Global Warmists Dig in Their Heels over Climategate — Kind of
Coby Beck, author of How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (PJM’s fisking of his work here):
I hear the conspiritorial cat is well out of CRU’s bag and the jig is up on the Global Warming hoax. I guess the Greenland ice sheet will be well refrozen by now, and the sea levels have stopped rising. Oh well, it was fun scaring you all while it lasted!
———————
Chris Mooney, author of The Republican War on Science. (Yes, really.):
Why “ClimateGate” Ain’t Nothing
Global warming deniers are having a field day, because in some of the emails, the scientists are acting like, you know, people. They are also acting like scientists under fire, which is what they were and are. The Climate Research Unit is headed by Phil Jones, who has been involved in the highly public and seemingly unending “hockey stick” battle — and so peering into the emails lets the skeptics and deniers once again claim there was some kind of bad science involved in this one particular study, a claim they’ve been making for almost a decade now. Of course, none of this is at all relevant to the climate issue today. It’s a nasty, ugly sideshow. The science of climate change doesn’t stand or fall based upon what a few scientists said in emails they always thought would remain private. …The fact is that no matter what a few scientists may have said in emails, we have to go to Copenhagen and deal with our warming, melting planet. That’s what matters. The rest of this is hot air, and — unless it can somehow be channeled to power a few wind turbines — it doesn’t do us or the planet any good.
How are these hacked emails helping my children?
———————-
First: Watergate was named “gate” for a reason. Every other “gate” is just a silly name.
Second: The only emails I’ve read, I’ve read involuntarily as they’ve been posted to Wikipedia. I don’t think it’s right reading the email of others.
Third: I assume the “worst” emails are the ones they’re trying to push.
Fourth: From what I’ve read, this seems much ado about nothing.
I haven’t kept up with the climate blogs/news recently, so maybe my assessment is wrong. But it seems like the email conversations you’d expect scientists to have.
My two cents.
“Delete the emails!” is not the email conversation I would expect scientists to have. Scientologists, maybe. Or James Carville.
———————-
Climatedenial.org (“This blog explores the topic of the psychology of climate change denial … “):
SWIFTBOATING THE CLIMATE SCIENTISTS
The theft of 1,000 private e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA) shows that deniers have learned lessons from dirty politics and are running a new campaign to undermine public trust in climate scientists. …The denial industry (and hordes of climate nerds) has trawled through these e-mails and found sentences which, when removed from context, support their storyline that climate science is being deliberately distorted and exaggerated for a mixed bag of self interested and politicized ends.
Even better for them, some of these quotations come from Michael Mann.
But you could find anything in here. I looked and found lots of references to lunch and fun, 94 to hate, 31 to love.
You may deny our science, but you cannot deny our references to love.
————————
I guess the Greenland ice sheet will be well refrozen by now, and the sea levels have stopped rising.
Obama did say “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”, who knew he was referring to the exposure of the AGW Hoax in the first year of his presidency?
Of these, the best is Mooney’s. He leaves off sniffing and sniveling—for a moment—to sneak in a joke.
But, Christ, honey, “our warming, melting planet”? Good grief!
I got a chuckle at the title “Swiftboating the Climate Scientists.” You see, to “Swiftboat” someone is to tell an inconvenient truth (to borrow a phrase) about a Leftist. Rather than answer the allegations, the tactic is to question the motives, intelligence, and morality of the accusers.
I have Russian friends , I spend time in Russia. My nationality is Norwegian. Let me tell you this though:
NOBODY IN RUSSIA BELIEVE THE GLOBAL WARMING HYPE, nobody CARES
and I am sorry to say that combating this “warming” (actually it is cooling?) will financially RUIN USA (which by the way is already ruined). If your savior Obama will spend further trillions of his phantom money on combating the CLIMATE I am sorry to say:
YOU ARE FINISHED
stupid stupid people!!
