No most scientist's don't lie, however they don't speak up for the truth either, they can say CO2 is a greenhouse gas, man is emitting CO2, so man is responisble for warming (all of which is true) and ignore the facts that the climate is not very sensitive to CO2, that CO2 has been very much higher in the past without problem warming, that natural variations have a much bigger impact than CO2, that some warming is almost certainly benefical.

Well okay they do lie, they lie by omission.

I think the rank and file climate scientists just keep their mouths shut and collect their nice big fat paycheck every week, at taxpayer expense. But the lead advocates of this SCAM tell plenty of lies. People like Dr. Michael E. Mann of hockey stick graph fame, people are trying to get a full release of his data to this day and he is in court fighting it. What is he hiding? And of course he tried to eliminate the Medieval Warming Period with his Hockey Stick graph which is now so debunked that not even the IPCC uses it anymore. Then you have all the data tampering where decades old established records are being 'adjusted' lower and recent temperatures are exaggerated upward, that's worse than lying, that is criminal.

Then of course during ClimateGate, the CRU scientists were exposed for rigging peer review and 'hiding the decline' and other dishonest tactics. So yes, there is plenty of lying and deception that comes out of the so called 'climate community.'

-----------------------

How does a scientist really lie when he is "studying" (actually looking for answers in his studies)?

The word "science" use to mean "the study of ..." something. Nowadays, it means that a scientist is an "expert" on anything he studies just because he is studying it. That's one reason why people are losing "faith" in the science. They (scientists - the IP CC in general) are being conclusive without "just cause" and without skepticism. The science has been letting people like Al Gore make "proclamations" based on a political objective instead of letting the skeptics weigh in on the subject.

Liberal politicians have been very rude to all people lately simply because the extremists have been taking over the internet and TV media for many years (there's nothing conservative for them to report so they have to make things up), but since climate science has become a politically motivated science (ever since the "intended" establishment of the IP CC in 1988), climate science has enhanced the idea that the liberals are the rudest human beings to all other human beings simply based on political ideology and other purposes.

"True" Conservatives don't worry about extreme scientific behavior. Obama has been showing how actual liberalism works in a "free market" (tic - "free market" meaning - "all humans are fair game for exploitation").

Watch as he (Obama) stands back and lets hundreds of thousands of people get slaughtered. "Global Warming/Climate Change" means nothing to him. He's just another "shallow" thinking liberal without a clue!

He may be changing the "political climate", but that is all he is changing. "Climate clowns" will hopefully be thrown a paddle when they find themselves up the s*** creek.

If you believe what you are saying, you aren't lying. Scientists aren't the ignorant ones - the denial of global warming is done by the ignorant, or those who stand to profit from the status quo.

the climatic research center at east anglia university in norfolk england where all the data was coming from were found to have faked all the data , when they found their data showed NO global warming they moved all their monitoring points into towns and cities so they would read higher - they didn't so they falsified their data since then no serious scientist has accepted global warming and the international conference on climate change found there has been no warming since 1998 and in fact a very small cooling trend and some of their experts are now predicting a "mini ice age"

Of course. They are instructed to lie or else! The libtards make boocoo money from this false phony BS of GW.

Most deniers are entirely sincere, but tend to be scientifically unqualified. In 1911 Scientific American Magazine reported that CO2 is transparent to high frequency visible light, and opague to low frequency radiated heat. This fact seems inescapable and explains why scientists have been concerned about global warming for more than fifty years.

If you were a scientist, would you lie?

Keeping in mind that the truth will come out,

if you did lie, who would hire you afterward?

(Well, there is faux-lies, but they obviously don't need hundreds of scientists.)

I suspect that private industry (farmers) employ quite a number of them.

If you worked in the agriculture industry, would you lie?

I would assume not.

Last, would you be telling the farmers one thing, and the general public something completely the opposite?

http://www.c3headlines.com/fabricating-f...

Here is proof that Jimmy Hansen lied.

they're in it for the money

No. The lies about global warming come from the people who deny it, for whatever reason.

We know the deniers do.