lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:40:46 -0600
From: Paul Schmehl <>
Subject: Re: Software developer looks at CRU code

--On Monday, November 30, 2009 6:13 PM -0600 Rohit Patnaik 
<> wrote:

> Right, but you said that the global warming folks are asking for
> unnecessary spending of *trillions*.  Where would those trillions go?

Apparently you haven't read the proposals to deal with global warming.  An 
MIT study found the cost of complying with one proposed energy sector bill 
designed to deal with global warming would be $4500 annually per family of 
four.  The EPA analyzed the bill and estimated its cost at 500 billion 
dollars by the year 2030.  And that's just for the US.  And just one 
suggested "solution" to the so-called problem.

> I don't see Al Gore becoming richer than Bill Gates off carbon credits.

So unless Al Gore makes more than Bill Gates he's not motivated to 
proselytize for global warming?  He's already made millions of dollars off 
the scam, but I suppose his motivations were of the purest form.

> Neither do I see the UN gaining any more power via the IPCC.  If
> anything, the existing climate treaty (i.e. the Kyoto protocol) has
> completely sidestepped the UN. 

Anything that takes power away from local communities concentrates power in 
larger governmental entities.  By the same token, anything that takes power 
away from nations, concentrates power in a larger entity - in this case, 
the UN, which would supposedly administer fines for non-compliance, etc., 

> I guess what I'm troubled by is the fact that you seem to be stating that
> there's some kind of deliberate malice on the part of those stating that
> anthropogenic climate change is real.  I don't see malice.  I see a
> fair amount of incompetence, but incompetence exists in every discipline.

Have you read the emails that were exposed by the hackers?  The 
"scientists" have deliberately misled the public regarding the data, 
conspired to deny FOI requests (which may be a criminal offense), attempted 
to get the media to both ignore and denigrate the opposition and written 
programs designed to deliberately skew the data in their favor and hide 
unfavorable data.


If that isn't malice, what is?

Paul Schmehl
As if it wasn't already obvious,
my opinions are my own and not
those of my employer.

Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia -

Powered by blists - more mailing lists