Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

Soda Linked to Cancer: Study

2 soft drinks a week could raise pancreatic cancer risk by 87%

Feb 8, 10 4:53 PM CST
HAITI EARTHQUAKE

4 Weeks Later,
Man Pulled
From Rubble

28-year-old dehydrated, malnourished

Feb 8, 10 6:11 PM CST
Cougars Get
Pregnancy Warning

Ad campaign warns women they can be fertile into their '50s

12 hours, 6 minutes ago
Palin Blasts Global Warming Studies as 'Snake Oil'

... in speech to Calif. logging conference

Feb 8, 10 10:04 PM CST
Jack Nicholson Wouldn't Mind Being Eaten
by Vultures

Actor, 72, mulls Native American 'sky burial'

Feb 8, 10 8:45 PM CST
Achy Hearts Are Breaky

'Broken heart syndrome' caused by emotional, physical stress

13 hours, 50 minutes ago
Nancy Kerrigan's Dad's
Death a Homicide: DA

Charges against Olympic figure skater's brother may be amended

5 hours, 12 minutes ago
Analysis

Obama Calls
GOP's Bluff
With Health
Care Summit

President thinks Republican ideas will look worse in the spotlight

Feb 8, 10 2:20 PM CST
Botox Numbs
Emotional Response

If you can't frown, brain finds it harder to be sad, study surmises

8 hours, 6 minutes ago
Green Nail Salons
Smell a Trend

Workers suffer through long exposure to toxic chemicals, carcinogens

6 hours, 35 minutes ago
Federal Study Tries to Derail Train Suicides

Railroad Administration looks into ways to block tracks

5 hours, 59 minutes ago
ANALYSIS

GOP to Push Gradual, Market-Based Health Reform

Party will offer clear alternatives at summit with Obama

13 hours, 6 minutes ago
Fearless Gambler?
Could Be Brain Damage

Harm to amygdala seems to impair 'loss aversion'

8 hours, 41 minutes ago
Orcas Storm
Beach to
Grab Seals

Killer whales surf ashore for dinner

Feb 8, 10 5:43 AM CST

|NEXT STORY »

Fallout From Hacked Climate Change Emails Intensifies

Scientists worry backstabbing could derail emissions agreement

By Rob Quinn| Posted Nov 24, 09 9:22 AM CST|

(Newser) – The planet-sized rift between climate scientists skeptical about man-made global warming and the rest of the field has been getting even wider this week as the fallout from last week's hacked emails continues. Some experts fear that the emails—in which climate scientists insult skeptics and discuss ways to block dissenting points of view—could hurt the chances of an agreement on cutting emissions, the Wall Street Journal reports.

Evidence of efforts to silence opposition is "what everyone feared," one scientist discussed negatively in the emails says. Other scientists say that while the emails will embarrass the scientists involved, they're not a game-changer in the climate debate. "It shows that the process of science is not always pristine," the director of the Yale Project on Climate Change tells Reuters. "But there's no smoking gun in the emails from what I've seen."

[Images (1)]

[Quotes (1)]

Aviation Maintenance Tech 2 John Ferrari looks out of the back of a Coast Guard C-130 as he surveys the ice off of the coast of Barrow, Alaska, during a surveillance flight to the Arctic. (AP Photo/Al Grillo)

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

It has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn't questionable practice, this is unethical.
- Pat Michaels, climate scientist at
the Cato Institute

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

2.9.10

It’s the Sex, Stupid

2.8.10

For Me, Palin Scores

61 comments

VIEWING:

tomodachi
Nov 24, 09 9:24 AM CST

This is republican food. Reply

-8

IN RESPONSE:

osu1067
Nov 24, 09 9:28 AM CST

Appropriate timing of the release of these emails since Thanksgiving is just a few days away.......

