Comments on: IPCC Gets a Solid “F” in WSJ Poll http://www.climategate.com/ipcc-gets-a-solid-f-in-wsj-poll Anthropogenic Global Warming, history's biggest scam Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:21:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Graham http://www.climategate.com/ipcc-gets-a-solid-f-in-wsj-poll/comment-page-1#comment-6456 Graham Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:14:35 +0000 http://www.climategate.com/?p=5797#comment-6456 I guess the alphabet isn't long enough to get a similar report for the University of East Anglia, and speaking as a Brit, I am thoroughly ashamed that, when the only thing we have to be proud about is our integrity, we have such a shameful example spread over the global media. It doesn't matter what the result of the inquiry is, no scientist with self-respect or a reputation they care about, will wish to be associated with them. You can fix many things, but a reputation isn't one of them. I guess the alphabet isn’t long enough to get a similar report for the University of East Anglia, and speaking as a Brit, I am thoroughly ashamed that, when the only thing we have to be proud about is our integrity, we have such a shameful example spread over the global media.

It doesn’t matter what the result of the inquiry is, no scientist with self-respect or a reputation they care about, will wish to be associated with them. You can fix many things, but a reputation isn’t one of them.

]]> By: Tom Arnold. http://www.climategate.com/ipcc-gets-a-solid-f-in-wsj-poll/comment-page-1#comment-6452 Tom Arnold. Tue, 02 Mar 2010 12:40:51 +0000 http://www.climategate.com/?p=5797#comment-6452 I fear my opinion of the IPCC is completely unprintable. And in my estimation if I were marking their efforts, I would think the student/s was being downright facetious and I would not award any marks whatsoever. Because any scientist can note immediately, the outrageous claims and implausible timescales - Himalayan glaciers to melt in 35 yrs.........Heavens above it's all b******* science and I've read more convincing, and more cogently argued conjecture in books by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle even Stephen King et al. I fear my opinion of the IPCC is completely unprintable.
And in my estimation if I were marking their efforts, I would think the student/s was being downright facetious and I would not award any marks whatsoever.
Because any scientist can note immediately, the outrageous claims and implausible timescales – Himalayan glaciers to melt in 35 yrs………Heavens above it’s all b******* science and I’ve read more convincing, and more cogently argued conjecture in books by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle even Stephen King et al.

]]> By: DougS http://www.climategate.com/ipcc-gets-a-solid-f-in-wsj-poll/comment-page-1#comment-6447 DougS Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:41:27 +0000 http://www.climategate.com/?p=5797#comment-6447 I'm assuming that "F"= FAIL and "D"= atrociously bad, if so they're still being a bit generous. The 6.6% who gave A, B and C must be vested interests! I’m assuming that “F”= FAIL and “D”= atrociously bad, if so they’re still being a bit generous.

The 6.6% who gave A, B and C must be vested interests!

]]>