I wonder what Al Gore – allegedly the world’s first carbon billionaire, not to mention Nobel and Oscar laureate – is thinking during the brouhaha over the release of the East Anglia CRU emails and documents. Probably, not much. No doubt the former veep has dismissed this as a minor distraction led by right-wing lunatics or some such. Fortunately for Gore, he has very little, if any, scientific training himself (unless you count divinity school, from which he nearly flunked out), so he can rely on his minions to reassure him without having to do much investigating himself. Several have already jumped into the fray to explain that “hide the decline” does not mean, well, “hide the decline” (of Gore’s beloved “hockey stick.”)
That’s possible, of course, just as it’s possible that all this shifty by-play between the scientists is completely meaningless in the grand scheme of things and we are on the brink of climate Armageddon. More likely, however, is that we are witnessing the vindication of Stephen McIntyre, the Toronto global warming skeptic who was among the first to question the sainted “hockey stick” and was refused the justifying data. We now see why. The suppression of peer review is perhaps the most repellent aspect of this amazing and still-unfolding story.
As James Delingpole writes in the Telegraph, the public is already skeptical of AGW (or of its supposedly giant impact). But perhaps too much water (or gold) is already under the proverbial bridge:
Unfortunately, we’ve a long, long way to go before the public mood (and scientific truth) is reflected by our policy makers. There are too many vested interests in AGW, with far too much to lose either in terms of reputation or money, for this to end without a bitter fight.
Sad but true. Sadder still is the tarnishing of science’s reputation.
Ed Driscoll (also citing Dennis Prager), hit the nail on the head with this, Roger.
The issue isn’t the cheapening of scientific rigor, or cheating to find
“the answer” by hiding the facts.
Nope, once again the real issue in “Global Worming”, is the entrenched media’s decision to intentionally bastardize the information stream…so that there is limited damage to the “message”.
Since AGW (Al Gore’s Whim) became a cause celebre among the whine and bray crowd on the left, it reached “protective bubble” status in our despicable leftist distortion machine…and it will not be touched, certainly not without a fight.
Ed and Dennis got it ever so slightly wrong, in my opinion, because they focused on how the story is being buried, ignored. That’s only half a worm, in the Global Worming picture.
The despicable distortion continues on, as if nothing has happened…even though the lying cretins who have been fracturing the truth on the subject have been caught red handed.
It’s not just that Al’s Global Worming didn’t deserve the rusted tin of a NoBAlls Peace Prize, it’s that once again the creeps who call themselves journalists went into the “prevet defense” from the outset, just as they do on EVERY issue, in their casus belli against anything that is not marching in lockstep with the leftist “message”.
Global Worming is now the issue…weasels that hide, distort, invert, bastardize the facts and the truth are there to be vetted, but our diseased information stream is going to instead keep the fraud alive and try to spread the lie to as many sheep as will follow.
This is just one issue…among thousands that we need to evaluate to self-govern this land of ours…and to take our place in the world. We are being cheated out of our right to do so by the traitors in our information stream. Perhaps Global Worming will finally give us a chance to correct this.
I doubt it, though. These lying creeps have a stranglehold on our culture…and it will take a hero to slay this dragon.
Now here’s a good example of a pet peeve of mine, cfbleachers: Excessive meaningless neologisms. “Al Gore’s Whim”, “Global Worming”, “NoBalls Peace Prize”? What in the hell do those even mean? They look silly and immature. If you are going to use ridicule as a weapon, try a stiletto approach, not a shotgun filled with sand.
Give me a link to the original and I’ll go there and complain, too.
Although the email revelations are certainly telling, it is the sad state of the data and software – now revealed – that has true scientific significance.
Bloggers digging through the files have found that CRU’s own programmers are unable to make any sense of the data and code. It appears that the data is so poorly managed that it cannot be used to reconstruct the published results.
This means that the output of CRU – the very important and widely used (by IPCC, Hansen, and many others) data sets are almost certainly corrupted and definitely cannot be reconstructed.
In other words, the key paleoclimatic data for the last couple of millenia is junk, and by the GIGO principle, so are the conclusions drawn from it. The hockey sticks – all based on this data – throw them in the trash.