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 9:38 AM CST

oh please tomodachi why must you always waive your banner and point your finger. What proof do you have for that comment? Are you really that narrow minded that you must blame republicans for everything? Your getting as bad a DLY only on the opposite hill. Why not condem the people who are trying to block freedom of speech. To quote the text above "climate scientists insult skeptics and discuss ways to block dissenting point of views". Bad tree huggers!

+13

IN RESPONSE:

tomodachi
Nov 24, 09 9:57 AM CST

quid pro quo... i'll answer your question... but first answer mine: ____________________________________________________ In your opinion... what's the definition of insulant?

-1

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 10:10 AM CST

insulant Insulant meaning insulation dolphin is a marine mammal, I am an A/C&R technician in the Navy therefore its a play on words for my job... your turn.

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 10:11 AM CST

you can look the meaning up at:

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 10:12 AM CST

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insulant

IN RESPONSE:

tomodachi
Nov 24, 09 10:24 AM CST

LOL… awesome… that’s what I thought. ____________________________________ To answer your questions in order: 1. Proof? Please elaborate. 2. No. 3. I am. ____________________________________ So tell me... what is it about those 4 words I posted... that have got you so angry?

-3

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 10:35 AM CST

1: its prety plain what made you make a statement saying its Republican food? Why can't it be Democrats or Indipendants. 2: I read some of your other comments and I havn't read anything possitive about any republicans, are they all evil devils that must be smited? 3: If you are condeming the people who said those words then why do you assume they are Republicans? Do you personally know their party affiliation? 4: It makes me angry when people automatically assume that someone who does something bad must be different than they are, so with that said I will claim them as Indipendants.

IN RESPONSE:

tomodachi
Nov 24, 09 10:46 AM CST

So it wasn't just the 4 words that got you riled up... but the aggregate of my posts. If this is true then you know I despise the 2 party stranglehold the republicans AND the democrats have on the US. And you must also know that while I do point out my displeasure of the republicans more... i also point out the democrats… with the same “finger.” So maybe you went a bit overboard... and maybe I have the right to feel the way i feel? And do I have the freedom to express my opinions of what's wrong with the US government here?

IN RESPONSE:

tomodachi
Nov 24, 09 10:59 AM CST

@insulant_dolphin: And you talk about freedom of speech? How about privacy too? Between the scientists who plotted and the people who hacked emails… In your mind: Who should be thrown in jail? What public right do I have to your emails? Can I post your private comments emailed to someone else? Do I get more rights to your emails if I believe they contain your immoral opinions? Does that justify my hacking you... just to confirm my suspicions? Should I be arrested for posting your immoral private emails to public places? Is there a law against this?

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 11:14 AM CST

First the fact that people hacked other's e-mails is illegal. So I do believe in the freedom of privacy. I also believe in the freedom of speech too. its terrible that we live in a world that we must balance the two whe nits just easy to say "what you do in your home or in private is just that private" but then you get into other aspects of when it is ok to breech others privacy. Look at the guy living with the corpses, the police that came to his house were not allowed to look inside because its his private home. Things like this make the whole privacy issue touchy. do we have the right to privacy and if so when is it ok for others to break it? So see we do agree on the issue of privacy vs. right to "snoop". If the Gov't didn't track people looking a kiddie porn then they would never arrest anyone for it, then again does that mean they are looking at your computer files and e-mails right now just to see if you were looking at something thats illegal? Does it make it ok?

-2

IN RESPONSE:

DontLikeYou
Nov 24, 09 11:15 AM CST

{{{ Some experts fear that the emails—in which climate scientists insult skeptics and discuss ways to block dissenting points of view }}} --- Liberals cannot achieve their goal unless they block dissenting points of views. All tyrants do the same thing, Hitler, Stalin..... you libs are in infamous company.

IN RESPONSE:

tomodachi
Nov 24, 09 11:34 AM CST

@inulant: Yeah... you're right. In the US we put so much emphasis on personal rights that we tend to crap all over victims to protect the rights of criminals... until proven guilty .___________________________________________________ And I must say... If you think i go overboard on my expressed displeasure of the Republican party leaders... then I can agree with you there too. I can't say I'll stop... but I'll try to be more considerate.

