Climategate: Time to postpone Copenhagen
Things are “starting to unravel at the AGW seams,” because, apparently, the “dog ate the homework” – more specifically the temperature data on which the whole global warming “can of worms” depends. Yes, three clichés in one sentence, yet somehow apropos for this unraveling fiasco that every day becomes more eye-rolling. Today’s unraveling – intentionally saved, I am assuming, for the weekend – comes from the Timesonline:
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
Not to worry. Carol Browner – Obama’s climate czar – assures us that global warming science is “settled.” And Carol should know. She has a B. A. in English from the University of Florida, not to mention a law degree from the same institution. (Pop quiz, Carol. What’s the Second Law of Thermodynamics? How about Einstein’s Unified Field Theory? Oh, never mind.)
Of course, there are people with somewhat more scientific background than Carol who – to be fair to her she was a legislative assistant to Al Gore when he was a Senator and helped prepare amendments to the Clean Air Act (something I support) – are considerably more concerned about the explosion of the East Anglia CRU documents on the Internet. One of those is Judith Curry at Georgia Tech who is worried about the ramifications of “Climategate” for her profession. But perhaps more apposite at this moment is Professor Mike Hulme of the very U. of East Anglia who has gone so far as to say this means the IPCC itself may have outworn its usefulness:
It is also possible that the institutional innovation that has been the I.P.C.C. has run its course. Yes, there will be an AR5 (fifth report) but for what purpose? The I.P.C.C. itself, through its structural tendency to politicize climate change science, has perhaps helped to foster a more authoritarian and exclusive form of knowledge production – just at a time when a globalizing and wired cosmopolitan culture is demanding of science something much more open and inclusive.
It was that UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as most of us recall, that shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Gore. And they are the ones with the “structural tendency to politicize climate change”. From a scientist to his colleagues, that’s a powerful indictment. So it should be no surprise that Hulme also has some rather cynical things to say about the coming Copenhagen climate conference:
This will blow its course soon in the conventional media without making too much difference to Copenhagen — after all, COP15 is about raw politics, not about the politics of science. But in the Internet worlds of deliberation and in the ‘mood’ of public debate about the trustworthiness of climate science, the reverberations of this episode will live on long beyond COP15. Climate scientists will have to work harder to earn the warranted trust of the public – and maybe that is no bad thing.
Indeed they will. And indeed it isn’t. No matter what our climate czar may insist, climate science and Copenhagen are now under a giant cloud. In fact, as Hume implies, the situation is far more serious than that, because what has been revealed is what strange bedfellows science and politics are in this era. The relationship between politicians and scientists today is not entirely unlike the relationship between scientists and the clergy during the days of Galileo. And the politicians of today know about as much about the science as the bishops of Galileo’s time did, although our politicians are perfectly willing to exploit the science of which they are ignorant and the scientists too often perfectly willing to be complicit in their own exploitation
But in an era when we no longer think the world is flat, it’s time to have open, transparent science. It’s an absolute necessity if we are to have any confidence at all in the results – and in how we are spending the gigantic sums our leaders seem to demand of us.
Toward that end, I have a simple recommendation. Postpone the UN Climate Change Conference, scheduled to begin in Copenhagen on December 7. Give it another year or two for people to examine the science in the open. Otherwise, this will be seen as one of history’s great boondoggles.
I realize this is a difficult request, to put it mildly, with 192 countries set to descend on the Danish capital. But Copenhagen has many attractions other than pompous talk. The time would be better spent drinking aquavit in Tivoli Gardens than it would spending a fair portion of the world’s wealth on anthropogenic global warming that could be either an illusion or a very minor contributing factor to a far more complex problem. Let’s postpone.
It’s Hulme, not Hume.
Somehow, Mr. Simon, I doubt they will. The fix is in. Acorn, Climategate, Obama, The Hague, Communist takeover of America, apathy of a wide swath of America can only lead to two outcomes. Either we chirp away on our blogs/radios/cable tv shows and drift into irrelevance or go to war.
Hmmmm.
Why do you assume that Catholic Bishops were ignorant of science? During that era many scientists were in fact clergy. Considering the juxtaposition of knowledge and time available for introspection and research it is no wonder why clergy were often the preeminent scientists of the day.
How come this “settled” science is so unsettling?
Is it because the left contaminates everything it touches or are we putting a “science” label on a field that has not yet matured into a real science?
Memomachine is right. Most bishops of the 16th and 17th Centuries would have been university educated, which reaquired the student to master the seven Liberal Arts. Among them was Astronomy. So the upper clergy probably had a better knowledge of the science of their time, relative to what there was to know, than almost any politicians today.
AGW is dead, intellectually at least. We can now conclude that there is no there there. Even the figure cited in the TimesOnline article for the temperature rise, 0.8 degree Centigrade over the last century or more, is insignificant. We know there have been temperature changes in historical times of that much or more. The Medieval Warm Period and the subsequent Little Ice Age are two well established examples. The fact that the infamous “Hockey Stick” graph showed neither of them, rather a flat lined temperature trend up until the 20th Century, then a massive, sharp increase, was enough to show the graph was worthless. When a scientific theory ignores known data, without explanation, that is a good sign that it is fraudulent.
My understanding of the relationship between the Catholic Church and science was this: If the Church believed one thing, and science clearly demonstrated something else, then the belief was what needed to be adjusted. In this case, the AGW model does not explain the leveling of temperatures, and the possibility that cooling is about to happen. The unfortunate, unintended consequence is that efforts not to reduce pollution, just because pollution is bad, will be diminished.
I have been skimming a few blogs over the last few days as the MSM seem to have decided that there is nothing important about ‘Climategate’. I was interested in the CBC site which did have an article which stated, ” …. climate science stands on a firm footing of rigorous research and appropriately skeptical peer review”. No wonder the MSM are not interested – clearly, they have lost any ability to research a topic and present the facts. Frankly, “Peer review ” looks like becoming a popular punchline for a bad joke as does the MSM’s ability to report the news.
Analogous to the open source voting project, this situation demands an open source climate project. All calculations, data and programming should be done under GNU by an open source team, out in the daylight.
Even with that, there is always the danger of self-appointed gatekeepers. Wikipedia has a notorious one named William Connolley, who watches the site like a hawk, and immediately deletes any edits critical of catastrophic global warming.
So whatever systems are put into place have to be designed to be bridge-troll resistant. I don’t know if we know how to do this, but do it, we must.
Good points, Calvin Ball, I have noticed the same thing about Wikipedia. Disgraceful.
I’m not too sure that “…the IPCC has run its course.” After all when was the last time a bureaucracy voluntarily gave up its power or paychecks? These kind of jobs almost come with a sacred promise that they truly are lifetime appointments and to make sure that all the t’s are crossed and the i’s are dotted.
These kind of jobs almost come with a sacred promise that they truly are lifetime appointments and to make sure that all the t’s are crossed and the i’s are dotted…Perriers are drunk, caviar and lobsters are eaten. (Remember their conference in Africa a couple of years ago when they flew in bottle water and lobsters for lunch while telling the villagers it’s better off for them to have a prestine environment than have electricity to purify their water?)
“the Clean Air Act (something I support)”
We’re seeing more reasons why it’s called an “act.”
An easy explanation of what ClimateGate means,
ClimateGate emails and computer programs were taken from a main server at the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia. It is not known if this was a theft or the actions of a whistleblower, disgusted with what the lead scientists at CRU were doing.
ClimateGate exposed the cabal of 20 – 30 scientists (not just at CRU) that peer reviewed each others papers, strong-armed scientific journals to only print their views, and then sat on the IPCC panels as authors judging which published studies go into the IPCC final reports. This is why they always keep shouting “peer reviewed studies, peer reviewed studies, peer reviewed studies”. They owned the peer review process.
ClimateGate exposed that this small group has been adding positive corrections to the raw global temperature data, inflating the amount of published temperature rise over the last 50 years. Both CRU in the UK and NASA-GISS in the US add these biases. At CRU, the programmers did not even know what and why some corrections were added every month. Only since satellite monitoring for comparison have the amounts of biasing leveled off.
ClimateGate exposed the leaders of this cabal instructing each other to delete emails, data files, and data analysis programs ahead of already filed Freedom Of Information Act requests for raw data and computer codes, clearly a crime.
ClimateGate exposed the “trick” about the Hockey stick figure and other studies that performed proxy construction of past temperatures. After all, reconstruction of the last 1,000 years of climate is the first step in predicting the future with super computer programs as explained below:
Everything about all 21 super computer programs used by the IPCC to determine future global warming rely on best-determined past sensitivities to solar and volcanic effects (climate forcings) from the proxy temperature record.
1. The elimination of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age (the handle of the hockey stick) was necessary so that past solar effects could be minimized, thereby allowing almost all of the warming in the last 75 years to be blamed on Greenhouse Gasses. Raw data (like tree-ring thickness, radioisotope of mud layers in a lake bottom, ice core analyses, etc.) are used as a proxy for reconstruction of the temperature record for 1000 AD to 1960 AD. To ensure desired results, statistical manipulation of the raw data and selecting only supporting data, cherry-picking, was suspected and later proved.