The Left’s nitpicking, misdirection of animosity, attacks against the messengers, preposterous theories of innocence, and all the other attempts at distraction are predictable and IMO will ultimately fail. Just look at what contortions the liberuls put us through to defend Congresspersonage Jefferson. He is now prisoner Jefferson. And look at what they said about the Islamist pipe bombers in the Carolinas. “Just some kids with fireworks looking for a good time.” Sure, sure.
Defending the indefensible, its what they do, the nasty rogues.
Raise them all to Corporal! They know how to defend the indefensible!
It will be interesting if these new denialists (denials that their emperor is naked) react to the disclosures that the data and software is in such bad shape that the CRU folks can’t figure them out – even though this is the data and software that the CRU research product is based on.
Anyone taking bets?
“…How are these hacked emails helping my children?”
They are helping your children by keeping them free from environmentalist fascism.
Global Warming has become a secular religion for these people; the facts are not important as the politics & the money. This story has enough energy to grow & consume the whole idea of climate change nonsense.
All of the quotes in the post are missing a couple of things:
1. The emails are only part of the story. The data (being examined all over the ‘sphere) is corrupt, and therefore any and all conclusions from it are invalid. Anything based on this data, among them the infamous IPCC reports, must be discarded as well, if you want to maintain the fig leaf of “Science”.
2. They’re completely skipping many of the emails as well, such as the ones where the authors speak of blocking dissenting authors from being published and trying to influence the personnel and editorial content of journals. That’s not science, that’s politics.
3. A week or two ago, some of these same authors already admitted that “the dog ate their data” and they could not produce it (now we know why!). If the authors can’t produce the data for others to review, that’s not science either.
These guys have no idea how badly they have hurt their own cause.
Here is the email from realclimate.org editor stating that he will do what he can to assist in eliminating or silencing any dissent from the established “consensus”
From: “Michael E. Mann”
To: Tim Osborn , Keith Briffa
Subject: update
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:51:53 -0500
Reply-to: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Cc: Gavin Schmidt
This shows that there was a conspiracy of sorts, not perhaps a “global” one, but at least several people in positions to do were willing to censor comments as well as refusing to publish any papers that do not support CRU, et all’s “consensus” on AGW.
guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we
put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre
thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go
there personally, but so I’m informed).
Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way
you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about
what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any
questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you
might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold
comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think
they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d
like us to include.
You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a
resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put
forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our
best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC
comments as a megaphone…
mike
–
Michael E. Mann
Associate Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075
503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663
The Pennsylvania State University email: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
University Park, PA 16802-5013
http://www.met.psu.edu/dept/faculty/mann.htm
As of 3 pm eastern, none of the Obama media, which is most of the MSM have even covered this story.
See, if they don’t cover it, it’s not news.
Our gatekeepers in action…makes you wonder about the stuff we missed before the net.
I’m glad they are trying to cover up this mess with LAME excuses. This just makes it worse for them and also confirms the emails aren’t a hoax. Their NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDERS is on full display.
Who’s making fun of climate scientists?
David Steinberg.
David Steinberg? No kidding?
No, no — not that David Steinberg.
Who then?
I dunno. Some guy.
Smoke screens begone – there are tricksy moves in those emails. More importantly, the emails are only one part of the picture. I understand that data files, both original and derived, and computer code are the others. Will the data support the assertions of the alarmists? Do the computer programs work? Do the algorithms, or does the code contain errors? Can the work of the alarmists be used for any purpose? It will be many months before these questions are answered. But answered they will be.
This “climate gate” thing is just beginning.
So we are to (assume) and (apparently) guess at what Phil Jones meant.
Is Phil Deaf and Dumb or on disability and can’t answer the questions himself?
