This is why real scientists share their data, algorithms and code for peer review, to ensure there is no crazy fudging of data.Who knows what really happened in these cases? Bad judgment? Poor math skills? Forcing data to conform to an expected outcome? Zealous misrepresentation to serve the "higher cause" of "saving the planet" from pollution and overpopulation?
Taking that report with a gallon of salt, it is nevertheless an interesting exercise to imagine the UN with less ability to make decisions affecting the world. Its track record is below abysmal.The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.
But who needs Henry Fonda, Morgan Freeman, or invading aliens when we have the world-wide Leftist press? Today, 56 newspapers in 45 countries are running the same Doomsday editorial, many of them defying convention by giving the editorial front-page space. (H/t Legal Insurrection). That might help explain why these 56 newspapers have been pretty much ignoring the mounting evidence of the use of fraudulent data and methodologies in the development of global warming models that promise that humans will soon be worth our weight in Soylent Green.In the typical sci-fi disaster flick, the Doomsday message is an honorable one, a brave one, and, above all, a truthful one, in which politics are transcended to deliver salvation. In our real world, of course, the Doomsday message is a pack of lies. Here is a temperature map based on information from one of the IPCC's own publications:Today 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency.
Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11 of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record, the Arctic ice-cap is melting and last year's inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the damage. . . .
As anyone can tell at a glance, the only way that 11 of the last 14 years have been the warmest on record is if temperature record keeping began 14 years ago. Earth's temperature has been declining or flat since 1998. You do the math. Furthermore, the Arctic sea ice melt was greater in the 1920s than it is today, and was followed by a period of ice thickening. Antarctic and Greenland glaciers have been in a phase of thickening for some years.The science is complex but the facts are clear. [I can just about hear Henry Fonda making that announcement.] The world needs to take steps to limit temperature rises to 2C, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next 5-10 years. A bigger rise of 3-4C — the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow inaction — would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced, whole nations drowned by the sea.
This is hogwash, utter hogwash (with apologies to hogs). One result of the melting of glaciers following the last Great Ice Age was rainfall that turned the arid plains of North Africa into areas of lush vegetation supporting increasing populations of all kinds of life. Significant rain fell over what is now the Sahara desert. Human and animal populations migrated northward. If Alaska, Northern Canada, Northern Europe, and Northern Asia were to become warmer, they could serve as breadbaskets to the world. And about that "whole nations would be drowned by the sea" scare, think about it. When was the last time the melting ice in your water glass caused the water to spill over the top? It just doesn't work that way.
Patriotism is as much a virtue as justice, and is as necessary for the support of societies as natural affection is for the support of families.
~Benjamin Rush, signatory of the Declaration of Independence
Barack Hussein Obama talks a good game of "dialog," good enough to have convinced millions of American voters that he can sit down and sweet talk some sense into our enemies ("they're people too"), but when it comes to New Yorkers still grieving from 9-11, his idea of "dialog" is to turn his back on them while they stand out in the cold December rain, mutely asking:
Houston at midday yesterday:
In an interview with the BBC, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, said the issue raised by the e-mails was serious and said "we will look into it in detail."This is the same guy who just a few days ago stated, unequivocally, that
"We will certainly go into the whole lot and then we will take a position on it," he said. "We certainly don't want to brush anything under the carpet."
The unfortunate incident that has taken place through illegal hacking of the private communications of individual scientists only highlights the importance of I.P.C.C. procedures and practices and the thoroughness by which the Panel carries out its assessment. This thoroughness and the duration of the process followed in every assessment ensure the elimination of any possibility of omissions or distortions, intentional or accidental.3. Less funny: UK Weather Service to re-examine 160 years of weather data, following the exposure of the global warmists' "CRU-tape letters" and crooked computer code. The weather service, known as the Met Office, doesn't expect to have the new analysis until the end of 2012. (H/t, Watts Up With That?)
The new analysis of the data will take three years, meaning that the Met Office will not be able to state with absolute confidence the extent of the warming trend until the end of 2012.4. However, the UK Government "is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination." The Government's argument: The re-examination "would be seized upon by climate change sceptics."
[snip]
Since the stolen e-mails were published, the chief executive of the Met Office has written to national meteorological offices in 188 countries asking their permission to release the raw data that they collected from their weather stations.