2. The slope of long-term 10-year running average global temperature using thermometers from 1900 to present (the blade of the hockey stick) was maximized with the sloppy gridding code, Urban Heat Island effects, hiding the declines, and even fabricating data (documented in the leaked source code comments revealed with ClimateGate). This ensured that the Greenhouse Gas effect coefficient in all 21 of the super computers was maximized, and that maximizes the temperature result at year 2100 based on Greenhouse Gas increases. This thermometer data was used to replace the tree ring-divergence after 1960 and plot this over the climate history data of (1) above giving the false impression that the reconstructed 1000 AD to 1960 AD results are more accurate than they are.
3. Because tuning of the super computer programs uses back casting, the computer outputs could always replicate the 20th Century (by design); therefore it was assumed that the models had almost everything in them. Because of (1) and (2) above, nearly all climate change predicted by the models was due to CO2 and positive feedbacks and hardly any of the climate change was for other reasons like solar, understood or not.
4. Over the years, when better numbers for volcanic effects, black carbon, aerosols, land use, ocean and atmospheric multi-decadal cycles, etc. became available, it appears that CRU made revisions to refit the back cast, but could hardly understand what the code was doing due to previous correction factor fudging and outright fabricating, as documented in the released code as part of ClimateGate.
5. After the IPCC averages the 21 super computer outputs of future projected warming (anywhere from 2-degrees to 7-degrees, not very precise), that output is used to predict all manner of catastrophes. (Fires, floods, droughts, blizzards, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, insects, extinctions, diseases, civil wars, cats & dogs sleeping together, etc.)
I hope that this makes the ClimateGate controversy easier to understand.
The earth IS flat. I had all the proof in my computer, peer reviewed by my alter-ego, but somehow I deleted all my data by mistake.
NucEngineer: Can I cut and paste your explanation on my blog, it is very easy to understand. Thanks.
Oh Roger, so naive, so silly.
Here’s David Frum’s article:
“A false lesson on climate change”
http://www.theweek.com/bullpen/column/103417/A_false_lesson_on_climate_change
The last line:
“In fact, whether you believe in global warming or deficit reduction, a carbon tax is still the solution!”
So, full speed ahead. There’s much work to do. We need to distribute wealth in the US, constrain growth, and give money to poor countries.
There’s so much to do, so, sadly no, Copenhagen will go forward as Planned.
Number one, I’m glad this happened in the UK and not the US. It’s much harder for the US media to spin a story that isn’t theirs. Although the story will move here soon enough as Hansen and Mann come under scrutiny, it will be too late for the US media to affect it’s primary trajectory.
That said, I think Copenhagen should move forward. Because unless it morphs into a stern call for the re-evaluation of CO2 forced global warming in light of the revelations from East Anglia, which it won’t, it will provide a naked public demonstration of how the political cause of global warming has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with money and power and nothing more.
#3 Ashen has the right of it, unfortunately. Science has not been the motivation – not since the USSR failed. Copenhagen was to be the vehicle to initiate one world governance (I’m sure that boy Kenyan had visions of gradure). He’s on is way with an open check book and and an unfulfilled mission. I’m worried about the unpublished agreements that he’ll sign us up for a la Potsdam.
Number one, I’m glad this happened in the UK and not the US. It’s much harder for the US media to spin a story that isn’t theirs. Although the story will move here soon enough as Hansen and Mann come under scrutiny, it will be too late for the US media to affect it’s primary trajectory.
That said, I think Copenhagen should move forward. Because unless it morphs into a stern call for the re-evaluation of CO2 forced global warming in light of the revelations from East Anglia, which it won’t, it will provide a naked public demonstration of how the political cause of global warming has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with money and power and venality, and nothing more.
It may have been necessary for them to have thrown away the raw temperature data. If the raw temperature data was available then they might be asked to show us, by reproducing Exactly The Same Results in front of skeptical witnesses, how they got the numbers they published to the world. This might have been impossible without the using some infected modeling code.
See also
Anthropogenic Global Warming Virus Alert
http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s5i64103
Ah, the United Nations. Could we have realistically expected a much different outcome?
Some of the U.N.’s earliest efforts related to Palestine and Korea. Which two parts of the world have been continually unstable for more than a half century? Why that would be Palestine and Korea, what a coincidence.
Success on other U.N. missions? Curing global hunger, nope. Preventing genocide, nope. Peace-keeping, nope. Protecting human rights, nope. Curing AIDS, TB, Malaria, nope, nope, nope.
Even if the short-lived warming from ’93 to ’98 had continued, and even if real data had been appropriately used, and even if the peer review process hadn’t devolved into pal review, even if everything else was perfect, the U.N. involvement would have somehow managed to screw the pooch on AGW.
Is anybody really surprised?
“The relationship between politicians and scientists today is not entirely unlike the relationship between scientists and the clergy during the days of Galileo.
Let’s look at that relationship between the clergy and Galileo. Clergy: “You agreed not to push speculations as if they’re fact, Galileo.” Galileo: “Sure, my arguments for Deacon Copernicus’ circular-orbit heliocentrism are full of holes but I feel the theory is true so I’m gonna break my word to you.” (The theory was false, of course. Kepler – using Tycho Brahe’s data – showed us why.)
Tsk, tsk. This is why I don’t trust Hollywood screenwriters to know much about history, religion, or science. The Hollywood set knows so much that just ain’t so.
“And the politicians of today know about as much about the science as the bishops of Galileo’s time did…”
Memomachine, Michael Lonie, and Milwaukee D. have already debunked that claim. (What earned degrees does Carol Browner hold? Oh yeah, an English BA and a law degree.) Likely, the bishops (who invented the university) of Galileo’s time knew more science than do today’s politicians – even after recognizing that the most advanced ‘settled’ science back in the day of those bishops was Aristotle’s.
“But in an era when we no longer think the world is flat…
That era ended before Aristotle. And the bishops of Galileo’s day knew the world was round. Lemmee guess, somebody’s been fed a lot of anti-Catholic propaganda and misinformation, right?
Time to hit the history books, Roger Simon.
I was perfectly aware, Micha Elye, that some (far from all) clerics realized the world was round during the Middle Ages. And I am in no sense anti-Catholic. Sorry. No propaganda, of that sort anyway, has gotten through to me. So save your hostility for others. Perhaps its your prejudice against Hollywood Screenwriters that is showing. We are no more all the same than clerics or any other group.
Elyi.
Stop bitching, take responsibility and take action. Stop all donations to the political party(s) responsible for this fraud. Stop donations to all environmental groups which funded this Global Warming propaganda campaign with our money, especially The Environmental Defense Fund. Write your state and federal representatives demanding wall to wall investigations of government sponsored funding and coordination of this and related propaganda campaigns and demand indictments of those responsible. Write your state and federal Attorneys General demanding Al Gore and others conducting Global Warming/Climate Change racketeering and mail fraud operations be brought to justice, indicted, tried, convicted and jailed. That’s what I have done in response to this outrageous violation of the public trust. Think of the consequences if you do nothing!
Roger, so, when are you writing a mystery thriller about a conspiracy of scientists, based in a swampy area of England?
Great idea–postpone it, and I would say postpone it for at least 10 years. Nobody, neither the scientists, politicians, nor newspeople, knows which way is up at this point. Why make a hasty decision that could tax everyone into poverty? We’re rolling the dice and we don’t even know how many sides the dice have.
And isn’t it time that all data and equations be published on the internet? This is public data thay may affect our individual freedom. It is crimminal that our access to it is being treated in such a cavalier manner. No one should require a Freedom Of Information Act to access the data. The data and equations should be reviewable by everyone from a person with a PhD to the young budding climatologist in fourth grade.
I’ll say it – this fraud, carried under the banner of a computer driven soft (statistically generated) science won’t be the last effort to harness all individual human actions under government control.
Let us consider rejecting the premise that even if all is going to hell, each of us shall maintain our God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and that includes generating co2 with fires, automobiles, and homes warmed as a result of co2 production. This and every other crisis government foists upon us is about power and money from us to them. You’re a mark for the con if you think otherwise.
Folks, I feel it’s time to out the number one tactical tool of the left; to bundle up all their lies and misstatements, and then to
accuse the right of committing each misdeed, be they unethical, immoral or illegal.
When the left was cooking the global warming books, for example, over the past decade, the left was constantly accusing the right
though the mainstream media of doing exactly the same thing. Do you remember how Bush was accused of preventing information on global warming from reaching the media?
This tactic continues. However, the inadvertently released climategate memos may put this tactic under the microscope of a number
of bloggers and Fox News. And reveal this vile, immoral, unethical and contemptuous act for what it really is. An embodiment of the left’s
stream of lies spread by the mainstream media.
Hang on to your hats folks. P.M. Harper had no interest in attending until Obama decided to attend and possibly commit the U.S. to some targets.
Harper will now attend. Watch for fireworks because unlike the community organizer Harper is an economist.
Insiders tell me that if Obama plays the AGW card, Harper will take him to the woodshed.
Obama may need to think about a different kind of bow.
