4 ms·

Related news from yesterday - and related to past repeated posts by some on Hacker News insisting there was a 'ClimateGate conspiracy': "An inquiry by a federa

by logjam 16y ago

Related news from yesterday - and related to past repeated posts by some on Hacker News insisting there was a 'ClimateGate conspiracy': "An inquiry by a federal watchdog agency found no evidence that scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration manipulated climate data to buttress the evidence in support of global warming, officials said on Thursday." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/25/science/earth/25noaa.html?partner=rss&emc=rss http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/25/science/earth/25noaa.html?...

guscost 16y ago
An inquiry by me found a lot of evidence. Sorry.
- grammaton 16y ago
  Do share with us then.
  - guscost 16y ago
    Eh, no, I'm not trying to convince anyone else. Just do your own research, and don't trust obvious bullshit like that.
    - 2muchcoffeeman 16y ago
      You don't have to convince anyone, we just want to see your research.
      - guscost 16y ago
        Well, I guess you're out of luck then.
archgoon 16y ago
I was very pleasantly surprised to discover direct hypertext links to the primary source document. I did some additional scanning of Science articles, and it appears that the New York Times may have adopted a policy of actually linking to the published articles that are discussed in the article. Kudos to them. This may seem like a small thing to be happy about, but amazingly enough, it isn't done that often. It's really depressing.
harold 16y ago
FTA: "The report was not a review of the climate data itself." The senate committee report referenced in the article raises questions about non compliance with FOIA requests, scientific objectivity and how money was a determinator in process. The committee report is here: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=597ab372-802a-23ad-468b-765a651134b0&Region_id=&Issue_id= http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.P...

by logjam 16y ago

guscost 16y ago

An inquiry by me found a lot of evidence. Sorry.

grammaton 16y ago
Do share with us then.
- guscost 16y ago
  Eh, no, I'm not trying to convince anyone else. Just do your own research, and don't trust obvious bullshit like that.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 16y ago
    You don't have to convince anyone, we just want to see your research.
    - guscost 16y ago
      Well, I guess you're out of luck then.

archgoon 16y ago

I was very pleasantly surprised to discover direct hypertext links to the primary source document. I did some additional scanning of Science articles, and it appears that the New York Times may have adopted a policy of actually linking to the published articles that are discussed in the article. Kudos to them. This may seem like a small thing to be happy about, but amazingly enough, it isn't done that often. It's really depressing.

harold 16y ago

FTA: "The report was not a review of the climate data itself." The senate committee report referenced in the article raises questions about non compliance with FOIA requests, scientific objectivity and how money was a determinator in process. The committee report is here: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=597ab372-802a-23ad-468b-765a651134b0&Region_id=&Issue_id= http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.P...