, and Winston is completely right in the fact that COP15 is going to make a number of people somewhat richer. Imagine Enron, on a global scale. In fact the same names show up (Ken Lay) if you take a look at carbon credits. As for the scientists, of course they are not all a part of some conspiracy. But important people like the president of the IPCC stand to gain loads of cash, thankfully people are finally taking a look at their work

P.S. if you saw Winstons youtube link, you would also see he is alot funnier than you. YOU LOSE!

way to miss the point winston.
conflation,deflection and congruence.
which all equal your myopia.
i am not going to waste another post on your inability to get the point.(ok..i'm lying)
my conflation of the man working the concentration camp showers was his decision to participate in the elimination of thousands while he,himself,may be a great guy.this is a moral argument not one of semantics.
i already stated my stance on "evil corporations" but you seem content with putting words in my mouth to make your point.
a point,by the way,i actually agree with but it has nothing to do with what i was trying to convey.
now you wish to direct the discussion on health care yada yada yada....
thats an entirely different discussion.
this discussion has begun to bore me.if you are unwilling or unable to see the moral courage this woman has by standing up and doing what she felt was righteous,then i dont know what to tell you winston.
have fun with the pink elephant in the room.

good for you winston.
what you looking for? a cookie?
your thinking reveals a myopic view,longde is correct.
it is not a slant,at least not to me anyways.it is who you are and i would not have you any other way.
you think in two dimensions and there can be great strength in that but the downside to that paradigm is abstract thinking,grey areas,fuzzy logic.

the discussion was pertaining to the morality of this young woman.recognizing she was stepping on her neighbors face to collect a paycheck,so she broke the rules and got fired for it.she didnt appear too bitter to me and i applaud her for her courage.i have made similar choices.does this make me better than others? of course not,but i have to wake up in the morning and look myself in the mirror.a clear conscience is a thing of beauty.

"the man who flipped the switch at aushwitz may have been a great guy and wonderful family man but he still participated in the elimination of thousands"-noam chomsky.

THIS is the integral point i am trying to make and since you are the "smartest man in the room" i would have thought i would not have to write an essay to get you to understand this very salient and important point on the matter of this young lady.

i give historical context you call it "opinion".
i attempt to convey my mistrust of bankers and show historically why and you cherry pick lines from my comment and ignore the over -all context.
we,as a group praise this young lady and you call her a whiner (which is your right) and spout rhetoric on the awesomeness that is you.
what i have gathered from your comments here is that:
a.bankers are a good and noble breed and those who may have had the misfortune of life turning wrong are just stupid and deserve neither comfort nor release but contemptful scorn.
this is the very same logic of "well,she wouldnt have been raped if she hadnt worn that miniskirt" and you get IRKED when longde calls you out on your myopia?...please son....please...
b.it is the full responsibility and fault of the politicians who ALLOW themselves to be bought and paid for.banks and other institutions hold no such responsibility.
yeah...ok..so the manipulation of markets by institutions to swindle entire governments and it's people of it's wealth is noble?the engineering of wars by those who would profit most is a good and honorable thing for society?

listen my friend,governments are thing not to be trusted,BIG government is a thing to avoid at all costs and when that government starts to work with financial institutions the death knell has begun to ring for the common citizen.
this is not new,it did not began yesterday and while you noted 30 years ago (correct 1972,gold standard=gone) but it goes even further.1966,1942,1933,1929,1917,1923,1880,1781 in america alone.since you are the smartest man in the room i guess you already knew that though./snark

maybe the difference is between you and us lib/leftie/whiner/cry-babies is that we wont FUCK YOU over for a dollar.WE dont agree with the fact that the very same people who created this financial mess cried like little fucking bitches and had to have average joe taxpayer working two jobs bailing those elitist pricks out.at NO risk to them but all the risk on us while they engage in practices that are at best, bottom feeding tendencies.
so YEAH winston,we LIKE when we see a person stand up for what they believe even if that may mean hardship for themselves.not like those PUSSIES on wall street.


