Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

The only WRONG I see is people who think a series of papers with valid concerns blows the lid off a well supported scientific finding. You have NO IDEA how many studies have been conducted on climate change. The vast majority show the same trend as Mann's.

McIntyre and McKitrick don't have any scientific criticisms, they are critical of the statistical methods that Mann et al. used in their studies. When the legitimate criticisms are reviewed, the conclusions do not change... that is, when other statistical tests are performed, the scientific results remain the same.

It's around here somewhere. Just name the study and I will do my best to get the data. Although you won't have any idea what to do with it because you are a dufus.

You don't even realize that Mann et al actually wrote the code you claim they doctored, do you? You really have no idea... at all.

The data IS available. The data IS being modeled properly.

Congress accepted the report....
...the membership of the National Academy of Science committees involved is listed below.

And you can read all of the papers and make the conclusions yourself.

bluering, the M&M had a criticism of the statistical methods that Mann et al. used.

Not only did Mann et al. respond, three independent scientific committees looked into the criticisms. In the end, the conclusion of the scientists was that while some of the M&M criticisms were justified, when the data were treated to different statistical tests, the scientific result remained the same.

Many such independent studies have been done, and they agree with Mann et al.,
they do not agree with McIntyre...

Science isn't about getting everyone's data, but rather, understanding the science implied by the observation/experiment and designing something independent to challenge that science.

As I've said above, science works in spite of the fact that humans do it, which is pretty incredible.

others find out not by investigating those people, but by doing independent science