The Warmergate Scandal

[CrusaderFrank]

I found half dozen of simlar articles to this one.

Salon.com Mobile

Still waiting for the smoking gun. If there is one, I would love to see it. Laymen seem to be making a lot to do about nothing, but I have an open mind.

 

[Oddball]

so some lost data totally refutes the general agreement among a vast majortity of the worlds scientists that man-made climate change is a reality?

"some" lost data?




I guess we'll never know what they deliberately discarded.

I keep saying this scandal gets more an more like Watergate every day!

Rose Mary Woods

Fiercely loyal to Nixon, Woods claimed responsibility in 1974 grand jury testimony for inadvertently erasing up to 5 minutes of the 18 1/2 minute gap in one of the Nixon audio tapes (specifically, the one from June 20, 1972) that were central to the scandal. Her demonstration of how this might have occurred—which depended upon her stretching to simultaneously press controls several feet apart (what the press dubbed the "Rose Mary Stretch"[3]) was met with skepticism from those who believed the erasures, from whatever source, to be deliberate. Later investigators identified five to nine separate erasures. The contents of the gap remain a mystery.

Rose Mary Woods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Jay Canuck]

"I keep saying this scandal gets more an more like Watergate every day!"


yes Prof. Dud.... we know you keep repeating yourself - the question is do you believe that doing so will make you anymore credible?

 

[Oddball]

When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.

 

[Dr.House]

When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.

That'll be different...

He's used to getting his opinions from HuffyPuffy or UnthinkingNoProgress...

 

[Jay Canuck]

Prof. Dud waxs forth with more science and then the Dr. lays another zinger on us..... I think they should get a room together.

 

[Annie]

I found half dozen of simlar articles to this one.

Salon.com Mobile

Still waiting for the smoking gun. If there is one, I would love to see it. Laymen seem to be making a lot to do about nothing, but I have an open mind.

It's going to come from the research folks and/or computer folks, that's my guess:

More on Climategate - Clive Crook

Link rich, including journals:

ore on Climategate

30 Nov 2009 09:40 am
In my previous post on Climategate I blithely said that nothing in the climate science email dump surprised me much. Having waded more deeply over the weekend I take that back.

The closed-mindedness of these supposed men of science, their willingness to go to any lengths to defend a preconceived message, is surprising even to me. The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering. And, as Christopher Booker argues, this scandal is not at the margins of the politicised IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] process. It is not tangential to the policy prescriptions emanating from what David Henderson called the environmental policy milieu [subscription required]. It goes to the core of that process.

One theme, in addition to those already mentioned about the suppression of dissent, the suppression of data and methods, and the suppression of the unvarnished truth, comes through especially strongly: plain statistical incompetence. This is something that Henderson's study raised, and it was also emphasised in the Wegman report on the Hockey Stick, and in other independent studies of the Hockey Stick controversy. Of course it is also an ongoing issue in Steve McIntyre's campaign to get hold of data and methods. Nonetheless I had given it insufficient weight. Climate scientists lean very heavily on statistical methods, but they are not necessarily statisticians. Some of the correspondents in these emails appear to be out of their depth. This would explain their anxiety about having statisticians, rather than their climate-science buddies, crawl over their work.

I'm also surprised by the IPCC's response. Amid the self-justification, I had hoped for a word of apology, or even of censure. (George Monbiot called for Phil Jones to resign, for crying out loud.) At any rate I had expected no more than ordinary evasion. The declaration from Rajendra Pachauri that the emails confirm all is as it should be is stunning. Science at its best. Science as it should be. Good lord. This is pure George Orwell. And these guys call the other side "deniers".
...

 

[Ravi]

The hackers are more like the plumbers that W&B.

I will not be surprised if the hackers were backed by some rabid denier group...

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Has spoken once again.

Listen up or go to hell you deniers!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Midnight Marauder]

The hackers are more like the plumbers that W&B.

I will not be surprised if the hackers were backed by some rabid denier group...