so feel free to cherry pick whichever lines you wish to conflate into your myopic paradigm.
hey..you are the smartest man in the room.guess what my response will be.

winston,
i think we can agree that we have differing philosophies.
that being said,understand that what i say here is in no way an attempt not to change your viewpoint but rather to give historical context.
1.in the 1800's a corporation was a temporary venture between different companies to achieve a common goal,the charter was only allowed if it was for the "common good".when the goal was achieved the corporation was dissolved i.e:the brooklyn bridge.
2.after the civil war a few creative lawyers used the newly written 14th amendment,installed to protect newly freed slaves rights,to create limited liability corporations that would not have to dissolve but rather flourish and have rights as a person.even though a corporation is not an actual person.
3.in the the 1960's (if i recall correctly) lawyers once again got creative and lobbied to have the "for the common good" removed from the corporate charter.which in essence took any morality out of the corporate charter leaving profit as it's sole impetus.
4.a governments role concerning business should be fraud protection.why?because the government is for the people and by the people (in theory at least) and with corporation no longer bound by law to do "common good" it is the last line of defense.
a.the reason i state this is because many people echo the "free market" line.what we have now is nothing close to a "free market".when a corporation can buy legislators to enact laws that benefit their own bottom line in the form of lobbyists we move closer to a plutocracy rather than a people run government.
b.i use adam smith and milton friedman as examples to make my point.for both of these men were huge proponents of the free market but for both of these economists plans to work there needed to be an equal playing field.how can we have a free market when international conglomerates own our political leaders?they own the media so they control the message.

we are a republic.what makes us a democratic republic is our right to vote but if the message is controlled the vote will be slanted by that propaganda.the last thing our government,corporations and financial institutions want is an informed citizenry.

there are two more points i would like to make.
1.you state that you are immune to such manipulations and indoctrinations.
ok.if this is true then why do you constantly use terms like "lib" or "leftie"?
you my friend have been snookered into buying into a polemic paradigm that does not, in reality, exist.the message has permeated your views on people who may think or feel different than yourself.humanity is a far more diverse grouping than TWO ways of thinking,feeling,being.
2.i also saw that you put the responsibilty on the borrower.that in itself is not an entirely incorrect statement BUT according to the GOA it was only 20% "stupid borrowing" while 80% fraudulent,predatory and deceitful lending practices.i could go into further details but there is plenty of information out there to back this statement up.

in summary:
corporations can,and do,much good but they can also do incredible amounts of damage.the way the system is set up it comes down to cost/ benefit every time and maybe that needs to be changed,but when the government and our representatives are in bed with the very same companies that can create/destroy on such a huge scale we should all sit up and take notice.

on a personal note.winston,you sound like a pretty stand up guy but do not project your integrity onto a corporation.they would eliminate you in a heart beat if it profited them.also...dont be so quick to judge those who you do not know,understand or walked one inch in their shoes.life happens and sometimes it aint pretty.
i enjoy our conversations winston.
till next time...peace.

winston.
you purchase gas?buy food?wear clothes?
then you are directly affected.
live near other people?neighbors perhaps?
then you are indirectly affected.
the indoctrination and immersion of pop culture in america is at saturation point.
most americans (maybe not you,but the majority) define their self worth by what they own and what they can buy.a citizens social worth is based on his ability to purchase,consume and keep this economy afloat and this is re-enforced by our media,schools and other social institutions.it is as insidious as it is subtle.
so yeah,you are affected even if you wish to believe you are not.

the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didnt exist.

She's a real life Winston Smith for sure.

I think it is worth mentioning, amongst all this discussion of the characteristics of a bank, that this is the product of capitalism. It's a dehumanising structure where a the only virtues are production and consumption.

Mr. Winston here has never suffered nor cared dearly for someone who suffers. He has no concept, no real compassion, no real heart. A body without a soul.