I've seen some poorly thought out places to measure temperature, but this one takes the cake. Not only do we have the sensor above a sea of air conditioners with warm air exhausts, there are two rooftop building exhausts, plus the roof and building itself, and then lets not forget that the Press Democrat itself is in a sea of buildings in downtown Santa Rosa, all of which to contribute to the Urban Heat Island (UHI) the thermometer is exposed to.
Yes folks, this is an official USHCN Climate station of record. The data from this station goes into the national climatic database. But given the absurd and irresponsible placement of this NOAA MMTS thermometer, is it any wonder at all that the graph of temperature at Santa Rosa looks like it does?
This isn't a case of gradual encroachment by localized site changes that happened around the thermometer, like what happened in Marysville. This is a deliberate placement of an official thermometer in the worst possible measurement scenario. Somebody had to choose this location, the building and air conditioners did not grow up around it.
March 31, 2004. Four Americans are murdered in Falluja. They are burned alive, dragged through the street. Their bodies are hung from a bridge.__________
September 3, 2009. Three navy SEALS capture the mastermind of the murders, Ahmed Hashim Abed.
Most wanted terrorist captured. Heroic mission completed.
But then... The terrorist Abed claimed the SEALS assaulted him and gave him a "fat lip." So what did the US Military do?
They filed charges against the SEALS! And now a court martial is scheduled, even though there was no physical evidence and the Al Queda Manual tells terrorists to lie and "say you were abused" or "tortured" to "use the system against itself."
Trusting the word of a terrorist murderer over our brave men?
THIS MUST NOT STAND!
Take action. Go to www.SupportTheSEALS.com. Demand the charges be dropped.
Act now: Hearing is Dec. 7th.
Day 4 of the Copenhagen Climate Conference countdown. Poor mistreated global warming cabal. Bring on the violins.Stolen e-mails have revealed no scientific conspiracy, but do highlight ways in which climate researchers could be better supported in the face of public scrutiny. The e-mail archives stolen last month from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA), UK, have been greeted by the climate-change-denialist fringe as a propaganda windfall (see page 551). To these denialists, the scientists’ scathing remarks about certain controversial palaeoclimate reconstructions qualify as the proverbial ‘smoking gun’: proof that mainstream climate researchers have systematically conspired to suppress evidence contradicting their doctrine that humans are warming the globe. This paranoid interpretation would be laughable were it not for the fact that obstructionist politicians in the US Senate will probably use it next year as an excuse to stiffen their opposition to the country’s much needed climate bill.3. Canada's environmental minister smells an East Anglian rat. According to Jim Prentice, Canada's environment minister and a participant in the Copenhagen talks next week, "something quite inappropriate seems to have happened at this institution, the East Anglia Institution. I think we all want to get to the bottom of that, what that actually was."
4. IPCC head issues statement: Everything peachy-keen over at IPCC. In his statement, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra K. Pachauri, concluded:The unfortunate incident that has taken place through illegal hacking of the private communications of individual scientists only highlights the importance of I.P.C.C. procedures and practices and the thoroughness by which the Panel carries out its assessment. This thoroughness and the duration of the process followed in every assessment ensure the elimination of any possibility of omissions or distortions, intentional or accidental.5. EPA head says ClimateGate emails showed "poor manners;" CO2 is still a poison gas. When Senator Jim Inhofe called for a delay in declaring CO2 an endangering greenhouse gas until the ClimateGate email scandal gets sorted out, Lisa Jackson, head of the Environmental Protection Agency said, "At this point, I have seen nothing that indicates the scientists out there have said that they've changed their consensus. . . . These e-mails certainly may show some poor manners, maybe more. I am not a lawyer, and it is not my job to judge that. But what we have to constantly be looking at is the science, and whether there is any information in the e-mails, or anywhere else, that changes the science."
The scientific process depends on open access to methodology, data, and a rigorous peer-review process. The robust exchange of ideas in the peer-reviewed literature regarding climate science is evidence of the high degree of integrity in this process. The body of evidence that human activity is prominent agent in global warming is overwhelming. The content of these few personal emails has no impact what-so-ever on our overall understanding that human activity is driving dangerous levels of global warming.So, Professor McCarthy, I don't get it. Where in the Jones-Mann cabal process do we find "open access to methodology, data, and a rigorous peer-review process"?