IN RESPONSE:

Forderon
Nov 24, 09 11:44 AM CST

Insultant, are you denying that the right has seemingly made the opposition of science and the demonizing of intellect one of the platforms of their party?

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 12:25 PM CST

I don't think that its wrong to show displeasure for a party (either one) it is, as you said, your right to do so. I just don't like the flag waivers and finger pointers who think their party can do no wrong~~ @ forderon so your saying that the "left" doesn't? Are you trying to paint me into some corner so you can say I am a Republican? Try again. I have points of view on both sides of the fence which is why I am Indipendant. But to answer you straight yes Republicans seem to block more research than Democrats do. But to say its a "platform" for their party? No, that would be saying they want to disband all scientific research and go back to the "world is flat" era.

-2

IN RESPONSE:

tomodachi
Nov 24, 09 2:42 PM CST

@insulant: Well... I really have no party. And yes... the republicans AND the democrats are doing wrong. If I had my way... there'd never be another republican or democrat in congress or the white house. They've totally bastardized the system to their benefit. They think we're an endless supply of money.

| 0 minutes ago

riffran
Nov 24, 09 9:40 AM CST

In all seriousness.......we do need to take better care of the enviroment..never argued that point...never will...big oil needs to go away, renewables need to be developed...always been for that too......the politics of climate on the otherhand, has done more to worsen ANY progress we might make to that end...Al Gore is one of the biggest charlatans in that feild....between his deliberate skewing and spinning of the facts, along with this busted "consensus" of scientist..."THE DEBATE IS NOT OVER"....in fact far from it..the oceans are actually cooling again, there is no flooding of the coastal plains...in fact there is growing ice in the antartic...climates change ...the sahara desert was once a verdant land, so was the namid, the bonneville salt flats was once an aquatic enviroment, the glaciers tha carved the great lakes retreated at one point, why????...because climate changes...most likely in cycles longer than we can imagine Reply

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 9:43 AM CST

all I can say is... ooooh look at the light!

IN RESPONSE:

kirby
Nov 24, 09 9:58 AM CST

I can imagine it. I remember the 70's and the "coming of the next ice age". Then it was the "Ozone layer", then "global warming" and now "climate change". Whatever you want to call it, it's part nature. I'm not saying that man has "nothing" to do with it but I don't believe it's as big of a deal as govt would have us think.

IN RESPONSE:

Guava_Jelly
Nov 24, 09 10:23 AM CST

@riffran- Agreed, the idea/ argument far less controversial than global warming (or which side is right predicting what the weather will be in 40-100 years), is ENERGY independence.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

DontLikeYou
Nov 24, 09 11:18 AM CST

@kirby,..... you're not sure man has nothing to do with it? Did man have something to do with the glaciers melting 10,000 years ago? Of course not. The earth warms and cools in a natural cycle. To blame this natural process on man is a lie. Don't get caught up in the lie.

IN RESPONSE:

kirby
Nov 24, 09 12:25 PM CST

I agree with you DLY, for the most part. But surely man has had some kind of impact. I don't think we could live the way we do and not have one. I think what little we do have is a non issue. And on a different note, if the ice is melting, wouldn't the ocean be receding, not rising? Ice takes up more room than water... yes?

IN RESPONSE:

DontLikeYou
Nov 24, 09 1:22 PM CST

Saying man pollutes (we do) and saying man is going to cause a disaster of epic proportions such as a 10 foot rise in sea level in 50 years are two separate issues. I am all for less pollution. I am NOT for lies and deception in the name of a lie known as human initiated global warming (or climate change as the liars are now calling it).