In school I hated that stupid FORTRAN IBM computer code.
John W. Backus’ historic FORTRAN team consisted of programmers Richard Goldberg, Sheldon F. Best, Harlan Herrick, Peter Sheridan, Roy Nutt, Robert Nelson, Irving Ziller, Lois Haibt and David Sayre
In the light of Climategate revelations I would like to send any of you gentlemen still alive a polar bear rug and a beer.
Sorry:
In the light of Climategate revelations I would like to send any of you gentlemen still alive a polar bear rug and a
beerCoke.
To: memomachine
Simon assumes the Catholic clergy of Galileo’s day were ignorant of science because they were, or least they were ignorant of what we today consider science and the scientific method.
The Church in the 17th century was all about appeals to authority, i.e. Truth is found in authoritative ancient sources and direct reasoning from those sources, specifically the Bible and the works of a few accepted pagan writers. The Church Fathers knew that the nature of earthly entities was to be at rest and that the nature of celestial entities was to move in circles because that is what Aristotle decreed, not because observation and experimentation led them to that conclusion. Because if they did observe and experiment (i.e. do science) they would have concluded that the nature of all entities, whether earthly or celestial, is to move in a straight line at constant speed forever, unless acted upon by an outside influence, which is what Galileo discovered through observation and experimentation.
You claim that many scientists of Galileo’s time were in fact clergy. I can only think of one who might barely qualify, and he died 22 years before Galileo Galilei was born. Perhaps you can name a few?
The mainstream media has become the enemy of truth.
Nothing is going to happen in Copenhagen. As matter of fact, this might have true even before the release of the scandalous e-mails! Recent events simply add another nail into the coffin of global warming fanaticism. The elites are simply going to meet together, pat themselves on the back, eat a number of fantastic dinners, and then return home. Their governments will then proceed to throw the resulting reports into the back drawer—never to be looked at again. A few officials might pretend to be sincere, but ultimately they will not allow their nations economies to collapse. A lot this nonsense was always pure theater and an opportunity to slap around the “ugly Americans.”
Bridge Troll?
yeah, OK, I met the bum. He wouldn’t let me over the bridge.
and today he is stopping most of the “major media” from reporting any analysis of the CRU “FOI2009″ disclosure.
In suppressing the CRU story the “Major Media” continue to discredit themselves, providing us with additional ammo with which to show the Bridge Trolls for what they really are: political vehicles.
The Copenhagen conference won’t be postpone for these reasons:
1. the dolce vita that its attendees get to live there on someone else’s dime. They won’t be staying in in the Danish equivalent of a Super 8, baby, or eating at Mom’s Diner.
2. the fact that climate change is not about climate change because “global warming” is a political movement, not a scientific discipline. And Copenhagen is a political summit, not a scientific one.
Climate science has no “product.” The outcomes of climate modeling cannot be used to do anything except what is being done with them – promote statist control of ever-expanding slices of national economies to conform to a transnationalist ideology.
If climate science could be used to do anything else, it would already be happening. But have you ever heard of any report of climate science’s findings not in connection with expanding the power of the state or trans-state organs?
Mr Simon
The Earth being round had been proven by Hellenistic scientists. And it was the Church who as earyl as teh Vth or VIth century took over the task of perpetuating the Greek heritage, import fropm Byzantium and translate into latin as much of Greek seceience, litrterature and philosphy it could (since learned Romans could read Greek these had not been translmated by the Romans). And most of Europe’s intellectual life until the Renaisance happendd either in the Church or in institutions controlled by the Church (most universities were founded for teaching theology and other diciplines came later).
Also when Colmbus asked for funding to the Spanisk king and queen, their scientific counselors rejected his claims not on thne basis they believed Earth was round but because they righly thought (Erth’s diameter had been calculated by the same Grek scientist who proved was round) that Columbus claim that the West route to China and India being shorter was false by thousands of miles.
“27. heathermc:
Roger, so, when are you writing a mystery thriller about a conspiracy of scientists, based in a swampy area of England?
Nov 29, 2009 – 12:12 am”
It’s not swampy. It’s a flat peninsular of agricultural land, drained many hundreds of years ago by criss crossing ditches and canals and perfectly dry. Norfolk is, in fact a glorious county.
Sea defences protect coastal areas and rather than being a reed riven bayou, the place is almost archetypal English with Saxon and Norman churches, ancient Market Towns and the kind of unspoiledness redolent of a pre-consumer age before the tentacles of commerce could do their worst.
It’s counterpart Netherlands across the North Sea/English Channel is similar in topography. Flat, irrigated and bulwarked against tidal influx. Lots of pretty old established towns there, also.
Now why do I point all of this out?
The warmists here never fail to point out the annual disasters which occur in say, Bangladesh as the predictable monsoon unloads it’s water onto the area and tides rise.
Consequently with clockwork timing, we watch TV images as villages are destroyed, lives are lost and the charity appeals demand our money.
And the Warmers either descend upon us or rise from the ooze (your choice) with dire warnings as to how it’s all our fault. How, we the grasping selfish West have inflicted this havoc on to poor innocent villagers and ain’t that what all this is about.
Spot the difference.
Once upon a time those Dutch and Anglian fens would have indeed been swampland. Lives would have been claimed and livelyhood’s ruined so what did they do? They set about digging drainage, they built redoubts and levees and over a long passage of time the waterlands were transformed into fertile farmland.
It’s called self sufficiency. It’s called spotting a problem and doing something about it. No Government aid. No screeching charities tugging at our supposed guilt. No ghoulish TV crews spewing hypocrisy and cant. Then the simple pragmatism told them, work together, harness the technologies of the era and the collective benefit will reap dividends, not only for the ones doing it but their offspring too.
No such ethos or work ethic seems to be apparent in the Eastern Muslim sector of the globe. Their insh’allah fatalism described perfectly by Winston Churchill dooms them, like goldfish to revisit the same spot, time after time with weary inevitability and as sure as day follows night, death, famine and hardship ensues.
Now, rather than the actually ‘doing something about it’ as those fenlanders did so many years ago, by building infrastructure to defeat the water, the onus is deflected westward and suddenly it’s our cars and industry which are creating the woe.
See where I’m headed?
A crazy mix of a religion which cannot be critisised. A marxist cabal of pseudo scientists and grandstanding politicians, ditto. And big money via carbon trading and all the rest. Add it all together and you get the perfect metaphor for the creation of an unelected global governance body intent on transference of power, money and freedom from us to pour into a bottomless pit of ingratitude, demand and victim rights.
How much easier, empowering and enrichening than actually ‘doing something about it’?
“27. heathermc:
Roger, so, when are you writing a mystery thriller about a conspiracy of scientists, based in a swampy area of England?
Nov 29, 2009 – 12:12 am”
It’s not swampy. It’s a flat peninsular of agricultural land, drained many hundreds of years ago by criss crossing ditches and canals and perfectly dry. It is, in fact a glorious county.
Sea defences protect coastal areas and rather than being a reed riven bayou, the place is almost archetypal English with Saxon and Norman churches, ancient Market Towns and the kind of unspoiledness redolent of a pre-consumer age before the tentacles of commerce could do their worst.
It’s counterpart Netherlands across the North Sea/English Channel is similar in topography. Flat, irrigated and bulwarked against tidal influx. Lots of pretty old established Towns there, also.
Now why do I point all of this out?
The warmists here never fail to point out the annual disasters which occur in say, Bangladesh as the predictable monsoon unloads it’s water onto the area and tides rise.
Consequently with clockwork timing, we watch TV images as villages are destroyed, lives are lost and the charity appeals demand our money.
And the Warmers either descend upon us or rise from the ooze (your choice) with dire warnings as to how it’s all our fault. How, we the grasping selfish West have inflicted this havoc on to poor innocent villagers and ain’t that what all this is about.
Spot the difference.
Once upon a time those Dutch and Anglian fens would have indeed been swampland. Lives would have been claimed and livelyhood’s ruined so what did they do? They set about digging drainage, they built redoubts and levees and over a long passage of time the waterlands were transformed into fertile farmland.
It’s called self sufficiency. It’s called spotting a problem and doing something about it. No Government aid. No screeching charities tugging at our supposed guilt. No ghoulish TV crews spewing hypocrisy and cant. Then the simple pragmatism told them, work together, harness the technologies of the era and the collective benefit will reap dividends, not only for the ones doing it but their offspring too.
No such ethos or work ethic seems to be apparent in the Eastern Muslim sector of the globe. Their insh’allah fatalism described perfectly by Winston Churchill dooms them, like goldfish to revisit the same spot, time after time with weary inevitability and as sure as day follows night, death, famine and hardship ensues.
Now, rather than the actually ‘doing something about it’ as those fenlanders did so many years ago, by building infrastructure to defeat the water, the onus is deflected westward and suddenly it’s our cars and industry which is creating the woe.
See where I’m headed?
A crazy mix of a religion which cannot be critisised. A marxist cabal of pseudo scientists and grandstanding politicians. And big money via carbon trading and all the rest. Add it all together and you get the perfect metaphor for the creation of an unelected global governance body intent on transference of power, money and freedom from us to pour into a bottomless pit of ingratitude, demand and victim rights.