Such blind assumptions are sadly typical of liberals who encounter valid but opposing philosophies. My wife of 14 years who survived NHL cancer would doubtless have a different point of view than yours. However, as a man of character and wit I am not offended by your ignorance. It is sad that such small-minded pettiness exists, and I correct it when I can. It is not anger or disgust that minds such as yours elicit from me. Only pity.

We even have Winston above, showing us bold face lies.

As much as I side with you on this, WP didnt exactly lie in that post. He says healthcare costs money, and yes it does.

What healthcare shold not do, however, is to be exploited for profit. And if the US Government didnt have its nutsack firmly placed in the hands of the health and insurance industry, they could, like most comparable country, spend HALF of what they do NOW, and provide free, universal healthcare


One of the reasons healthcare is so expensive in the US, is precisely because it is privately run. Providing care isnt like selling cars. You dont have the same kind of "competition driving the prices down", and even if you did, a MRI-scan is still insanely expensive. And then you have insurance.. sure, insurers can compete to have the lowest premiums, but that of course means that they'll have to cut somewhere to make a profit, and that means to reduce the number of actual payouts, so they make sure to attach hundreds of conditions and rules that no one reads anyway, so that they can blame pre-existing conditions or whatever, and then refuse payout. Overall, its a system that encourages PROFIT, and not actual healthcare.

If you ever needed proof of this, simply look at the numbers: The US government spends more money, yes MORE TAXPAYER's MONEY (hear that, republicans?) today then every single country that provides free, universal healthcare
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_spe_per_per-health-spending-per-person
http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/spend.php
http://seekingalpha.com/article/146992-comparing-u-s-healthcare-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

I had a serious illness a few years ago. The medical bill, if not insured (I did my homework out of intellectual curiousity), was $387,630. I'd like to see anyone not in the upper 8% of this nation's wealth afford this, WITHOUT going bankrupt. Yes, you STILL have to may the morgage on the house, and all the other expenses like cloths, food, gas, etc. Oh, and do this, when you dont have a job, because you were laid off, during a bad economy.

There's no way to do it. None.

Fortunately, I have and had, Mass Health (for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts), that paid for it. Yeah, I suffered on a level you will never know, nor understand, during that time period. You want to know what torture feels like? experience a year of what I went through. Anyone that has heard the tale and knows me, just is amazed at the horror ahd Hell I went through to get better (mostly).

I've come to understand the two sides of this: Republican and Democrat.

Republican: Do not want this, as its feared it will interfere with PROFIT. That's right, reduce the human equation down to numbers related to a substance that doesnt exist in the nature world: money. But then, I can not recall the last time I saw, heard, or witness a republican showing compassion for their fellow Americans, UNLESS, they themselves were also gaining from the act of compassion.

Democrats: Traditionally been the group that helps the workers out. Help pass structures and legal code that brought the worlding hours down in states from 60 to 40 hours a week. Put in a number of healthy life style provisions over the years. And now, they are doing something that benefits Americans for decades to come.

You can argue my words anyway you want. Republicans LIE to get what they want. They lied to get Bush in to office back in 2000. They lied on the energy crisis of 2003. They lied on Iraqq (no nuclear WMD, anyone?). They lied on Afghanistan. Some say they lied on 9/11. They lied on 'no nation building'. They lied for months on Health Care Reform. This video here, is simply showing, how often, and deeply, the lies go. We even have Winston above, showing us bold face lies.

You know Winston....

If you show up at the ER one night in catostophic pain, from an unknown source (be it a kidney stone, heart attack, etc). And the person there said "ok, you can access our hospital, but first, you must: A) Give us all your money B) Make yourself our slave, C) Give your body parts away for free. You WILL do so. Because, when someone is in that level of pain and suffering, they can not think straight, clearly, or consciously. Its a level of torture, someone like you, is unfamilar with. And yes, fortunately, the US hospitals (thanks to good legistation) prevent this sort of thing taking place. However, this sort of thing takes place outside of ER's every day in the US. You just choose not to see, hear, or witness it,

because....YOU....ARE....NOT....COMPASSIONATE....TO...YOUR....FELLOW....AMERICANS!