IN RESPONSE:

Pragmaticrealism
Nov 24, 09 6:19 PM CST

DLY your cluelessness concerns me beyond description. You are blinded everyday by a mind numbed by religious doctrine. I, too, once was. Our Actions* have effects, no? How is it so hard to imagine that our climate is changing due to our countless Actions* over the recent industrial BOOM?!?!?! ****Is it a Liberal lie that for every Action* (buring trillions upon trillions of tons of PURE energy), there is an equal and opposite REACTION (a more active, unpredictable climate, my friend). The earth is a relatively closed system, like your house. If you burn shit in your house, the smoke rises, and what happens? You know, I hope. I am in no way attempting to explain the deep feedback systems behind climate change, but only trying to plant the smallest, hardiest seed in your mind, apparently barren to science, so that you can actually contribute to the debate, without calling the entire concept a LIBERAL LIE?? In any serious learning institution, liberal or otherwise, that idea is literally laughable. Time to catch up with the rest of us, liberal or otherwise, or else future generations are going to have to deal. Also, do you deny environmental degradation? Fresh water shortages? Pollution problems? please answer

IN RESPONSE:

Hip
Nov 24, 09 10:57 PM CST

@pragmatic, I don't understand why you always have to shit on people in your posts. You don't agree with them...fine, deal with it. You don't have to give your opinion and then spit on the person. I agree with riffran and disagree with you. I don't give you a thumbs down for having an opinion either. Read riffran's post and don't get mad because everything he wrote has been previously published by scientists.

IN RESPONSE:

NewserScooter
Nov 25, 09 12:49 AM CST

The Earth is hardly a closed system. Turn off the Sun and the Earth is dead in a week or less. We absorb and reflect energy in massive amounts far in excess to what we burn in fuels, which BTW are derivitives of Solar energy, that came from off planet. The systems in play are rather complex.

IN RESPONSE:

Pragmaticrealism
Nov 25, 09 4:13 AM CST

@ hip: what, are you 12? I couldn't care less who you agree with, or if you think I speak harshly. This topic is more important than so many realize or choose to accept, and I'm sick of the ignorance.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

Hip
Nov 25, 09 7:59 AM CST

Then you ARE the ignorance.

IN RESPONSE:

Hip
Nov 25, 09 8:05 AM CST

I agree with you NewserScooter. But according to pragmaspasm your intelligent post is all wrong because he says that if you burn something in your house the smoke rises.

| 0 minutes ago

RockyPneumonia
Nov 24, 09 10:10 AM CST

In other words, a small handful of liberals behaved in the way that conservatives have institutionalized as the core of their strategy. Reply

-2

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 10:14 AM CST

So that makes it ok? It's wrong no matter who does it. Don't try and make it sound like its ok because they are "on your side"

IN RESPONSE:

DontLikeYou
Nov 24, 09 11:19 AM CST

A small handful of liberals? Surely you jest! The lies and deceit over global warming is a liberal hallmark. You libs MUST lie to acheive your goals. It is as certain as the sun rising in the East.

IN RESPONSE:

RockyPneumonia
Nov 24, 09 11:36 AM CST

...And yet, DLY, you seem unable to cite any credible evidence to support your claim that liberals lie more than do Republicans. It's almost as if your claim is itself a lie. Almost ---------- The Numbers on Politifact and Factcheck, by the way, indicate that conservatives out lie liberals by 4 or 5 to one.

IN RESPONSE:

DontLikeYou
Nov 24, 09 1:24 PM CST

Your delusion is apparent for all to see.... except for those who will ignore it because you think like they do.......

-2

IN RESPONSE:

Caps
Nov 24, 09 5:52 PM CST

DLY, I wish someone would knock that chip you have on your shoulder off. You get nuttier with each posting,

| 0 minutes ago

Stasis
Nov 24, 09 10:12 AM CST

Jesus said "Crap all over the planet. That is why God gave it to us...Be fruitful, become many and take giant sh*ts all over the planet. Sh*t here. Sh*t there. Sh*t everywhere." Reply

-7

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 10:20 AM CST

ok this made me laugh.