How much easier, empowering and enrichening than actually ‘doing something about it’?
It would be suicidal to delay a global policy on greenhouse gasses for even one minute. Prince Charles has made it very, very clear. If we do not act right now, the human race will be heading off to extinction. And he is a prince of the realm, whatever that means. And he is supposed to be very, very smart. Twenty years ago I began to stockpile flannel underwear and corduroy pants in preparation for the coming ice age. More recently I have been hoarding bags of ice. My cousin Salvatore is of the opinion that an eighteen foot rise in sea levels would bed worth it if it got rid of LA, San Fransciso and Manhattan. He’s a very angry person. I myself, being an upstanding citizen have attempted to reduce my carbon footprint earnestly. I ordinarily wear an eleven D shoe, but have, lately, been buying 10 C’s. They pinch a bit, but if it will save the planet, I’m willing to suffer.
Very nicely written. I think deleting raw data is serious scientific misconduct. These scientists should lose their grants and their jobs as well as their reputations.
The situation is worse than it seems. It’s not a relatively simple matter of scientists vs. politicians. The scientific camp itself has been infiltrated and perverted. Those guys busily cooking the books at East Anglia all this time are not scientists in any useful sense of the word. They’re activists – that is, amateur politicians, putting a pseudoscientific gloss on their preconceived notions of how the world should be arranged and managed. To be useful, science must be purged of people better suited to selling used cars, and scientific positions staffed with, well, real scientists; otherwise the next round of climate data will also be rubbish.
Why were these people allowed to hide their data from public view? This never made one bit of sense. There were neither proprietary nor military defense issues to resolve. All this stuff should have been easily accessible on the Internet. It matters not a whit whether credentialed scientists look at these studies—-or even your no good brother-in-law or Bozo the Clown. Why give a damn? Anyone who wished to enter the discussion merely had to provide rational justifications for their arguments.
Spotted on some blog:
“Don’t you think Al Gore is now sorry he ever invented the internet?”
Steven
NucEngineer & logdon are my heroes of the day.
I think Algore and the IPCC should have to return their Nobel prize and the money involved! Liars all! While we’re at it, strip all the bogus .org environmental groups (who have been banging the AGW drum for decades) of their non-profit status and make them pay back all of us guilt-duped donors who were convinced our SUVs were destroying the planet. May they all rot in HELL. I, for one, will NEVER donate one more penny to any of those groups.
President Obama wants to move Cap & Trade in the Senate, but it will be stopped by Democrats in the red belt states dependent on such energy for profit. Obama has no credibility at this point. The exposed e-mails reveal the corruption to all the world & is proof Global Warming is one big political con game.
“Otherwise, this will be seen as one of history’s great boondoggles.”
This is exactly why Copenhagen should *not* be postponed. Just maybe, the political posturing in Copenhagen on the heels of Climategate will help make explicit to the world the disconnect between environmentalism and reality — and the threat of politicized science to human well-being.
Good Idea. Won’t happen.
You never stop a scam and give the sucker time to think. Every Chicago hustler knows that.
Why do you think the Usurper is moving his socialist agenda forward so fast? He knows he won’t be in power 1 minute past the point where he can’t show proof of being a natural born citizen.
On a positive note, once he is impeached ALL the bills he signed become null and void. the GPO will drag out the old Code from before his oath of office and we will move forward from that. Biden is a Liberal, but he is an American and a patriot. I don’t like him but I trust him to act with America foremost in his heart.
Biden is not a US hating socialist with the goal of doing as much damage to America as he can.
“So whatever systems are put into place have to be designed to be bridge-troll resistant. I don’t know if we know how to do this, but do it, we must.”
Calvin, you are seeing the beginning of that system right here, an internet that facilitates the free exchange of ideas from all over the world on a real-time basis by experts from every field. The is a peer-review process far more effective than the politically driven one of peer-reviewed publications.
Don’t despair over scientists bending the facts to fit their theories, this is simply human nature-all references to the Catholic church notwithstanding. Several years before Einstein, a scientist named Henri Poincare worked out the special theory of relativity almost to its conclusion. However, when he reached the point that showed timed speeding up or slowing down, depending on the circumstances, he abandoned it as impossible, choosing to remain faithful to Newton’s concept of universal time. The more liberated Einstein was not so constrained and produced the theories of today. On the other hand, Einstein could never accept the concept of quantum mechanics and argued unsuccessfully against it for the rest of his life on the basis that it defied common sense (God does not play dice).
Jef at 17,
Thank you for attaching David Frum’s opinion piece. It demonstrats in his own words what a psuedo conservative he is. It goes nicely with his intellectual vacuousness.
People like Frum and David Brooks are used by the lefty publications as tools to say “See, even conservatives agree with us.” More people everyday are figuring this out and turning away from the media sources that print their rubbish. The fact that Frum thinks we should have a carbon tax anyway shows his complete disconnect from the East Anglia reality and actual, as opposed to fake, science.
You can see why President Bush went so horribly wrong with people like this fraud advising him. Thanks again Jef for letting the rest of us see what a complete ass Frum actually is.
postpone?
no: cancel.
“Leading British scientists at the University of East Anglia, who were accused of manipulating climate change data – dubbed Climategate – have agreed to publish their figures in full.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6678469/Climategate-University-of-East-Anglia-U-turn-in-climate-change-row.html
Of course, ‘in full’ is what they say in public, and what they say in public, is, we know, not necessarily what they say in private.
If they insist that political decision making continue before the released material has been studied then they are merely faking openness.
Memomachine, I don’t think that word means what you think it does;
http://www.sciencebuddies.org/mentoring/project_scientific_method.shtml
{snipped}
# The steps of the scientific method are to:
* Ask a Question
* Do Background Research
* Construct a Hypothesis
* Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an experiment
* Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
* Communicate Your Results
# It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. A “fair test” occurs when you change only one factor (variable) and keep all other conditions the same.
If the answer at ANY point of the process is “Will of god” then you aren’t using the scientific method.
If you are using the scientific method, then you are NOT a scientist. Period.
The word scientist means ‘one who uses the scientific method’. Or it used to. Media/Madison Ave. promoted language drift has changed the meaning of scientist to ANY body with an advanced degree. That is so junk science can be used to sell products that otherwise would get dusty while taking up shelf space. Google FUD ( fear uncertainty doubt ).
That doesn’t make it so.
Well, to this country boy,’postpone’ simply means ‘after cornbread’…let the games begin in Copenhagen and let the necessary asses be kicked forthwith.
President Obama will go the conference, but, as usual, will come back with nothing beyond his bashing America. Will he bow to anyone?
A dinasouar droping… remembering my Dad’s remarks when I informed him of my desire to attend College in 1955,(He wanted ne to go to work with him and he would help me buy a truck for his busines). He said “just remember education is no reason for failure”. His was a third grade education. Now we rely on these Educated idoits for information. Old coach…
What is one more boondoggle to that crowd? Their own agenda is what matters, and they define what matters. So, given that they cast a blind
eye to the substance of those who oppose. In fact they see opposition as only an obstacle to plow through.
So, they have chosen their lot, and they are not changing.
Which is why they have to be punished within a millimetre of all they hold dear being lost forever.
Because, expecting them to change, must less listen to those who see their actions as culturally subterrainian – a leopard would change its spots sooner.
Talk about beating a dead horse, although in this case it’s more the case of beating a piece of fallen tree that sorta looks like a dead horse if it’s dark enough and you squint. It doesn’t matter how many malicious and/or badly confused anti-science yahoos scream “Fraud!” or “Hoax!” or whatnot, you are still only dealing with a bunch of malicious and/or badly confused anti-science yahoos.
Not that the news media is rising to the occasion to help clarify matters (surprise, surprise): that deliberately parsed excerpt from the Timesonline left off that this was from the 1980′s, and original raw data, which likely filled up rooms and rooms since it was “stored on paper and magnetic tape,” were only “dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building”.
Believe it or not, back in the 80′s you couldn’t just pop down to your local Staples store and pick up an external terabyte USB drive whenever you started running low on space. This was just some basic house cleaning of stuff they felt they didn’t need anymore — bear in mind that this well predates the global warming “skeptics” (aka the anti-science wackos) becoming a nuisance political force — and these numbnutted attempts make even this into a conspiracy again shows the eye-rolling malicious nonsense climatologist have to put up with these days.
Someone at Wikipedia does not like William Connolley. This is from W. Connelley’s Wiki page: “…he prefers to adopt the fascist mentality of eradicating any view counter to his own.”
As they say: “Read the whole thing.”
Disagree, Copenhagen with The O as senior figurehead should go on.
In the first place absolutely nothing will come of it. It will be like the recent run up where the “leaders” discussed what they would discuss at Copenhagen, where they will discuss what they should discuss next year at Mexico City.
Second, they will make fools of themselves, especially in light of the released e mails situation. The pure emptiness and futility will only become more apparent, the movement more discredited, and The O even more magnified as a supreme horse’s ass.
They are only going to waste money whatever they do, let them waste it while destroying a destructive myth and their own shoddy reputations.