Deny, Deny,
and it will go away-
Bill Clinton
this whole thing is so over rated…
Mr, I agree Global Warming is completely overrated; unfortunately, politicians want to impose Communism through the backdoor of Green technology & Global Warming. Therefore, we must be vigilant. Have you noticed it snows or is unusually cold when Al Gore has a meeting about Global Warming? God has a very good sense of humor apparently…
Now here is my message to the yet remaining climate change afirmering believers, hanger-oners:
if one looks at the current political climate(gate) from a different perspective, there is a sort of
strange but relieving logic to it:
now that it cannot be denied that the colleagues at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research
Unit (aka Hadley CRU) aren’t playing by the rules of law and goodwill and that the circle of those
tainted by this major scandal is hardly likely to be limited to the CRU (it is hardly plausible that
the rogues at Hadley CRU were capable of isolating questions about their views and communications from
all of the agencies and groups of people around them…)
it logically follows that:
we should all be more eminently relieved in assuming that the particularly dire threat of imminent
global/climate/warming/change is almost certainly also to the same extent eliminated and a thing of
the past as is the reputation of the scientists at Hadely CRU and those in collusion with them;
in other words, we can all relax now and concentrate on real environmental issues which won’t
necessary require establishing a kind of corrupt UN world gov. puppet body to tax and regulate…
The real important question now is: HOW CAN WE REGAIN TRUST IN THE VOICE OF SCIENCE?
4. Chris:
well said: stupid stupid people
The emails and documents in question have been verified by the CRU as having orginated on their server. None of the ‘suspects’ has denied that they authored the emails and documents.
What those emails and documents reveal is criminal activity, including tax evasion and fraud and conspiracy to commit tax evasion and fraud. The smoking guns, the motives, the opportunities, the victims…and the signed confessions.
Title 18 of the U.S. Code
Section 1001 (false statements)
Section 287 (false claims)
Section 371 (conspiracy to defraud the government)
Section 1341 (mail fraud)
Sections 1341
1343 (wire fraud)
Title 26, sec. 7201, Attempt to Evade or Defeat tax.
Where are the legal experts who post here?
Meanwhile, back on Mother Gaia, Greenhouse gasses are a-riseen;
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576368,00.html?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a16:g4:r5:c0.000000:b29039368:z10
But the temperature isn’t.
Imagine that!
This would cause a rational person to question the theory that rising greenhouse gases cause a temperature increase. What does that tell you about the AGW faithful?
All he (apparently) meant by “Mike’s Nature trick” was us, in our original ‘98 Nature article, showing the instrumental record after the proxy record ends (1980)
Yet doesn’t Gavin, on RealClimate, make the claim that nobody, ever, ever, ever, EVER, EVER, EVARRRRR concatenated the instrumental record onto the proxy record?
There’s a book title that I’m thinking of, right now. Paging Al Franken. Al Franken, courtesy call on line one!
It’s really a pretty simple thing to understand; these files took a long time to assemble, it took good knowledge of the ‘assembler(s)’ to understand the importance of each item.
This was an insider LEAK, not an outsider HACK. I actually suspect it was all information collected/assembled in preparation to dispose of prior to getting nailed with a FOIA. (shades of ACORN disposing of 20k pages of data, in a dumpster…)
The leaker(s) knew the importance of leaking this data prior to it’s disposal. Insider job.
Another observation: the leaker wasn’t well versed in distribution of an item like this – it took a good day before it was on torrent site ThePiratebay.org.
What we really need is for ALL suspicious items to be cataloged, and public, because the enviro-extremists WILL return, it’s just a matter of when. And we need to be well prepared for their comeback!
It’s going to be a good while before we fully understand the importance of this leaked data. But I know it involved some high players from UEA and UN’s IPCC.
ANY Fraud and Lies coming from ‘scientific’ players of those levels is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!
We also need to understand the ‘intent’ behind the players involved, thus far all we have is denial. Again, to help us better guard against a comeback.
This is just delicious . The lefts second favorite hoax and they do what liars are always compelled to do . They lie.
If you tell a lie often enough it becomes a tired useless lie regardless of who is spreading the lie. It cannot ever become the truth.
Its sorta like a prostitute trying to recover her virginity.
Someone please ask me what their favorite hoax is , please.
Well, now, just what has Penn State been trying to do here to get to the truth of the matter? Have they frozen Professor Mann’s account so that he cannot delete any emails? Do they have backups that are beyond Mann’s reach? Are they seeking to do a investigation into this matter? Will they make public the results of this investigation? Have they made a statement that they will cooperate with any legal authorities who are interested in investigating this matter
Penn State’s credibility is on the line here. Perhaps the administration needs to be reminded of this.