-2

IN RESPONSE:

DontLikeYou
Nov 24, 09 11:20 AM CST

@Stasis..... Did Jesus tell liberals to lie in the name of instituting a global tax on the citizens of the Earth?

-3

IN RESPONSE:

Pragmaticrealism
Nov 24, 09 6:24 PM CST

DLY why such selfishness? Our action and consumption has costs (both dollar, and environmental), and the current costs of our actions/consumption do not take into account the the value of the resources that are being spent. If we don't acknowledge and bear this difference, we will pay for it tenfold in due time. Unless Jesus keeps his word, sighhh

| 0 minutes ago

dax
Nov 24, 09 10:54 AM CST

On one hand those in the scientific community should not use their professional status as empiricists to invest in a low order of political activism. ---- PERHAPS these folks would have been LESS motivated to unduly influence the dialog on global warming, IF the Bush Administration had not used its influence to quash climate reports coming out of various agencies (NASA et. al.) ---- Shots were fired on both sides of this contest to control public opinion. ---- Some scientists dispute man's influence on climate change. Fine. No one has stopped them from presenting their case DIRECTLY to the public, and so far the arguments I've seen have been lacking. ---- Despite the unprofessionalism implied by SOME of these emails between SOME of these scientists, the larger body of work that indicates a climate change trend connected to human activity still stands. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

riffran
Nov 24, 09 11:14 AM CST

to be fair..the fact that man is spewing tons of pollution in the air on a daily basis worldwide, and NOT affect the climate is ridiculous...and burning rivers OMG...lakes and streams unsuited for aquatic life it all bad....but the whole carbon cap and tax bull, but the deliberate skew and misinformation deluge..from both sides, the enviro's over dramatizing, and the skeptics reactions to the overdramatizing....by minimalizing just confuses the regular "Joe" that just wants to have a backyard garden, and go the the lake on the weekends, and do some fishing

-1

IN RESPONSE:

dax
Nov 24, 09 5:56 PM CST

> "Joe" that just wants to have a backyard garden, and go the the lake on the weekends, and do some fishing " ---- Now THAT'S 'minimalizing" and/or trivializing the issue.

IN RESPONSE:

Pragmaticrealism
Nov 24, 09 6:31 PM CST

Yes, very trivialized. What about the billon or so people who are going to have serious water shortage issues, very soon. Or the hundreds of millions who will be displaced from their low-lying places of residence, such as myself? Do we get to keep a backyard garden, too? Trust me please, higher taxes are the least of our worry. It's time to realize that life as it has been for the average American is impossibly unsustainable in the long run.

| 0 minutes ago

divetrader
Nov 24, 09 11:05 AM CST

Is it really news when one party tries to block another? William Randolph Hearst made Hemp illegal because he owned paper mills and had huge investments in the forest industry. Perhaps we should make it illegal for politicians or scientists to have investments in anything that would affect their opinions. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

insulant_dolphin
Nov 24, 09 11:17 AM CST

oooh I like it, where do I sign that petition?

IN RESPONSE:

CS1234
Nov 24, 09 11:32 AM CST

Me too. Get the money out of Washington and watch how much better it gets.

IN RESPONSE:

riffran
Nov 24, 09 12:19 PM CST

excellent point there divetrader..thumbs up from me..!

