the use of the word “trick” is well-established in scientific

literature, especially where mathematics and statistics are

concerned.”

Please, then tell me , in math, what trick is used in 2+2=4 ?
Please tell me what math tricks were used with the 1st

landing on the moon ? Were their primitive computers loaded
with “tricks” to guide them to the Sea of Tranquility ?
PRESICELY WHERE they were supposed to land ?

a TRICK is A TRICK ! Fudge factors are sometimes necessary
to make up for lack of data on a continuing trend.
But it’s more than apparent that tricks and fudge factors
were grossly misused in all this climate data hoax.
The leaked emails attest to that. Face it. The lid has blown

off of the scam ! Analasis of the parts of the code that were

leaked show HARD numbers where DATA should be to skew the

results in a favorable way. PHONEY OUTCOME !
NOT REASONABLY DEBATABLE ! GARBAGE.
PLUS… the raw data was dumped !!!
Convieniently after a FOIA request !!!!
I damn well gaurantee that the FOIA data is STILL intact.
Frrauds, every one of you “scientists” !!!

Overall the most amusing comments I have seen in a while… along with the ones bashing Monkton for using the name “Rhodesia” instead of Zimbabwe. I am sure that there are many in the British house of Lords that still refuse to recognize that country as anything other than “Rhodesia”. It was certainly much more prosperous back then. Far from perfect, but then again, it went from far from perfect to absolute hell-hole after Mugabe took over, and you would have to be a REAL racist to not admit that fact.

At least the use of the word “trick” is well-established in scientific literature, especially where mathematics and statistics are concerned.

The use of the word Rhodesia these days is however established in few places where the light still shines.

Next time the anti-climate science PR machine think they’re being so clever fooling people with cherry-picking “tricks” they might want to do some research first so as not to end up with egg on face. . .
and Monckton might want to start doing some schooling as well. He’s degreed only in the classics and journalism, not science at all.
It hasn’t stopped his vocal opinion from foraying into the medical field though when he advocated that all carriers of the AIDS virus be forcibly collected and quarantined for life.
If he has published anything scientifically relevant in the atmospheric climate research realm however, it’s deeply hidden. Oh wait, there was that APS opinion piece. Not peer reviewed, not scientifically examined, and given a quite proper note to that effect. He wasn’t happy with that and claimed he had been edited. If that were the only hurdle to publishing data my research group would not be labouring over the 3rd review of our paper at this moment!

http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/20/irony-gate-viscount-monckton-a-british-peer-says-his-paper-was-peer-reviewed-by-a-scientist-how-droll/

Is allowing hobbyists to dictate public policy a wise move in any nation however. Even Al Gore doesn’t claim to be a scientist.

Here he is demonstrating that asking a Greenie simple basic questions is allways the best approach;

Too many people pushing too many “fashionable ideas” got us into this mess in the first place.

‘That brought to mind not only the difficulties I personally had getting into the conference center this week but also problems I ran into immediately with the UNFCCC’s secretariat when I tried to obtain press accreditation as IEEE Spectrum magazine’s editor for energy and the environment. When proper press credentials failed to arrive on request, and I sent an e-mail message of inquiry, the secretariat told me that they did not issue press credentials to publications of “non-governmental organizations” and only accredited press organizations somehow recognized by member governments.’

http://spectrum.ieee.org/blog/energy/renewables/energywise/copenhagen-and-the-uns-ngo-problem