I subscribe to the idea that there is some humor in everything, if the timing and delivery are right. But this is new: there’s nothing funny about this. The country is in the grip of violent, dangerous fanatics who have the added quality of rank stupidity. It is time to start kicking people in the face or they will never back off. Don’t kid yourselves that this will make these savages skulk off in shame.
this is what you are up against. it is like trying to have a discussion or debate with a troll.
they have no morals to match their lack of honesty.
Maybe America will elect a Conservative so real science will once again be served. It is obvious that Dubya failed on that because we got the Won winning .. in part on that slogan. Now that the left is discredited, fully I might add, by obama on real science. That leaves only a real Conservative……. You know, someone who values truth.
Values truth… well, that ain’t a lieberal, now is it?
“We’ll laugh at them one by one–just like the shooting sun”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPQA__j3kLg–“Shooting Sun” by Siouxsie & the Banshees
I got a great way to generate gigawatts of electricity for America.
Just hook these people up to the nearest generator. The way they’re spinning, they could each light up Las Vegas on their own!
Science should be about a universally proveable truth and global warming is theoritical. That also should be a margin of disqualification.
Assuming that man made climate change from greenhouse gas emmission is true, what would be the outcome if all CO2, methane, and water vapor from power plants, internal combustion engines, and industry were immediately eliminated? Wouldn’t we have to wait 50 years to find out if that experiment worked? Who would be left alive to validate the heroic efforts of saving the plant? How much damage would be caused to civilization? Would the earth return to it’s hypothetical balance of which designated era?
Opinion: there is as much chance of cooling the planet with off-set carbon credits as there is of making someone more healthy by giving him more insurance. Real pollution should be fought, mental delusional pollution should be fought harder.
The castle is crumbling. Yea!!!!!!
#14 Anonymous: When David joined PJM, I tried the same joke on him.
Didn’t work then either.
I guess he’d heard it before.
I think the emails are embarrassing for some of the authors, there’s no doubt about that. But some of the interpretations I’ve seen certain bloggers impose on them have been patently absurd. The emails hint at the possibility of problems – but that’s all they do. When you dig further (i.e get some facts), some of the “headline” emails (at least, the ones I’ve had point out to me) turn out to be pretty mundane, and not at all an indication of the sorts of things that the anti-AGW crowd is suggesting.
A lot of noise is being generated, but I think there’s a heck of a lot less to these emails that some people seem to want to impose on them. Embarrassing? Yes – some authors say some stupid things, express dodgy opinions and say downright rude things about others. But do they prove (or even convincingly imply) a conspiracy to mislead, or consistent, deliberate dishonesty? No, they don’t. Sorry.
This strikes me as a replay of the ID crowd’s “teach the controversy” strategy. There is (IMHO) actually not a lot of real interest in those emails – but if enough people hoot and holler like there is, and occasionally post the odd half-sentence with a paragraph of editorializing, it’ll seem like the IS something big going on.
It’s a clever tactic by the person who leaked the emails to include plenty of personal commentary as well – the authors are going to be far more concerned about the fallout from that than they are about the scientific claims, and hence they’re laying low. Eventually they’ll have to explain themselves, but the boosters will have a good month of claiming whatever they like before they do.
There ARE reasonable questions raised by some of the emails. But without more information, all anybody can do is speculate. An actual journalist would go ask some questions and resolve the matter – but all we have in this case are bloggers with opinions, so it’ll remain just speculation.
Matthew, you are missing some big points. Yes, reactions to *some* of the emails are overblown.
But… others of the emails indicate collusion to destroy data, to prevent skeptics from publishing, to blackmail scientific journals which publish papers by skeptics, to ignore legal FOI requests, and to prevent skeptics from obtaining data.
Those are serious issues.
As for the actual science, there are two points:
1) The facade maintained by the alarmists that they were altruistic scientists has been shredded
2) The validity of their data has been utterly destroyed, by the accompanying data itself and the comments of the poor programmer trying to make sense of it. These guys DON’T HAVE THE DATA they have been publishing about, and upon which the IPCC reports are based. It is either non-existent, or missing the necessary meta-data required to use it.