Go for it Obama !!
Let Copenhagen roll! Obama will “commit” the US to 17% CO2 reduction and wind up proving himself an ass once again. Stand back — our enemies are committing suicide.
“Orwell” on the IPCC:
All peer-reviewers are equal, but some peer-reviewers are more equal than others.
Thing we all need to remember is that for the most part the sources from which the majority of people get their news have kept this whole story out of their papers and off their screens. They’re sticking to the narrative.
the fix is in. as others have stated.
the ugly truth will vanish from the media …it isn’t even being report to any extent.
those nudging us to disaster are already changing the message.
FIRST : global warming changed to climate change, when there is no proven warming.
SECOND : climate change is being sidelined for the new headlines the ice caps melting and glaciers receding (even in this cooling period …not) and sea level rise (even though it is not rising).
yesterday I was listening to a news broadcast on the radio and they had another polar bear catastrophe story, the title was “Global Warming Causing Cannibalism in Polar Bears”
if there is no global warm how can it cause anything to happen.
the religion is set. good luck trying to open the eyes of the blind.
Hey guys. Need a peer review? Call your urologist.
This is what Stephen Hawking said about global warming:
“The danger is that global warming may become self-sustaining, if it has not done so already. The melting of the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps reduces the fraction of solar energy reflected back into space, and so increases the temperature further. Climate change may kill off the Amazon and other rain forests, and so eliminate once one of the main ways in which carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere. The rise in sea temperature may trigger the release of large quantities of carbon dioxide, trapped as hydrides on the ocean floor. Both these phenomena would increase the greenhouse effect, and so global warming further. We have to reverse global warming urgently, if we still can.”
Now who should we believe, Novelist Roger Simon, (whose books I love by the way) or one of our time’s great geniuses?
” The time would be better spent drinking aquavit in Tivoli Gardens ….”
I hope there’s a plan B. If I’m not mistaken, the Tivoli Gardens close for the Winter and reopen sometime after Easter. Maybe we can ship them off to Euro Disney instead.
Many years ago I worked in the lighting division for a large conglomerate. When home fluorescent light bulbs came out the sales force quickly found out that people would not replace their incandescent bulbs, which cost pennies with one that cost about ten dollars.
What to do? We were told then…the lobbyists were working on getting the government to mandate the new lighting system…and we were all gonna make a pile of money. It took awhile, but here we are.
lets not and say we did. after crunching numbers and tying in all the raw data, with some adjustments thrown in for good measure, i have come to the conclusion that this meeting will take place and it will be a great success. the press will hail it as a monumental unprecedented step forward for mankind, and all the snake oil sales men selling carbon credits will jump for joy. i’m trying to figure out if a carbon credit is the same as a widget?
Anyone that would like to copy / use my Post # 14 may do so.
What is important for me is stopping this global redistribution of wealth madness.
51. JBS: “He knows he won’t be in power 1 minute past the point where he can’t show proof of being a natural born citizen.
On a positive note, once he is impeached ALL the bills he signed become null and void. the GPO will drag out the old Code from before his oath of office and we will move forward from that.”
Music to my ears, but I just gotta ask: What makes you so sure this is going to happen (as I don’t think they care whether or not he’s a natural-born US citizen)?
BC@59
Are you claiming that it was normal and accepted scientific practice in the 1980′s to delete your source data to save room once you “didn’t need” it any more?
Do you believe that this practice was so well established in the 1980′s that anyone claiming otherwise is spouting “malicious nonsense?”
Roger – I read what Carol Browner had to say. Apparently, she’s going to hide behind 2,500 climatologists who claim there is global warming. For her, science is apparently a popularity contest and not a search for knowledge.
Oh, BC @ 59, shame on you for telling filthy lies.
I’ve been involved with researchers for 25 years, and I can tell you that NO researcher loses his data, except voluntarily. They keep their paper files, they keep their research books, they take electronic files home. They protect their data by duplicating it, distributing it, and storing extra copies. Because their raw data is their life. They know that, when somebody else has a good point, they will need to look at the data again, and if it is altered, they will have forgotten how it was altered. They need to have a clean view. Any researcher that tells you he can’t get back to his own raw data is either lying or trying to conceal fraud.
Furthermore, computer storage capability has expanded, not contracted, in this time period. What used to take a supercomputer fits conveniently on a laptop, now. The cost of storage has fallen the entire time. And, when it comes time to change systems, the researchers have long ago preserved and transferred their data.
“The dog ate my homework” is for children and frauds.
Yes!
And he also said the ‘Big Bang’ created all these natural,
beautiful galaxies with trillions of stars and billions of earths.
His BB was the biggest hoax ever put on the Astronomy circus and they still can’t prove it.
The Hubble telescope 1996 pictures put his BB theory below the level of these Carbon Sun God Global Warming Worshipers.
Now if you want real knowledge-
Al Gores 100 million dollar invention of the internet and Inconvenient movie truth,
there is the real genius.
Finally this boondoggle has been shown to be what it was, an excuse to socialize even more of the worlds economy. The few, who know so much better what we need, have been endeavoring to wrest control from the “great unwashed masses”. WE of course don’t know what we need, they do. WE can’t possible understand the problems, that’s why we need them. WE just need to SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP”.
Sounds like democracy to me. NOT.
“yesterday I was listening to a news broadcast on the radio and they had another polar bear catastrophe story, the title was “Global Warming Causing Cannibalism in Polar Bears”
You don’t understand the way climate science works. The process is to select an obvious fact and credit it to AGW. Polar bears have always been cannibals. Look for another upcoming broadcast to point out that AGW is causing polar bears to turn white.
81. Valerie:
“The dog ate my homework” is for children and frauds.
Letter to the IRS.
The dog ate my tax returns for the years 2000- 2008.
I think this is a good excuse for not paying my $90,000 dollar fine and penalty.
I also have an earned income credit for 2008.
For most systems, what is derived and presented is “as only as good as the data.” So if one can’t validate the data, the entire system becomes suspect at best.
What scientist in their right mind would even think of throwing away the data on which their entire hypothesis is based?
These guys are not scientists who seriously consider academic peer review…they are propagandists at best.
“The time would be better spent drinking aquavit in Tivoli Gardens than it would spending a fair portion of the world’s wealth on anthropogenic global warming that could be either an illusion or a very minor contributing factor to a far more complex problem” The first part of this statement is accurate. The last part about “could be an illusion” and “far more complex problem” is really annoying. Don’t you get it? It’s not an illusion, it’s a hoax, and it could absolutely not be a “complex problem”. It’s BUNK. It’s always been BUNK. And such hoaxes will always be perpetrated by people whose claims are BUNK. I wish writers would stop giving this issue any quarter at all.
Sorry, arthur williams. Just because many scientists defending AGW are disreputable liars does not mean AGW does not exist at all. It only means that they have not proven its existence. We shouldn’t spend money on it. Or believe anything they say. But, if we are to remain even quasi-scientific, we should keep our minds open. Who knows what the future will bring? And we should demand transparency at all times. Work that is not transparent should be discounted (outside the national security area, of course).
If the lying scientists belching out their misstatements about global warming were in charge of writing the NY Times headline for December
8, 1941, instead of “Japs bomb Pearl Harbor”, the headline would have been something like this.
Employment shows signs of lessening
BC wrote:
“and these numbnutted attempts make even this into a conspiracy again”
I guess the post-FOI-request e-mails instructing others to delete relevent e-mails, the other e-mails attempting to prevent non-AGW papers’ publication, the e-mails calling for ousting of journal editors who published anti-AGW papers, the screening of comments at RealClimate, etc, all mean nothing to you. That’s some seriously strong Kool Aid you drank.
As for calling skeptics “anti-science yahoos,” when those yahoos you support actually get around to engaging in some objective, transparent science, let us know, will ya?
I note that there has been very little troll traffic since the story of the East Anglia fraud broke. A few trolls have ventured forth and made some absurd statements about the loss of data. They very much remind me of the “wizard” in the “Wizard of Oz” when the curtain is dislodged. Their bluster betrays the weakness of their position after they have been caught red handed promoting garbage science.
Real science has finally caught up with the crooks. The East Anglia cabal has used tax payer’s money to perpetuate a lie, and they have conspired together to do this. This is criminal fraud. If there are US scientists participating, it should trigger a RICO indictment. Billions have been spent on this “science”. I am very much looking forward to the criminal investigation that will follow. It’s time to put conspiring theives in prison where they belong. Tax payers need to demand further investigation and criminal sanction. We need to demand that AG Holder start getting his act together and do his job.
Courtesy of the despicable Briffa, Jones et al. the Hadley Center’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) –what Solzenhitsyn called an “organ”– has admitted destroying climatological base-data ab initio. Good: Archives exist in other venues, and now no-one need pay any heed whatever to anything these bumwads profess. Toss CRU’s phony numbers, hoked-up methodology, scare-mongering propaganda into the “climate science” (sic) garbage-dumpster, its true home.
