Hacker News Reader

Comment by robotrout | Hacker News Reader

To whomever hacked these emails, I thank you. I really think this was a valuable service to mankind that you've achieved.

You've lifted up the robes of the priesthood, and exposed them to be at best, flawed scientists, and at worst, social engineers. Whether this knowledge will have any effect on the truly brainwashed, we see that it doesn't, but it will have an effect on saner minds.

The marketing geniuses who turned 'global warming' into 'climate change','carbon dioxide' into 'carbon', and migrating polar bears into victims, will surely not be knocked out by this, but they're deleting emails this morning, you can be sure!

View on HN

You're ranting like a loon about brainwashing, cheering on the hacking of private e-mail, and you're getting upvoted for it?

If my e-mail was hacked and out-of-context quotes were levied to take ignorant pot shots at my work, I would be beyond livid. This behavior is absolutely inappropriate and I hope the perpetrator is caught and jailed.

Thanks for sharing your valuable insights on this issue.

Of course, the email wasn't private, was it? It's a government funded (your money) institution. That actually, perversely, makes this crime even more illegal. Governments seem to have more rights than private citizens.

So, you're right, it was a crime. You're also right, I'm cheering it. But you're wrong about who is ranting. It's you who is ranting.

Of course, the email wasn't private, was it? It's a government funded (your money) institution.

This justifies breaking federal law and then excising context as to leverage out-of-context statements to dishonestly support your position?

It's no wonder that climate scientists are mildly paranoid about the behavior of "deniers".

But you're wrong about who is ranting. It's you who are ranting.

You've convinced me sir. I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

I think it's obvious from your constant "out of context" remarks, that you haven't actually read the emails. Instead of me starting a newsletter for you, why don't you download them and read those instead?

Well, as long as we see ALL the emails, they can't be taken out of context, eh? (What? Communications methods other than emails? Preposterous.)

Emotionally, I'm glad it happened. But that doesn't make it right. The hackers were stealing, there's no getting around that fact. The end doesn't justify the means.

    The end doesn't justify the means.

Sir, you appear to have a highly developed moral sense. I respectfully submit that you haven't really analyzed that sentence carefully, however.

Many means are justified by their ends. It's left to history to decide if the means really were justified. Some things, like Hiroshima, we still agonize over, 50 years later, whether the end justified the means. As for hacking some scientist's emails, and possibly saving hundreds of thousands or even millions of human lives by stopping a gross misallocation of resources? Yeah, I could sleep with a smile on my face on that one. No qualms about justification in my mind.

You are begging the question, assuming that climate change is a fraud and that any resources allocated to dealing with it will be detrimental to life. We might equally consider that if you're incorrect, many lives could be endangered through lack of necessary action...although given your characterization of this whole episode as a religious issue, I'm not sure you are aware of the fallacy in your argument.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com