AGW scientists are going to have to start over with a lot of their most critical data (past temperatures). It is unlikely that the result will be the same as what we have been hearing described as “settled science.”
BTW… it is not unusual in a university climate for software to be in bad shape. However, the failure to properly archive the raw data and metadata, on a subject this important, is pure negligence and inexcusable.
Now here’s a good example of a pet peeve of mine, cfbleachers: Excessive meaningless neologisms. “Al Gore’s Whim”, “Global Worming”, “NoBalls Peace Prize”? What in the he-doubletoothpick do those even mean? They look silly and immature. If you are going to use ridicule as a weapon, try a stiletto approach, not a shotgun filled with sand.
If those are quotes, give me a link to the original and I’ll go there and complain, too.
Sorry for the double post.
And a pet peeve of mine is the smug and pedantic tone of some commenters, trying to schoolmarm how anyone else chooses to express themselves.
If you like it, copy it…use it as your own. Some do. Some don’t.
For those that don’t…scroll, please. I get plenty of compliments on my writing style and requests for reprinting. Other folks…not so much.
Hey, it comes with the territory. But don’t arrogate to yourself the sniffing posture of a master-student relationship. It’s pompous and a turnoff to most folks.
Sometimes I hit a chord with folks, sometimes I miss. Those “neologisms” are what get the most compliments by the way…people chuckle at them. I mean, those with a sense of humor, not tsking biddies.
As for the link…go to Ed Driscoll here at PJM Express and it’s all there.
Look on the good side, cfbleachers. You are now no longer a virgin. Now your writing has finally been criticized on the internet. Finally!
So, how was it for you? Personally, I feel like taking a nap.
Conduct that saw people thrown into the dock to defend themselves is tolerated in the scientific community. Why? Because they see ethics as being separate from what their research is about.
Since in the past I’ve commented often on the relative uselessness of the Baby Boomers I’ll just point out that from AlGore to Prof Hansen to most of the folks at the CRU that’s what they are.
This latest scandal concerning the global warming advocates is pounding another nail into the Democrats decreasing chances in the next couple of elections. Rasmussen’s polling results of today indicate that the purple and red state voters no longer trust them to do the right thing. Democratic Party candidates may only be viable in the bluer areas of the nation. This means, of course, that the Democrats have next to zilch chance of retaining the White House in 2012. The Republicans are likely to have a lock on the Electoral College. Purple voters are now learning what the red ones knew all along about the MSM: they are scoundrels out to mislead them. The arrogance of the Obama administration is forcing middle-of-the-road Americans to reevaluate their previous voting habits. When everything is ultimately said and done, the Democratic Party will almost surely be an unambiguously left-wing—and marginalized political entity.
Al Gore was in Atlanta yesterday publicizing his new book (which may explain why the weather turned cold and rainy). The ‘Atlanta Journal Constitution’ covered the story, but no mention of the E. Anglia CRU events. The reporter either 1) was ignorant of it, 2) didn’t have the nerve to ask Gore about it, or 3) tried and was told to stick to the talking points.
The heads of major
fossil-fuel companiesresearch centers who spread disinformation about global warming should be “tried for high crimes against humanity and nature,” according to a leading climate scientist. [Dr. James Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies].http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,370521,00.html
Yes, let’s put the whole lying group of them on trial.
Roger -
Two small points of correction:
1) Gore actually did fail out of divinity school. He also got a “D” in the ecology course he took as an undergrad
2) McIntyre is actually not a skeptic in the sense that many others are. He thinks the AGW theory is plausible, but argues that it has not come close to being justified.
As the world cools and the taxes rise it will only be a matter of time before global warming falls apart – it just depends how much pain we want to go through first!
Excellent piece in the WSJ yesterday that seems to me to be a reasonable approach to global warming claims. It’s “The Climate Science Isn’t Settled,” by Richard S. Lindzen, Meteorology at MIT.
URL is http://tinyurl.com/yfrkpt7 , but I don’t know if the WSJ article requires a subscription in order to read it.