First off, there weren't any "hackers." The massive zip file containing the emails and the code was released by this guy:

Keith Briffa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, let's review:

We are supposed to trust these guys to be unbiased, clinical, and professional. In stonewalling a legitimate FOIA request, they gave us this mess.

Thanks to Briffa, who is one of the scientists, we now know they are NOT unbiased and definitely have a political agenda and aren't afraid to "adjust" hard data to appear to say what they want it to say. So, out goes the "clinical" part too.

"Losing" ALL of the raw data, right on schedule -- the very data that was requested to start with -- leaves us with incompetence at the very least. A SCIENTIST losing raw data? (And in this case, a group of them.) Unthinkable in the scientific community. Until now.

They are biased.
They are unprofessional, not objective.
They are incompetent.
They are liars.

And one of them had a conscience. And here's the words of one of the most fierce AGW believing media persons:

There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request.Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.I apologise. I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed. I would have been a better journalist if I had investigated their claims more closely.

Skepticism. That's what Monbiot above admits he should have had alot more of. NOW he gets it, why don't you? That's what we ALL should have, especially now. VERY healthy and on-alert skepticism.

If you don't, you're a hapless moonbat dolt.

 

[eagleseven]

I found half dozen of simlar articles to this one.

Salon.com Mobile

Still waiting for the smoking gun. If there is one, I would love to see it. Laymen seem to be making a lot to do about nothing, but I have an open mind.

If you don't understand the implications of actively subverting peer-review, you have no grasp of the scientific process.


Interesting that you are claiming "no smoking gun" when there is no way you could have processed the 130 gigabytes of data.

 

[Chris]

Jay- do you think the people who are concerned about the fraudulent claims of AGW are proponents of increasing carbon emissions? there are lots of people who believe in a green lifestyle who don't want to unilaterally cripple the economy and put a huge debt on the backs of working people. there have been many great improvements in the last few decades and there are more to come but the business of carbon tax will surely degrade into a ripoff of regular people.

This is one of the funniest posts I have ever read.

The carbon tax will degrade into a ripoff of regular people?

What do you think the oil companies are doing now?????

 

[Midnight Marauder]

What do you think the oil companies are doing now?????

Getting all up in this "green" thing, positioning themselves to make TRILLIONS off of it.

 

[Chris]

You can't "lose" data that is a matter of public record. Wherever the original data came from still exists.

I haven't seen religious zealotry spin something like this since the christians said the bible gave them the right to persue the crusades.

I know the right is really putting a spin on what is basically pretty obvious.

The poles and the glaciers are melting, and the temperatures are rising, and we have doubled CO2.

No question about it.

 

[Oddball]

What do you think the oil companies are doing now?????

A combination of hedging their bets, a PR campaign and throwing a bone to WarmerNazis.

 

[Chris]

What do you think the oil companies are doing now?????

Getting all up in this "green" thing, positioning themselves to make TRILLIONS off of it.

The irony is that green energy can very easily be made at home.

Each of us could produce our own energy.

Then the big companies would be out of the loop.

 

[Oddball]

I know the right is really putting a spin on what is basically pretty obvious.

The poles and the glaciers are melting, and the temperatures are rising, and we have doubled CO2.

No question about it.

No they're not, you lying sack of shit.

Numerous links were posted last night, and you refuse to accept the facts.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

What do you think the oil companies are doing now?????

Getting all up in this "green" thing, positioning themselves to make TRILLIONS off of it.

The irony is that green energy can very easily be made at home.

Each of us could produce our own energy.

Then the big companies would be out of the loop.

When you show me where it's cost beneficial and truly carbon neutral, I'll stop laughing.

However, cap and trade will artificially inflate everyone's utility bills, making "green" solutions for the home almost look viable!

 

[Andrew2382]

why even bother responding to chris

the guy is a fucking idiot

he doesn't want to accept the fact that yes there are some glaciers melting but there are also glaciers growing!

just ignore him

 

[Modbert]

I try to keep up on this topic, however the moonbats on both sides make that pretty difficult.

So can anyone on either side explain to me what happened in the Larsen Ice Shelf then? Specifically Larsen B.