Science as such is not impugned but vivified by this sad episode: When major journals collude with corrupt, self-serving charlatans and knaves, accepting asinine, undisclosed “adjustments” while suppressing all dissent, citing coteries of raging ideologues as “peer reviewers”, their blatant dishonesty reinforces genuine scientific ideals to the point where large-scale criminal fraud becomes well-nigh impossible.
Science is three things: A philosophy of the objective natural world; an empirical discipline formulating and testing falsifiable hypotheses; above all, a social construct demanding replication of results as reported in toto to panels of skeptics expert in a field. Ideologues of any stripe, mystics, psychics, need not apply– agenda-driven arguments from authority, by stipulation; perpetual motion; miraculous supernatural cause-and-effect, are not acceptable in any wise. To the extent these principles are willfully violated by eminent practitioners, Science stands supremely vindicated when their asininities inevitably collapse of their own weight. Doltish partisanship may delay but cannot prevent exposure of such rampant fraud.
“Knowing the truth” is an epistemological question, unanswerable in the sense that mortal knowledge is of a place-and-time, necessarily prey to exigencies and misconceptions. But objects fall to Earth, water runs downhill, all things decay; chance-and-necessity combine to govern Fate. Here we stand, for we can do no other.
May Briffa, Hansen, Jones, Mann et al. suffer obloquy and ostracism to the fullest possible extent. Meantime, some unsung Seeker in a Zurich patent office meditates concepts simply expressed but ultimately subtle, “secrets of the Old One” due to change our world in ways that neither he nor his contemporaries can conceive.
I hope that the apparent lawyers commenting on various blogs about RICO actions will follow through with lawsuits. Such lawsuits would garner extensive publicity for the attorneys’ careers. And, just think of the information that would be revealed by videotaped depositions. If these “scientists” want to claim the 5th amendment against self-incrimination, let them!
Planet fever is a good hobby for the idle, but pretty soon we will have more pressing matters to attend, and our 21st century St. Albert will fade in the GUMD (Grand Unified Media Dumpster). Enjoy the alleGory while it lasts.
The US constitution formally requires that 25 presidential candidates come out disappointed by the outcome of the final election for every century of American history. Some take it better than others. Our Oh-so-dear Albert of Tennessee tried to redeem himself through metamorphosis into a prophet of doom, but science is supposed to be a non-prophet enterprise, and defeat will ultimately be recognized for what it is.
In any case science has served us better when it has been applied to help life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which it did quite well. Long before the dawn of science, carbon dioxide has been this essential feedstock the plants need to produce the oxygen we might be more appreciative of if we did not get if free of charge. How do the plants do this? they analyze CO2 into its components, carbon, for their own structural needs, and oxygen, for the benefit of the animal world, thinking or otherwise. How difficult is it to separate the components of CO2? Actually, quite difficult, and energy consuming: The plants use solar energy and very subtle chemistry to get it done. Bottom line, agriculture is a gigantic carbon-dioxide-sequestrating and oxygen-producing solar energy collection enterprise, long before we learned how to separate sand (Silicon dioxide, by the way) into oxygen and silicon (also very difficult, but no silicon, no Pentium inside, nor outside!).
In the meantime, more idle talk to come about whether ill begotten emails are necessary to debunk ill begotten science. How is this contributing to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Can we go back to being grateful for our blessings and focus on positive work, the only thing capable of wealth production, which we used to be quite good at? Must we become obsessed with poisoning the broth?
Unless they placed the article in the Sports section, which I don’t usually read, I didn’t see even a mention of C-Gate in my Sunday NYT. Who are the FlatEarthers now? This should be called ACORN DEUX the screwJob for the rest of us. The Piltdown Hoax lasted for 40 years maybe their going for the record. So close – Yet so far. ~Sigh~
73. Lorenzo:
This is what Stephen Hawking said about global warming:
“The danger is that global warming may become self-sustaining, if it has not done so already. The melting of the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps reduces the fraction of solar energy reflected back into space, and so increases the temperature further. Climate change may kill off the Amazon and other rain forests, and so eliminate once one of the main ways in which carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere. The rise in sea temperature may trigger the release of large quantities of carbon dioxide, trapped as hydrides on the ocean floor. Both these phenomena would increase the greenhouse effect, and so global warming further. We have to reverse global warming urgently, if we still can.”
Now who should we believe, Novelist Roger Simon, (whose books I love by the way) or one of our time’s great geniuses?
it is amazing that mr hawkins is putting his nose into this …just like any other “celebrity” they think there sh!t doesn’t stink.
warming may in fact due the opposite as to what the good Doctor claims.
ans …a big AND the global warming is NOT MAN MADE.
One volcano can puts more CO2 into the atmosphere then man ever has.
and on top of that I’m freezing
I stll think that the vaccine designed to prevent cows from farting is a terrific idea. I mean, the world would be just a little bit sweeter if cows did not fart. But, of course, there is always the law of unintional consequences. Discontented cows, and certainly any cow feeling a need to fart, but unable to carry it through to fruition is by definition a discontented cow, would more likely than not produce sour milk, cream and butter. Thus resulting in rancid cheese, that when consumed would most definitely increase the human flatus quotient, accelerating the destruction of the ozone layer, and ultimately life on earth as we know it. Anyhow, if they’re having as much success with the cow fart vaccine as they are with the H1N1 vaccine, we can rest easy. But I still think fart free cows is an idea whose time has come.
One point about the Inconvenient Global Warming scandal has gone mostly unreported. The warmists who do acknowledge the scandal (those who don’t try to claim the emails were all taken out of context) still try to claim it was just the work of a few rogue researchers while the overwhelming body of evidence at facilities around the world support the theory of human induced global warming.
But how is this possible? The CRU is widely considered one of the preeminent climate research facilities in the world with some of the top climate researchers working there. How is it that only this facility could run into so much trouble making the case for global warming? Researchers communicate with each other freely, so would they not have shared some of their concerns with other researchers? The emails hint that they did.
Far from a small band rogue researchers, this scandal leaves every indication that it is a problem pervasive throughout the industry. Other public statements by scientists such a James Hansen who wants oil company executives put on trial for alleged crimes against humanity indicate this kind of thinking is prevalent elsewhere. So until all research facilities dedicated to the study of climate release their data all schemes to reduce CO2 emissions should be put on hold.
And Winston looked at the sheet handed him:
“Adjustments prior to 1972 shall be -0.2 degrees and after 1998 shall be +0.3 degrees.”
Winston wondered at the adjustment to the data. At this point, no one even knows if the data, prior to his adjustments, was raw data or already adjusted one or more times previously.
It didn’t matter. All Winston was sure of is that one of the lead climatologists needed more slope to match his computer model outputs. He punched out the new Fortran cards and then dropped the old cards into the Memory Hole where they were burned.
“There!” Winston exclaimed to himself. “Now the temperature data record is correct again; all is double-plus good.”
Jack at 95,
It isn’t up to private lawyers to prosecute, that’s the government’s job.
We shall see what respect for the law Mr Holder and company have. If I were Holder I would be very unhappy to have been duped into supporting AGW, by fraud. The East Anglieites have made alot of liberals look foolish. It is inevitable that US scientists are caught up in this web of deciet. If they used taxpayer funds to further the fraud they need to be punished.
@ Carla, #99.
I personally would vote against the vaccine that would eliminate bovine farting, because it would mindlessly preempt, and eventually nullify, the future technology that would otherwise lead to the production of the greenest of all synthetic fuels so far: the long awaited Flatulene.
Does the enervation of the MSM and it’s lack of curiosity about Climategate, ACORN and various failed policies of this administration due to its hollowed out condition?
Staffs have been cut to the bone and what newspaper or magazine now has the resources to support investigative journalism even if the will existed.
Liberals love to throw away the raw data. They do it all the time. Like when they created the New Society (welfare) and said it would only cost a few billion dollars. Like when they created social security as a safety net then raided the cash creating the worlds largest ponzi scheme, like when they created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and forced banks to provide loans to folks they knew couldn’t afford to pay them back, like when they said the 800 billion stimulus was needed to prevent unemployment from reaching 10% (it would only get as high as 8%), now their new ObamaCare health bill which will only cost 980 billion and won’t add a dime to the deficit and will make your health care improved and insure more people and be fair to doctors, etc..
‘Science’ that exists in a self-protective bubble where other scientists who are not within the ‘group-think clique’ are barred from critically analyzing the raw ‘data’ is about as ‘anti-science‘ as it gets.
Ever heard of the four seasons? ‘Climate change’ happens.
Logically, any opinion from any famous person or expert about Global Warming or Climate Change that was made prior to November 2009 must now be considered to have been based on fraudulent evidence. Since Roger Simon’s opinion takes the CRU fraud into account, he is actually now more credible than Steven Hawking.
“Now who should we believe, Novelist Roger Simon, (whose books I love by the way) or one of our time’s great geniuses?”
Does either man claim to possess any particular expertise regarding global warming? I was not aware that Stephen Hawking ever focused on the subject. At best, I suspect he simply relies on people he thinks are trustworthy. He is nonetheless not the only voice. There are countless other scientists who have arrived at a different conclusion. Moreover, a much larger number will be reexamining the issue in the immediate future. That’s something you can take for granted.
