IPCC Contributing University Fabricates Evidence

[rsmith7]

www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/558.htm

Here's a list of the scientists and institutions contributing to the IPCC.

I notice the now infamous Oregon University is placed very lose to Phil "the shred" Jones.

So a contributing University to the IPCC has been caught fabricating "evidence".

Isn't this a newsworthy revelation...on a global scale?

Cheers lazarus, I think you're worthy of a namecheck. Send me a private message with your details so you don't miss out.

[lazarus]

Guilty by association? Not that you have provided any evidence of fabrication.

For a wanna be politico you seem to have little idea of basic human rights - like presumed innocence.

[rsmith7]

You're grasping at straws now lazarus.
Don't you think this scandal should be investigated?
Would you rather this was covered up?
That's the problem with the AGW argument - too many un-truths.
How many will it take for you to question your beliefs?

[lazarus]

Sept 12, 2010 18:23:21 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

Don't you think this scandal should be investigated?

What scandal - that Dr Jones name appears near another scientist from Oregon on a list?

You need to get out more.

[rsmith7]

Nope, the scandalous scare stories fabricated by an IPCC contributing university.
I think Lazarusgate has a nice ring to it.

[lazarus]

Sept 12, 2010 18:36:12 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

the scandalous scare stories fabricated by an IPCC contributing university.

Which would be? Give us a clue, a link to a newspaper, anything?

[rsmith7]

You remember this - your link - from the ocean acidification thread:
abcnews.go.com/GMA/Eco/ocean-acidification-hits-northwest-oyster-farms/story?id=10425738&page=1

Then this video which showed the above to be a fabrication?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLmhMPpN0X8

Du-uh

[lazarus]

So no evidence whatsoever then? Just your childish jumped up conclusions - I wasn't holding my breath anyway.

I supposed it is quite humorous how desperate people can get supporting untenable beliefs and really shoul be in this section.

[rsmith7]

£azarus,
The hatchery had a bacterial problem.
The OSU helped them sort it.
The OSU went public saying the problem was caused by Ocean acidification
The OSU held a presentation about the bacterial problem in the hatchery.
You argued blind that the hatchery problem was acidification.
It wasn't.

At best, the OSU used the hatchery as part of a baseless AGW scare story.
At worst it fabricated evidence to show the world's shellfish will all dissolve soon.

These are the facts old quoit.

[lazarus]

Sept 14, 2010 19:25:05 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

At best, the OSU used the hatchery as part of a baseless AGW scare story.
At worst it fabricated evidence to show the world's shellfish will all dissolve soon.

You have provided exactly NOTHING to support this claim. You think a firm can only have one problem?

[rsmith7]

I've searched the OSU and local newspapers and cannot find any evidence of an acidification problem at the hatchery. I'm sure you've done the same. The article stated the ACIDIFICATION problem began in 2007. In the video, they stated the BACTERIA problem started in 2007.
There was no mention of acidification in the presentation about the hatchery.

I've got 20 years experience in this field and, with one look, can tell that they would have severe water quality problems on that site. Look at the place on google maps/satellite. They are situated beside a freshwater stream in a practically land locked lagoon with a small town using it as their toilet.
You desperately tried to say that they drew water from the ocean. Look at the satellite photo. There is no pipework that would make that possible.
I can see their intake pipe just to the south west of their settlement lagoon.
But still you cling to the assertion that it's an ocean acidification problem.

You're making a fool of yourself old bean.

[lazarus]

Sept 15, 2010 19:41:34 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

You're making a fool of yourself old bean.

Me a fool? Anyone reading these threads can clearly see you have fabricated a libellous claim of corruption and fabrication.

And you have actually made a silly claim on here somewhere that all my claims (for my read links to stories about scientific research) have been utterly debunked!

Surely only you are foolish enough to believe your own hype.

[rsmith7]

£azarus
Could you please address the points raised in my post above.
Where are the pipes used to draw water from the ocean as you have asserted previously, for a start?

[lazarus]

Sept 15, 2010 22:46:55 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

Where are the pipes used to draw water from the ocean as you have asserted previously, for a start?

I don't know and neither do you. Nor can you tell what difference it would make. The water is filtered, it is from the ocean. That ocean has a changing pH due to increased Co2.

If you stick with the real facts and the known science you have nothing.

[rsmith7]

I do know that there are no pipes through which water could be pumped from the ocean. Look at the satellite image I linked to.
The water is not drawn from the ocean, it is drawn from a practically land locked lagoon with all sorts of crap flowing into it.
Look at the satellite image.

Remember what I have said about boring rejection of empirical evidence??

Do not reply with more boring diversionary tactics.
Address the issues raised or go away.