-2

IN RESPONSE:

Pragmaticrealism
Nov 24, 09 6:32 PM CST

thumbs up

| 0 minutes ago

riffran
Nov 24, 09 2:34 PM CST

@insulant......you're job description reminded me of an old SK-1"s sense of irony...his favorite joke was.."I joined the Navy, to get away from my drug problem...and what did they do? They put me on a fricken LSD working the reefer deck...go figure"...rofl Reply

-2

| 0 minutes ago

Hip
Nov 24, 09 4:03 PM CST

The smoking gun is the fact that scientists disagree about CO2 and global warming, period. Whenever All Gore (sic) talks about global warming he always says "scientists believe..." but he never mentions that a good percentage of scientists actually disagree with what he's about to say. Other evidence of this withholding pertinent information is in the talk about global warming in general. You never hear one positive slant, it's always gloom and doom. Can there only be negative outcomes if the globe warms up a few degrees? Impossible! I bet there are a lot of people in Greenland who would love for the globe to warm a few degrees in the next 50 or so years...but you never hear about them in an All Gore presentation. Reply

-1

IN RESPONSE:

Pragmaticrealism
Nov 24, 09 6:40 PM CST

Really?? REALLY?????? """""""Can there only be negative outcomes if the globe warms up a few degrees? Impossible!""""""" CAN YOU IMAGINE THE LOSS OF 50% OF POTABLE WATER WORLDWIDE, THE LOSS OF 20% OF ALL COASTAL CITIES WORLDWIDE, THE LOSS OF PERHAPS 60-90% OF ALL SPECIES OF ANIMAL, WORLDWIDE? can you? Well, if you can imagine it, I guarantee you can't comprehend or appreciate it, because that would require a mind that grasps the interconnectivity and interdependence of all things seen and unseen.

IN RESPONSE:

Hip
Nov 24, 09 7:19 PM CST

You think with a username like that you'd be a little more pragmatic, my friend. I never said there aren't dangers, I just said that we always hear of the negative and never hear any positives...doesn't that concern you? Maybe not, but when I only hear one side of the story from anyone (a politician, a lawyer, a pharmacist, a priest, my mom) for 10 minutes, I begin to wonder about what they're not telling me. The global warming scientists have been telling only one side of the story for 10 years! I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything about global warming...I'm just wondering WHY they seem to be hiding important information. The emails mentioned in this post seem to mention that the scientists were indeed withholding info...is it true? I obviously can't say for sure but it sure as hell wouldn't surprise me. So go ahead and give me a thumbs down...all I'm stating are the facts. As for your stats of doom and gloom, of course those situations would be terrible...but will they happen? Says who? Cause not all scientists agree...

IN RESPONSE:

Pragmaticrealism
Nov 25, 09 4:24 AM CST

Jesus you sound like Glenn Beck. How can you say you stated facts, hip? There was only accusation and logical flaws. If you admittedly don't know anything about a subject, then don't form strong opinions, and defer to experts who give their careers to these studies.

IN RESPONSE:

Hip
Nov 25, 09 8:24 AM CST

@fagomatic, did you read my post? I said I didn't know if the stealing of the emails thing was true because I don't believe everything I read. Anyway, I guess you do believe everything you read, which clarifies everything to me...especially your view on global warming. FACT: Scientists do not all agree on what's happening to our planet. Or is that an accusation or logical flaw? You are the one who spews predictions and percentages like they're facts...now that's ignorance.

| 0 minutes ago

jimw428
Nov 24, 09 6:53 PM CST

Way too many liars and powerful people, protecting way too many rice bowls, for this climate change farce to be put right Reply

| 0 minutes ago

jeebus
Nov 24, 09 11:06 PM CST

99.9% of the population has no idea how climatologists collect and study data, yet everbodies a fucking expert. The fact is that over 95% of scientists believe in man made global warming. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

NewserScooter
Nov 25, 09 12:51 AM CST

Can you cite a reference that is not written by Gore or Hansen about that. I have met few climatologists who buy MMGW. Now liberal gov't officials who stand to increase their power though taxation, yep 99.9% of them will agree.

IN RESPONSE:

jeebus
Nov 25, 09 1:18 AM CST

A reference? look out the fucking window. When I was growing up here in southern New Jersey, the ground would be covered with snow, sometimes for weeks at a time. Now, it's rare that we have a snowcover that lasts an entire week now. We used to have 5 or 6 snow days a year, now, the kids are lucky to get 2, not to mention every god damn glacier on the planet and the polar ice cap is melting, plus the rise in sea water. I have also noticed that most global warming deniers just so happen to be religious shitheads too, it's almost becoming it's own religion.

