Heating up
At the summit in Copenhagen, leaders need to call scientists to return to science
Date published: 12/9/2009
Science and scientific process must inform and guide decisions of my administration on a wide range of issues including climate change. The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process.
--President Barack Obama
SCIENCE, which Webster's defines as "systemized knowledge de- rived from observation, study, and experimentation," must be objective to be trusted. So when scientists cook the books and politicians use this skewed information to push policy, it's an outrageous scandal, a betrayal of the public trust. Consider "Climategate."
Some unknown whistleblower hacked into the computers of the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit in Norwich, England and accessed some eye-opening e-mails from research scientists. The messages suggest that the scientists at the CRU are such strong believers in global warming that they are willing to resort to underhanded tactics to buttress their thesis and marginalize skeptics.
Off-balance because data reveal that the rising temperatures of the past century plateaued in 1998, and have slightly fallen since, one scientist wrote a colleague, "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series from the last 20 years to hide the decline [in temperature]."
Worse, CRU director Phil Jones wrote, "The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the U.K., I think I'll delete the file, rather than send it to anyone. We also have a data protection act, which I'll hide behind."
The "MMs" are Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, two Canadian researchers who disproved the iconic "hockey stick" graph, a methodologically flawed depiction that showed that temperatures had remained flat for a thousand years, only to rise sharply following the industrial revolution. When one "MM" asked CRU for data, the organization did indeed hide behind the data-protection act.
As evidence contrary to global-warming dogma began to mount, the CRU gang even began plotting how to get colleagues around the world to boycott a journal that published articles contrary to global-warming doctrine. In all this, they were aping some anti-warming scientists, including those who took money from corporations (e.g., Exxon) to present data friendly to industrialists' cause, as a 1998 American Petroleum Institute memo shows.
Date published: 12/9/2009
Most recent reader comments:
smarter? now thats funny even for you bobby
The transcript shows that Kerry's freshman-year average was 71. He scored a 61 in geology, a 63 and 68 in two history classes, and a 69 in political science. His top score was a 79, in another political science course. Another of his strongest efforts, a 77, came in French class.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/06/07/yale_grades_portray_kerry_as_a_lackluster_student/
Atack, why don't you look
(posted by
AtackDuck
, Dec. 10, 2009 1:19 pm)  
I have looked at the data sharing. The data shared by CRU is questionable, to be polite. Why won’t CRU release the data that they can? Why did they destroy most of the raw data? Again, why the closing up instead of opening up, their research to independent peer review? Why the emails asking to delete files about their research methodology? It’s obvious, these hosers pulled a Bellesiles.
Frankvert...The "smarter" people you talk about
(posted by
slarrivee
, Dec. 10, 2009 12:57 pm)  
are only good for taking folks like you and true_bob to the cleaners. Thats all they are smart about. Lemmings like you following the chicken little crowd over the edge. There is alot more money streaming into the pockets of the GW is real crowd from grants they don't want to lose to go along with the political crowd looking to fix something that doesn't exist by picking our pockets even more to fill their coffers. Al Gore and his daddy were always in the pockets of Occidental and suddenly he's green. BS
Problem with smarter
(posted by
True_Bob
, Dec. 10, 2009 8:06 am)  
people is sometimes their audience gets bored with nuances. Same thing happened with Kerry in '04.
frankvert: Smarter People, Really?
(posted by
RVR
, Dec. 9, 2009 11:04 pm)  
Is that why Al Gore was chosen to be the GW spokesperson? Listening to him is like watching grass grow. Yawn...is he finished talking, yet? One would think that if GW was a crisis, the GW proponents would have been able to get a better pitchman? Really, this is about the money. Unless you own a "green" business, you're not going to profit; but, you will get taxed and taxed and taxed and taxed some more.
|