This is a very big deal, and not just because some folks are saying questionable things. People are very correctly calling into question both the behavior of the scientists and their conclusions.
Remember the “science is settled” and “skeptics aren’t serious because they don’t publish in peer reviewed journals?” Both of those arguments have been utterly destroyed by this data dump.
What hope is there of enlightenment when the MSM even when the whole rotten edifice of the AGW SCAM is exposed still writes paragraphs like this in a article supposedly about the SCAM
“The leak has been a huge embarrassment to the climate unit at the University of East Anglia, which is a global leader in its field.
Although there is NO HINT of evidence that climate change IS NOT REAL , the emails appear to show researchers MANIPULATING raw data and discussing how to dodge Freedom of Information requests.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1230635/Scientist-climate-change-cover-storm-told-quit.html”
Notice the use of the WEASEL WORDS Climate Change which we all KNOW is real it is AGW which is the SCAM and even though they admit the data was MANIPULATED but they cant even now bring themselves to say it. What hope have people who rely on the MSM for news got of getting the truth.
John Moore:
“Matthew, you are missing some big points”
Probably.
“Yes, reactions to *some* of the emails are overblown”
Most of them, I suspect. I asked someone on a blog yesterday to give me his worst examples so I could see what the fuss was about – and of the 7 or 8, only one of them (as far as I could see) indicated genuine willingness to misbehave (and it didn’t even prove misbehavior – it just showed a willingness). So I suspect that, like in all things, the bloggers making the claims are not all equal.
“But… others of the emails indicate collusion to destroy data”
Do they show that data was actually destroyed?
“to prevent skeptics from publishing”
Please show me an example from the emails where someone was successfully prevented from publishing.
“to blackmail scientific journals which publish papers by skeptics”
What I’ve seen is a willingness to ignore journals which publish (in the opinion of the authors) bad science. I see no problem with that, honestly. The world of scientific publishing is staggeringly large – a couple of churlish authors doesn’t make a lot of difference. It’s a market, like anything else.
“to ignore legal FOI requests, and to prevent skeptics from obtaining data”
On the second, yes – absolutely. I’m still waiting for an explanation of why researchers do that (including one from the lancet body count guy). But the first is still far from proven (from what I’ve seen). There’s a lot of big talk in those emails – but somebody needs to prove actions or it’s just talk (and shows that the authors are bozos)
“1) The facade maintained by the alarmists that they were altruistic scientists has been shredded”
I wasn’t aware that such a facade mattered, or even existed. The issue of motives and credibility has always been much more important to skeptics than AGW’ers, for obvious reasons.
“The validity of their data has been utterly destroyed, by the accompanying data itself and the comments of the poor programmer trying to make sense of it. These guys DON’T HAVE THE DATA”
That’s possible. But surely their data is not the only global source, is it?
“Both of those arguments have been utterly destroyed by this data dump”
No, I really don’t think it is. Not yet, anyway. You’re talking like this is the one institution that works in the field. It isn’t – the field is VAST. There’s definitely one prominent IPCC author with a great deal of egg on his face (can’t remember his name, but it’s currently on leave, unsurprisingly), but it seems to me that a lot of allegations raised by these emails need to be followed up properly before anyone can conclude something like that. I know you WANT to conclude that, but I want to see a proper case, not just extrapolations from a filtered selection of one-sided conversations. Show me the actual misdeeds, please. You’ve got the leads – now somebody please follow them up and find out what actually happened. Show us that murdoch is wrong – that bloggers can actually report news.
Get hold of 13 years of records from any academic institution, and I could dredge up plenty of backbiting, nastiness, dishonesty, tribalism, territorialism, ego, envy and bad language. It’s been like that forever. As somebody once said: Why is academic politics so nasty? Because the stakes are so low. The field of AGW shouldn’t be any different.