Lorenzo:
Stephen Hawking is a very bright fellow. But he is not omniscient, does not even claim to speak directly to God, and, like the rest of us, can be assumed to know very little about subjects he has not studied. The comment you quote is presumably based on his understanding of the relevant data and models, data we now know to be dubious and models we now know to be compromised (to put in mildly).
What has Stephen Hawking said since this information was made available? I have seen no recent posts in which he rushes to the rescue of the Warmists of East Anglia.
Many prominent scientists are going to be deeply embarrassed when AGW comments they made in perfectly good faith are repeated to them now. Some of my friends already are. They trusted the objectivity of the scientific literature. They neither knew nor imagined that the whole time-honored process of edit and review had been seized and perverted.
The comparisons to Galileo are valid and useful. Compare two contemporaries, Galileo and Kepler. Both worked on similar theories, both knew of each other’s work. But Galileo, a Catholic, was imprisoned and forced to recant. Kepler on the other hand, was a protestant and went to protestant schools. His work flourished.
Kepler did in the natural what Luther did with the spiritual – open the books with an open and inquisitive mind. Both sought truth even if those truths lead in unexpected directions. Both sought to understand God. Unbinding humanity from the dogma of the church allowed the Renaissance, the “Age of Reason” to flourish for the first time.
We are today in a very similar situation. Today, the communist, socialist, neo-Marxists, are the Catholic church of the 17th century. Curse and suppress the heretics! Believe in salvation not by God, but by State. The reason our good friends BC or DS cannot see the truth is because the truth would destroy their faith.
Hacklehead:
How come this “settled” science is so unsettling?
Is it because the left contaminates everything it touches or are we putting a “science” label on a field that has not yet matured into a real science?
Shannon Love and others have several good posts on this over at Chicago Boyz. He makes the point that climate science is new and does not have testable hypotheses. Therefore, it will depend on the social science model of reference to authority. You cannot conduct an experiment in climate science, although Chinese have tried a few lately and gotten snowstorms.
Scientist priests were numerous in the Middle Ages and included Albertus Magnus, who discovered arsenic in 1250AD. He isolated arsenic when he heated soap and orpiment (arsenic trisulphide, As2S3). Thomas Aquinas walked from Italy to Cologne to be his pupil. Another example was Roger Bacon who discovered many of the principles of optics and made reading spectacles.
Roger
WAITNG FOR THE SPIKED HEEL TO DROP
This scandal will not be covered in the MSM the sex angle shows up.
Hey, you know, things are what they are.
With all due respect for everyone:
I am observing a very funny phenomenon: we live UNDER an administration made up of totalitarians who are implementing a complete change of the American economy and of the American way of life, with the explicit goal to change capitalism into something else (that can only be socialism).
DAILY, the members of this administration make clear their goals.
Daily, the country falls into the pit of totalitarianism.
And the Freedom Lovers Americans just ignore all that.
Yes, “stop Copenhagen”. Sure. Tell them.
You will see.
They will listen to you.
Do better:
send a letter to this address with your requests:
SANTA STALIN
NORTH POLE
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
“…spending a fair portion of the world’s wealth on anthropogenic global warming that could be either an illusion or a very minor contributing factor to a far more complex problem.”
Yes, Roger, and that’s exactly why it can’t be postponed.
It’s about redistributing wealth among countries and into the pockets of a select few Co2 czars. It appears now that there is much uncertainty into man’s contribution to climate change. What is certain by my calculations is that billions will change hands and a fortunate few will become instantly wealthy beyond imagining if this can be rammed down everyone’s throat before real investigations are made into the CRU allegations. Since Phil & I are a couple of the lucky ones who orchestrated, er, organized this charade, er conference, please STFU until after Copenhagen.
Sincerely,
algour
“you are still only dealing with a bunch of malicious and/or badly confused anti-science yahoos”
Damn straight, and that why they have to be cashiered from the CRU as quickly as possible!
On the other hand,
I am certain that if we ask politely, the mullahs will stop producing enriched uranium.
And the Obama administration will stop destroying the dollar.
And they will stop nationalizing one sixth of the American economy (health-care).
And they will stop being anti-israel and pro-islam.
Let’s not jump to conclusions, it’s only one year of socialism and we don’t have evidence of concentration camps yet.
They only said that FoxNews is not a legitimate source of information, that Rush is the people’s enemy and that police do stupid things, and that conservative Americans are terrorist. And that the islamic terrorists deserve Miranda rights and a trial in NY.
Nothing to worry about.
So, they will likely listen to us, stop cap and trade and they will not sign anything at Copenhagen.
Even the fact that Napoleon Obama took four months to send needed Troops in Afghanistan is purely due to his passionate love for American Soldiers. Sure.
93. Samizdat: “I note that there has been very little troll traffic since the story of the East Anglia fraud broke.”
Y’see, Sammy, we trolls are devastated. Everything we knew and believed about global warming came from East Anglia. But don’t worry about the lack of troll traffic; there’s still plenty of a-hole traffic. Roger’s words don’t fall on deaf ears:
3. Ashen: “The fix is in. Acorn, Climategate, Obama, The Hague, Communist takeover of America…”
It is notable that the marxist tree huggers who are more than willing to shut down civilization as we know it over anthropogenic global warming are flumoxed to the point of silence by the developments of last week at East Anglia. If they had a firm grip on the science behind their dubious warming claims, they would be troting it out to refute rebutal. They are paniced by the revelations because they have no science to fight back with now that the rest of us know their fudging tactics. That leaves them with sarcasm and insult, weak cards to play given the fraud uncovered last week.
This is typical behavior for the bullies who make up the AGW crowd. Let’s see how well they can defend their scientific theory now that they have been outed. Insults and name calling only increase suspicion and erode credibility.
Roger -
AGW is for all intents and purposes the equivalent of a Religion. I have friends both on the right and left who believe in it – AND I Shall keep their privacy to my dying breath. Point is, let there be separation of Caesar and G-d in this instance. The fewer coins rendered to Caesar – The Better. The “less footprint” rendered to G-d – the better – AND – understand that people being HUMAN, they WILL CHEAT on occasion – I know this well – have eaten a few big steaks and gone well over 100 mph on Public Highways a few times. The basic thing is that most of the time – REMEMBER – you are a mere Human Being – one of 6-7 Billion – like a grain of sand on a beach. The Earth, whether you believe in G-d or Gaia can shake you off as a Dog shakes off a flea. Learn that Humility and you will understand much. That is all. -S-
73. Lorenzo:
I recently saw Mr. Ed (Ed Begley Jr) being interviwed by Stuart Varney. Mr. Ed says we shouldn’t listen to physicists, only to climatologists. Although it goes against my grain, this time I’ll follow Mr. Ed’s advice.
Biblio, so good to see you back again in such fine and convincing form. Your sophisticated logic has convinced me that AGW is for real! Well played!
119. Samizdat:
“It is notable that the marxist tree huggers….”
“Insults and name calling only increase suspicion and erode credibility.”
Remember, folks, you read it here first!
If it accurately describes the political philosophy and environmental bias of the environmentalist who is propagating anthropogenic global warming it is neither insulting or name calling. It’s like calling Hitler a Nazi or Stalin a communist.
Where is the science that proves AGW? We are waiting to hear it.
To NucEngineer #14 – thank you.
Now that we have proof that global scientific lying has been going on hot and heavy for more than a decade, the question arises what
to do with the people who’ve been fanning the flames of disingenuousness, stoking the ovens if deceit, spreading the lies like wildfire that
the world is undergoing dangerous climate change.
Let’s face it, if George W. were President when the scandal broke that something this devious, deceitful and underhanded was going on during his watch, the mainstream media would have Dan Rathered it into a linkable, unthinkable, unforgivable intentional offense; the act of diverting tax money to the fraud. Calls for an independent prosecutor would have been screaming off the editorial and front pages of the Times, Washington Post and LA Times every day, in hopes that everyone involved, from the highest principal to the lowliest scientist be hung from the nearest back alley tree.
Of course, I’m not asking for some out of the old west neck tie party for the willing participants in one of the most egregious sins of the last 200 years, but I do think that if Obama doesn’t use the full power of his office to prosecute the offenders who ran off with billions of American taxpayers’ money, I must question his complicity in the entire sordid affair.
Like a dentist drilling down into a diseased tooth before the rest of it can be saved, I realize a lot of painful investigation must be undertaken to get to the bottom of it; the deceit and deception. I realize each and every trail must be followed until all wrongdoers are found and formally tried tried in world and national courts.
Unfortunately, at this moment, highly incriminating files are now being deleted. The truth being, law enforcement should already have taken steps to make the hiding and destroying of evidence illegal.
But, as I suggested, I fear cover ups that reach the highest levels of government are underway.
In this dilly of a multi-billion dollar fraud, the evil doers must be brought into the halls of justice. In this dilly of a monetary slight of hand, for the first time, the mainstream media should be named as co-conspirators.
I believe fair justice should be meted out to crooked scientists politicians and other authors of misfeasance, yet I think the mainstream media that communicated the fraud to the people of the world should sweat the sweat of old west horse thieves.
