Thank you for posting a link to NOAA's response. Could you also post a link to the complete set of raw temperature data for those 70 stations? 70 separate download links will also do. And I'd certainly like to have the original raw data before any adjustments.

I don't have a problem if you or NOAA or anyone proves McIntyre or Watts wrong. But I need to have some proof instead of rebuttals. These e-mails have changed the situation so, that neither side should be believed without solid evidence. Say-so isn't enough.

It is unfortunate that the signal to noise ratio on the skeptic side is low.

I have no problem with thinking skeptics. I think there should be more of them. But the problem is almost all the skeptics are fanatical mad dog skeptics with solid Ph.Ds in arcmchair climatology backed by B.S's in BS. It's become like evolution vs. intelligent design, only worse.

I think that the fanatic ones are not skeptics at all. They are mostly ignorant people with loud opinions. However, there is an equally big bunch of equally ignorant and loud environmentalists, who are equally bad. This Slashdot article is a prime example of the battle between those two ignorant camps. Way too much noise and partisan moderation. This whole debate should be about data and science and not about people. So we should ignore all the ignorant, loud ones no matter what their opinions are.

I believe, that it is unethical for you to just point out the low quality of those, who don't share your point of view.

I've read through a lot of material of that FOIA.zip. I have no degree in climatology, but I have 20 years of experience in computing and analyzing sensory data and data conversions. From what I've read, there are big problems with how the CRU tempareture data is processed. These problems affect the outcome. How much? Nobody knows, but we all should be interested in finding out.

I have no respect for those, who just repeat, that there's nothing here to see. These people have not read the material. They are just cheerleaders, who support their own team, no matter what. They add no value to the debate.

Even if humans aren't causing global climate change, cleaning up the air is a GOOD THING for our own health.

Reducing pollution is definitely a good thing for our health. However, concentrating on CO2 has lead to boneheaded legislation and subsidies that result in increased pollution.

Random data will not do. They'll definitely do a raw copy of the whole device before trying any passwords. Then they will try your key on two different copies and notice, that the data looks different.

So, you assemble a group of people from different big companies and vastly different backgrounds and expect them to do a good job, think critically and be unanimous? Are you really serious?

If you bring together a big enough group of experts, they seldom are unanimous. Add the outside influence from the big companies and you'd have a recipe for failure.

The group would avoid changing anything big as it would only lead to conflicts. After a while the brightest people would get frustrated and leave. After adding less ambitious people, that group would probably be very good at making decisions on very insignificant matters. Also known as wasting time and money.

America became a world superpower (in part) because it's not afraid to fund such things. I would rather have the government triple NASA's budget rather than buy a couple more golf balls for GM execs...

USA became the superpower because it's letting companies blossom and people use their potential to chase their dreams. As a consequence of that, USA had the manpower, knowledge and resources to shoot for the moon and deliver the glory days.

Government and public money funded organizations do not deliver. Money is "free" for them. What they are good at is wasting money and doing incredibly stupid decisions. It's politics at it's worst.

Really, do not install Windows for your older parents. They will just get in trouble with it. Get them a Mac or some really user friendly Linux distro, like Ubuntu.

The #1 problem with Windows is not usability, but malware. As older people don't probably have any clue about security, it's best to let them use an OS, that will keep them out of trouble.