IN RESPONSE:

djpars
Nov 25, 09 10:18 AM CST

First of all, scientists absolutely agree that glabal warming is happneing. Any dissent lies laregly in the realm of WHY. But if everything keeps going the way its going, the earth will be uninhabitable in short time. Whether its our fault or not... why take the chance? Why not err on the side of being able to help our situation?

| 0 minutes ago

wayno215
Dec 1, 09 12:18 PM CST

this changes everything for me!i recall the big scare of a new ice age a way back and now this!they can suck an egg. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

View all 61 comments »

climate change • global warming • scientist • skeptics • hacking • climate skeptics

from our news partners

Just For Laughs

Associated Press

UN climate chief defends panel report findings
(Feb 4, 10 5:15 AM CST)
Michigan State research team develops global warming climate model to aid East...
(Jan 14, 10 1:17 PM CST)
Michigan State research team develops global warming climate model to aid East...
(Jan 14, 10 12:39 PM CST)
New Hampshire officials say agriculture has large role in climate change, energy...
(Jan 12, 10 4:35 PM CST)

What is Newser?

Face it: there's too much news. At Newser, we choose the most important stories from hundreds of US and international sources and reduce them to a headline, picture, and two paragraphs. And we do it 24/7—you can come back morning, noon, night (and in between) for something new that matters. Read less, know more.

Learn more »

x

Fallout From Hacked Climate Change Emails Intensifies

Scientists worry backstabbing could derail emissions agreement

[Images (1)]

[Quotes (1)]

Drier Atmosphere Slows
Global Warming

10% less vapor in stratosphere kept temperature increase down in 2000s

Drier Atmosphere Slows Global Warming

10% less vapor in stratosphere kept temperature increase down in 2000s

Bin Laden
Blasts US
for Causing
Climate Change

Terrorist-in-hiding urges boycott of American goods, the dollar

Bin Laden Blasts US for Causing Climate Change

Terrorist-in-hiding urges boycott of American goods, the dollar

Wacky Winter Seen As
Sign of Climate Change

Less ice means more moisture in air and more precipitation, study says

Wacky Winter Seen As Sign of Climate Change

Less ice means more moisture in air and more precipitation, study says

climate change • global warming • scientist • skeptics • hacking • climate skeptics

MOST POPULAR STORIES

[ By Views ]

[ By Comments ]

from our news partners

Just For Laughs

Associated Press

About

Help

Tools

Site Maps

What is Newser?

x

Fallout From Hacked Climate Change Emails Intensifies

Scientists worry backstabbing could derail emissions agreement

[Images (1)]

[Quotes (1)]

Related Newser Stories

Drier Atmosphere Slows Global Warming

10% less vapor in stratosphere kept temperature increase down in 2000s

Drier Atmosphere Slows Global Warming

10% less vapor in stratosphere kept temperature increase down in 2000s

Bin Laden Blasts US for Causing Climate Change

Terrorist-in-hiding urges boycott of American goods, the dollar

Bin Laden Blasts US for Causing Climate Change

Terrorist-in-hiding urges boycott of American goods, the dollar

Wacky Winter Seen As Sign of Climate Change

Less ice means more moisture in air and more precipitation, study says

Wacky Winter Seen As Sign of Climate Change

Less ice means more moisture in air and more precipitation, study says

climate change • global warming • scientist • skeptics • hacking • climate skeptics

MOST POPULAR STORIES

[ By Views ]

[ By Comments ]

from our news partners

Just For Laughs

Associated Press

About

Help

Tools

Site Maps

What is Newser?

Drier Atmosphere Slows
Global Warming

Bin Laden
Blasts US
for Causing
Climate Change

Wacky Winter Seen As
Sign of Climate Change