I suggest waiting a little bit and finding out how other research groups react. I’ve met people at CSIRO’s atmospheric research unit, and I’m pretty sure they’d be just as furious as you are to find out their data is rubbish. Scientists don’t like being lied to any more than anyone else does. They’ll have to deal with that – and it should show up in the papers.
If at climate-alarming you don’t succeed, why not turn the data upside down. I kid you not. See this link:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/17/iq-test-which-of-these-is-not-upside-down/
Despite all the revelations of the SCAM Al Bee Bee Ceera ( BBC) is STILL unashamedly punting Global Warming SCARE stories. This is from the BBC site today 25/11/09
“Warming globe
The past, present and possible future of climate change ”
Here is the link to the stories with all the Graphs based on what we now know is MANIPULATED information.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8359629.stm
Once the emails , data and models are looked over by real scientists (skeptics)and the cat is out of the bag we might get a sense of the validity of all the positions. If this is the fraud it appears to be , all those government grant recipients need to face the real global horror , lawsuits. Phony scientists can sell some magic cure vitamins once they get out of prison. The media and politicians actually seem to be getting more dire and demanding immediate action as they fear they hoped for gravy train might get derailed. Funny they do not seem interested in the truth like the skeptics.
The Truth Will Out, and Other Lies
“The truth will out,” along with what seems a million other terms and phrases, is credited to Will Shakespeare and, as with so many other wise Bard aphorisms, is generally true. Except when it isn’t.
We’re bombarded daily with news reports, announcements, statements many of which, based on their sheer repetition, become chiseled in our brains as absolutes when they are absolutely false.
Fortunately, usually, the truth will out, will work its way through piles of faleshoods and be exposed for what it is.
Two examples follow:
The Global Warming Farce, aka The Big Lie: A prime instance of truth outed is the long-running charade that is anthropomorphic/anthropogenic climate change.
Those big words, simply a high fallutin’ multisyllabic way of saying mankind did it, is a baldfaced lie which is finally getting exposed.
We have been warned and lectured that man is responsible for global warming/cooling/climate changing for years now and that we had better stop being poor stewards of the planet before said planet eats us up and spits us out.
Environmental radicals . . .
(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1343)
Visual aids to facilitate the discussion:
“Won’t anyone think of the kittens?”
http://sweasel.com/archives/4943
“Hockey stick? I’ll give you a hockey stick!!!!!1!!
http://sweasel.com/archives/4951
What bothers me about these e-mails is that the perps don’t seem to be too bright. Oh, I’m sure they have little hats with SCIENTIST printed on them, but that doesn’t automatically make them geniuses; some “scientists” are a lot dumber than others. So the problem is, it took a long time to get the goods on these hammerheads. It’s only prudent to assume that some of the people in on this scam are a lot smarter than these clowns. They’ll be a lot tougher to catch.
Forget the personal email. The code, the programming comments CONFIRM the misuse of raw data and the massaging of the data to give the “correct” (warming in this case) answer. This CANNOT be taken out of context. It’s fraud. Don’t just read the blogs with the “he said – she said” banter. The code doing the data reduction was rigged. Try defending that. Admit that it was a colassal hoax with researchers getting essentially limitless grants (tax dollars) with an abetting and eager funder (the govt) with the ultimate goal of using it as a way to tax everyone and for some, social engineering.
What ever the accuracy of interpretations of the e-mails by all who try may be, we are still left with a vast discrepancy between the projections of the predictive climate models and observed climate/weather.
Leftards: You are done. No one is buying what you are selling. Cap n’tax is history. Copenhagen will be a joke, even (especially) with Barry 0 showing up. We have won. You and your fake “science” lost.
Why don’t you arm yourself with some facts on climate change fundamentals.
From NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center:
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict_l.gif
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Zurich_Color.pdf
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/
Other sources:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html as a great primer.
http://www.leif.org/research/ a treasure trove once you understand the basics.
And this is just funny!
http://anhonestclimatedebate.wordpress.com/predictions/
….because in some of the emails, the scientists are acting like, you know, con artists and frauds.
More accurate.
Okay, #25 WRJonas, I’ll bite…
What is the first?