If the judges of the world deem the sentence in all ways appropriate, then I wouldn’t get in the way if the media miscreants, from reporters, to editors to publishers, were hung from the highest trees until dead. It would pay their debt to humankind. And leave unpaid only their affront to the laws of God.
125. Samizdat: “Where is the science that proves AGW? We are waiting to hear it.”
All the AGW science came from East Anglia, and that’s been discredited. So there’s really not a speck to be had. If you don’t believe me, check the internet (and disregard, of course, leftist-loony sites like NASA’s).
NASA, Biblio? Did you say NASA?
Samizdat, check the Internet! The proof is on the Internet! Nice rebuttal Biblio; you are in top form tonite!
My eyes sting and my backside is numb from reading a screen these past days.
But my faith in my countrymen is restored.
I have not enjoyed such thought and conversation in many years.
East Anglia reveals the tip of an iceberg. It exposes corruption in the scientific AGW community and the inability of those “scientists” to support their AGW hypothesis when exposed to peer scrutiny. East Anglia is a repository for information relied upon by other AGW apostles.
Pressure that should have been brought to bear long ago on the “scientists” who are proselytizing AGW will now be applied. Albert Einstien would not fear such inquiry. The East Angleites furtive behavior indicates they do not welcome scrutiny from real scientists.
Other AGW advocates are going to have to prove their hypothesis as a result of the fraud exposed last week. That will be a significant and long lasting effect of the East Anglia incident. True scientists would welcome the need to prove, it is part of the process of scientific inquiry. The coverup and repeated statements of the Al Gore types who claim the science is settled show just how far from science this phenomenon actually is.
Its like a domino effect – all the data needs to be reworked based on what open, transparent and audited records we now have. Until that is done any policy based on previous ‘records’ needs to be put on hold, if not discarded altogether.
Copenhagen is just another junket for the likes who wined and dined in Bali at taxpayers expense and hypocritically made the carbon footprint of a small country in the process.
For Clay at #111
http://www.catholic.com/library/Galileo_Controversy.asp
Luther was a geocentrist. Galileo’s “arrest” was a house arrest in a friendly bishop’s palazzo and he was allowed all of his books and instruments.
BTW, the backwards Papists’ scientists, mainly Jesuits, invented our modern calendar that Protestant Europe wouldn’t accept for a long time after its invention. (Sort of how they refused to use quinine in the Indies for a long time too because the Jesuits discovered it.)
I smell the stench of similar arguments. Re abortion during Roberts questioning. Democrats: “Don’t you agree that the law on abortion is
settled?”
On global warming. Democratic scientists. “Don’t you agree that the science is [settled]“.
From one bunch of lying Nazi cows to another.
Global warming is a bunch of hot air.
While this is still far from reaching PrimeTime in the MSM, there’s an interesting article on this at http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/24/taking_liberties/entry5761180.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody
Some highlights:
“… programmers unaffiliated with East Anglia started taking a close look at the quality of the CRU’s code, and second, they began to feel sympathetic for anyone who had to spend three years (including working weekends) trying to make sense of code that appeared to be undocumented and buggy, while representing the core of CRU’s climate model.
“One programmer highlighted the error of relying on computer code that, if it generates an error message, continues as if nothing untoward ever occurred. Another debugged the code by pointing out why the output of a calculation that should always generate a positive number was incorrectly generating a negative one. A third concluded: “I feel for this guy. He’s obviously spent years trying to get data from undocumented and completely messy sources.”
It is a fine case of community organizing on global scale. Isn’t it amazing how millions of people were effectively brainwashed by ‘scientists’, ‘journalists’, lawyers, politicians? Everyone I ask knows about AGW, and more or less accepts it as a fact. Millions of dollars are being made in ‘carbon offsets’. Millions of dollars (and pounds) are wasted to provide for good life and successful careers of community organizers.
In the end, all this is not about science or ‘science’. It was a way to make serious money, and money does not smell, if you can get away with whatever you’re doing to make it.
Prof G #104
FLATULENE is the registered trademark for a new synthetic fiber derived from, you guessed it. It’s popular and usually the choice of ‘loners’ for obvious reasons.
The hacked emails certainly provide at least a moderate and certainly fascinating scandal; the chips should fall where they may.
The NYT website Dot Earth (even as the mother paper has been silent so far) has had non-stop discussions of the topic for the last several day. The discussions include people very knowledgeable in the field and certainly more scientists of all stripes than we hear from here.
While I have grown even more disgusted with the warmists’ omission of the Medieval Warming Period I am becoming convinced that the general build-up of CO2 in the atmosphere is both a product of and simultaneously (another) cause of warming.
I believe that we could relatively easily survive another MWP, whatever caused it, but a MWP accelerated by man-induced CO2 would be dicier. It is that generally accepted “fact,” I believe, that has led so many folks, even Repubs to buy into the position that some reduction, or at least moderation of the increase of putting out more CO2 into the atmosphere is a good thing. How one goes about this general policy then becomes a political question with the usual parties taking their usual positions.
So, although I have come to despise the term “settled science” I believe that is is settled science that more CO2 in the atmosphere does cause some warming.
In the mean time, one side will scream about commies and one-world government and the other will yowl of big-oil money corrupting the information process as happened in the tobacco discussions for all those years. The truth, as usual, will be very elusive.
Climategate has introduced a jarring reality check, but we have not heard the last of CO2, unless of course, the current apparent cooling continues.
I am sure we all agree that NASA had excellent reasons for mislaying permanently all of the original scientific records and videos of the glorious moon landing program. Yes, indeed.
AL GORE should be held for treason.These 1107 emails are proof this has been a fraud since day one.also,these were not hacked emails,they were insider information leaked.Thank god for this new light on a bogus claim.These eugenicist must be stopped.Oh ya,what about acid rain,hahahahahaha.
AGW has been a fraud from the very beginning. Unfortunately, the whole world’s population has been taught this propaganda for more than a generation. The fix is already in, it will take years to undo these lies, and you can bet your ass that the Copenhagen accord will now go ahead as planned. The “affirmers” have no choice but to go for it now. And our President, Boobily, will sell us down the river because he got most of his votes from the affirmative left. Have we learned our lesson about compromising with these collectivists yet?
It’s full speed ahead for Copenhagen. After all “fixing” global warming is not about climate change. It’s all about transferring power and money from the people to the governments of the world.
I am appalled at the allusions above to back alley hangings for the climateers who’ve profiteered to the tune of billions of dollars on the ignoble notion that global warming is destined to lead to world wide disaster.
Of course, although I am not in favor of extreme punishment for the Gorian liars, cheaters and wanton global alarmists; followers of the inglorious almighty dollar, I do, however, agree that significant punitive measures should be meted out to dissuade scientists forevermore from foisting another fraud of biblical proportions on the 7.1 billion world population.
By the same token, now that the dastardly deceit has been exposed to the light of truth, I implore that all participate not in a cover up of these unfortunate and unforgivable deeds after the fact.
President Barack Obama, I hope and pray, is not tempted to join in on the miscreant deeds of wayward, disgraceful scientists who worship at the alter of crass profit rather than solid science. I assume that I should add the following warning: Anything short of President Obama’s full and nuance free denunciation of the sullied scientists and their fraudulent work product will result in prosecution by appropriate
legal authorities to the fullest extent of the law. This duly sworn by the 2nd Michigan Militia granted powers by the Constitution of the United States.
As you may be aware, citizen militias in Michigan are historic lawful entities predating all federal and state constitutions.
Such militias are “grandfathered” into the very system of government they created as clearly revealed in both the Constitution of the United States and that of Michigan.
These constitutions grant no right to form militias, but merely recognize the existing natural right of all people to defend and protect themselves. The governments created out of well armed and free people are to be constantly obedient to the people. Any attempt to take the means of freedom from the people is an act of rebellion against the people. Currently in Michigan, the citizen militia is subject only to the historic role of American militias as defined in Black’s Law Dictionary.
#143, Dwight writes:
“So, although I have come to despise the term “settled science” I believe that it is settled science that more CO2 in the atmosphere does cause some warming.”
What do you think of the following:
The following web site seems to suggest carbon dioxide plays virtually no additional role:
http://www.john-daly.com/barker/index.htm
After analyzing the data and noticing very little difference due to CO2, this web site has the following quote:
“This may especially be the case if there is any overlap between the absorption bands of water vapor and CO2. In this scenario, because all the energy in the bands is absorbed, further increases in CO2 will have no additional greenhouse effect. The implication would be that the pre-industrial concentrations of atmospheric CO2 were already close to saturation (total absorption) levels.”
Werner Brozek,
Science teacher
Thanks for the article Mr Simon. I think we should let it go ahead. It gives us a chance to identify the co-conspirators and beneficiaries of this scam.
It gives us a chance to see how well they can lie…
It is very simple actually.
Investigate, prosecute those that tried to swindle money based on junk science, convict them, and ship them to the Somali pirates as new recruits. Might as well – these buffoons are finished!
Some films are made specifically for alternative venues, hitting theaters as made-for-TV films or direct-to-movie movies.