AGW tactic - forgery?

[bluefrog]

No once again you are wrong. One is a think tank. there are lots of those. The other is a public repository of raw data. They are not the same.

They are not the same.

They are not the same.

I think we both agree that what Gleick did was wrong.

I guess you're saying hacking a public repository is ethical. I would disagree with that.

It amounts to saying that it's OK to lie and steal so long as you feel your intentions are good, and so long as you don't get caught. That's not a code of ethics, but a rationalization for throwing out ethics.

 

[Denny Crane]

Gleick was chairman of an organization dedicated to ethics. Oops!

 

[bluefrog]

Gleick was chairman of an organization dedicated to ethics. Oops!

I think we both agree that what Gleick did was wrong.

 

[Denny Crane]

Yeah, but this is on the order of a gay republican being outed after years of championing anti-gay policies.

and what's more interesting is to see who circles the wagons around him.

 

[Denny Crane]

Since we're talking tactics...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...-ago/2012/02/28/gIQA4mriiR_story.html?hpid=z5

Radical theory of first Americans places Stone Age Europeans in Delmarva 20,000 years ago

At the height of the last ice age, Stanford says, mysterious Stone Age European people known as the Solutreans paddled along an ice cap jutting into the North Atlantic. They lived like Inuits, harvesting seals and seabirds.

The Solutreans eventually spread across North America, Stanford says, hauling their distinctive blades with them and giving birth to the later Clovis culture, which emerged some 13,000 years ago.

When Stanford proposed this “Solutrean hypothesis” in 1999, colleagues roundly rejected it. One prominent archaeologist suggested that Stanford was throwing his career away.

...

Other experts remain unconvinced. “Anyone advancing a radically different hypothesis must be willing to take his licks from skeptics,” said Gary Haynes, an archaeologist at the University of Nevada-Reno.