So basically, The Global Warming Alarmists are the new Flat Earthers of our time. The sky is falling/ you will fall off the edge of the earth/ we are all going to burn up/ Your breathing is killing us.
The emails prove what the guy debunking the hockey stick charts had been saying for a decade , scientists are cooking the books to create a global warming alarm . The fact that they try to cover up a period of global warming in medevil times to make a period in modern times seem apocolyptic would just be a hoax that would just discredit climate science without the fact that they have built a scam upon it , selling carbon credits … Now it is a conspiracy that will make many lawyers very rich .
These “scientists” need to go to jail for bilking billions of dollars from the taxpayer. And Al Gore should be their cellmate. Maybe old Bernie too.
Danzo.
You racist bigot radical extremest.
How dare you confuse the argument with facts.
Great links! Thank You.
Jeez,
A whole lot of people are missing the main point. These guys are “scientists”, here how it’s supposed to work.
Scientist: I have discovered this fact (X), here’s what EXACTLY what I did, Here’s how we measured the data, here’s EXACTLY how we processed/evaluated the data, here’s why we are justified in concluding that the meaning of the study is undeniably (X), Oh and by the way here’s the actual data and processing tools we used. Evaluate our study – I’m sure that you will concur.
Peer reviewers: repeat what was done, validate the measurement technics, validate the processing/evaluation, determine the validity of the conclusion (X), try to find any holes in the entire chain that could in any way undermine the conclusion (X). If no problems are found then, conclude that (X) may actually factual, and proceed on the basis.
What actually is happening,
Scientist: Me and my buddies (and like politically minded folks) say (X), look at this graph we made.
Peer reviewers: WAY COOL!
Skeptical types:Might we have a peek at the data you used and perhaps the processing tools employed so that we can determine the validity of (X)?
So called scientists:Screw off!
It goes much deeper than just that, but’s that’s enough to say it’s not science at all.
Where is FOXNews on this? Other than Beck, that is.
I just listened to Charles Krauthammer say that Global Warming is inconclusive science, but it is not junk science. This, 5 minutes after discussing the e-mails exposing the BIGGEST HOAX IN WORLD HISTORY. I’m sorry, I know many conservatives love Krauthammer; but I’ve always thought he was a psuedo-conservative putz — now I’m sure of it.
“I guess the Greenland ice sheet will be well refrozen by now, and the sea levels have stopped rising.”
Is that the same Greenland ice sheet that accumulated 268 more feet of ice tween 1942 and 1991?
A couple of P-38’s had to make an emergency landing on an ice sheet in the 1940’s. Years later, after rampant global warming, only 268 feet of ice accumulated on top of them!
D’Ho’
Matthew @ #38: You are indeed missing the point. A key aspect of the global warming “hockey stick” are the temperatures assumed to exist centuries ago as derived from tree ring data by Michael Mann. Served Cold @ #16 includes blog exchange between MM (Michael Mann?) and SA. In the first part of his defense of the CRU emails, MM admits that post 1960, tree rings cannot be used to infer temperatures. He then says it is proper to simply delete that data. I learned in Mr Gregory’s science class that I have to show ALL my data points. If one or two stray from the line hypothesized I was to give cogent reasons why they may be off. If the majority of points went astray then the hypothesis was disproved. Therefore even the scientist defenders of CRU show a complete break with proper scientific method within their defence. THAT IS THE POINT.
This doesn’t even go into the whole situation wherein Mann has been shown to have cherry-picked his original tree ring data (Something like 35 trees were examined but only 9 or so were listed in the report as the others did not support the hypothesis). That came about because someone (I think it was McIntyre in Canada) finally got Mann’s original data and analysed it. Maybe that is why CRU was so dead set against letting the original data out, and why, in his emails, Phil Jones is so upset that McIntyre keeps submitting FOI’s.
4. Chris:
It sickens me to acknowledge your accuracy. Sadly, people such as myself attempted to warn others bur were written off as “cranks”, “nuts”, “deniers”, “Republicans”, etc. Worshiping the creation isn’t new, but it certainly IS a religion.
Uriel: Charles Krauthammer is right. Because we know that CRU’s data is total mess, that doesn’t prove that AGW is false. However, it does destroy much of the supposed evidence that AGW is true. So the correct scientific statement about AGW is: we don’t know if it is true or false.
Just for a reminder: East Anglia CRU was mainting one of the four main databases holding global temperature records. GISS is another. Neither was answering FOIA requests for their data. Now we know why! I wonder if GISS’ database is as big a mess?
“Swiftboating the Climate Scientists” Now that’s an appropriate metaphor, or at least it will be when the skeptics get done going through the data and code (which will prove far more damaging than the e-mails). The next step will be actual “Peer review”, not the politicized version exposed in the e-mails.
Swiftboating- public affidavits from over 240 of John Kerry’s peers that his character was found wanting. Affidavits that to this day have not been refuted.
Now come on y’all, how are they gonna ram a global government down our throats without the proverbial global emergency to ram it with? Why Hollywood has known all along that we’d need aliens, meteors, earthquakes, or some such thing to pursuade us to throw aside our differences and unite like the good little socialists that they want us to be. Who are we to stand in the way of a progress(ives) anyhow? Besides, if there is one thing that is clear, a scientist would never manipulate data just so it would fit their theory, would they? If one were caught doing such a thing, they would lose almost as much credibility as they would have if their theory was just proven wrong, right? And surely the good honest folks in the mainstream media would let us know of such a thing wouldn’t they? And even if all else fails, at least we can count on our government to recognise the truth and not be swayed by special interests, right????
Global warming is regarded by the sheeple as true, by those who can think for themselves as false and by the power mad and money grubbers as … … useful … … very useful in their pathological quest to filch money and power to themselves.
Able to guzzle more energy than dozens of normal men! Producing more hot air than a locomotive! Able to pile up carbon credits higher than a tall building in a single bound!!!
Look UP in the sky! It’s ChickenLittle! It’s FlyingSnakeOilSalesman! It’s the Sultan of Hanging Chads! It’s the Ayatollah of Heat! No, it’s CarbonMan in a private jet painted green! And now following in the tradition of other great men such as Jimmy Carter and Yasir Arafat, he is the proud recipient of a Nobel Prize!!!
CarbonMan, strange visitor from an alternate reality who came to Earth with claims and scary predictions far beyond those of honest and sane men, disguised as Fat Albert, and now joined by other members of the Royal GreenLeague such as BioFuelHummerMan and EcoCleaningWoman, they all fight a never ending battle for Science-fiction, money grants, hypocrisy and the Hollywood way!
Carbon Trading works like this:
Let’s say your are a smelly hippie. Send ME some money and I will promise to take a shower for you. Then I will send you a bumper sticker that says “I took a shower.”
If I’m *good* at selling, I may be able to sell the same shower to several hippies.
Chris, #4:
As an American I couldn’t agree with you more. However, don’t sell our resolve short, as it often requires a wake up call…
…we are about to bear arms and take back our country!
Global warming is a hoax. Why? Just like anything else our half-brained politicians brew up…follow the money, some group(s) of people stand to gain extraordinary wealth or power (or both)if this farce is allowed to stand. The earth goes through cycles of slightly warming and/or slightly cooling over millions of years and a hundred million years is just a blip in ‘earth time’. Any person or scientist that can look at a few decades, a few hundred years or a even a few thousand years and decry that the earth is either permanently warming or cooling is defying common sense. Read the Jurassic Park chapter entitled “Destroying the World” by Dr. Michael Crichton or see the YouTube video by Charleton Heston who reads an excerpt from the chapter. In short, it eloquently expresses the ridiculousness of the environmentalist claim that global climate change, if in fact the earth is warming, is “MAN-MADE”. If expresses the belief of many scientists that man did not change it and man can not fix it. It is a sure thing that China, India and any other developing nations will not spend their way into oblivion by throwing money at the global warming. The USA and any other countries that choose to do this are very stupid….or there is some sinister motive behind it. You can be certain it isn’t altruism.