But the computer code is transparently fraudulent. Here, one finds matrices that add unexplained numbers to recent temperatures and subtract them from older temperatures (these numbers are hard-programmed in), splining observational data to model data, and other smoking guns, all showing that they were doing what was necessary to get the answers that the IPCC wanted, not the answers that the data held. They knew what they were doing, and why they were doing it.Francis Bacon is spinning in his grave.If, as Prof. McCarthy insists, “peer review” was functioning, and the IPCC reports are rigorously peer reviewed, why was this not caught? When placing it in context made it highly likely that this type of fraud was occurring?
Policy decisions require real science and real solutions, not junk science and doomsday scare tactics pushed by an environmental priesthood that capitalizes on the public’s worry and makes them feel that owning an SUV is a “sin” against the planet. In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” Boycotting Copenhagen while this scandal is thoroughly investigated would send a strong message that the United States government will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices. Saying no to Copenhagen and cap and tax are first steps in “restoring science to its rightful place. (H/t, Big Government)Update 12:00 noon. Looks like the East Anglia CRU data might not have gotten tossed out with the recycles after all. Maybe "we tossed out the raw data" really means "no Freedom of Information Act on the planet will get us to divulge the raw data so that other researchers can see exactly what we did." Look at the evidence being collected by AJ Strata at The Strata-Sphere.
means, in green Double-Speak, is that India's CO2 emissions will continue to rise, but not as fast. As fast as what, I can't report. Personally, I would like access to the crystal ball by which India knows what its carbon emissions would have been in 2020 without its proposed carbon "intensity" reductions. (That might be a tad difficult to compute: click on photo of Indian electrical wiring at right.) I'd also like to see China's crystal ball, which has informed China that it will cut its "carbon intensity" by more than 40% while China's carbon emissions go up. However, the EU and the US are talking about actually cutting CO2 emissions, the EU by 20% and the US by 17%. Rumor has it that the EU used to keep its crystal ball in East Anglia, but that it got thrown out with their global warming data to save space.
Anecdotal note. The photo at the left shows the 10 feet of snow that fell in a single 8-day snowstorm three winters ago in "CO2-warmed" New York State (a signatory to the state cap and trade agreement). The little black dot at the far left of the photo is a vehicle driving down the plowed road. Obviously, New York State is in desperate need of higher heating bills caused by Cap and Tax. 6. Republicans call for hearings. Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (WI) said, "We're being asked as a Congress to make major changes in American society, in energy use and how much the out-of-pocket cost is to everyone in this country, as a result of this debate. We'd better get it right. The scientists may be able to change their story (but it's) as difficult to repeal the consequences of that law as it is to get milk back in the cow." Candace Miller (MI) said, "I recognize that the e-mails are an inconvenient truth, perhaps, an embarrassment on the brink of Copenhagen... There is at least a debate on whether or not climate change is human-induced." Sen. James Inhofe (OK) warned Malcolm Hughes of the University of Arizona not to delete any of the ClimateGate e-mail messages.Surely there must have been serious men and women in the hard sciences who at some point worried that their colleagues in the global warming movement were putting at risk the credibility of everyone in science. The nature of that risk has been twofold: First, that the claims of the climate scientists might buckle beneath the weight of their breathtaking complexity. Second, that the crudeness of modern politics, once in motion, would trample the traditions and culture of science to achieve its own policy goals. With the scandal at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, both have happened at once.
I don't think most scientists appreciate what has hit them. . . . Global warming enlisted the collective reputation of science. Because "science" said so, all the world was about to undertake a vast reordering of human behavior at almost unimaginable financial cost. Not every day does the work of scientists lead to galactic events simply called Kyoto or Copenhagen. At least not since the Manhattan Project.
This has harsh implications for the credibility of science generally. Hard science, alongside medicine, was one of the few things left accorded automatic stature and respect by most untrained lay persons. But the average person reading accounts of the East Anglia emails will conclude that hard science has become just another faction, as politicized and "messy" as, say, gender studies. The New England Journal of Medicine has turned into a weird weekly amalgam of straight medical-research and propaganda for the Obama redesign of U.S. medicine.
The scientist who convinced the world to take notice of the looming danger of global warming says it would be better for the planet and for future generations if next week's Copenhagen climate change summit ended in collapse.
8. John Holdren is the Really Big "Denier," next to Michael "Hockey Stick" Mann. Obama's Science Policy Czar, himself implicated in ClimateGate, maintained that the U.S. must "act promptly to reduce global emissions to the atmosphere of carbon dioxide" or face "extreme" and "damaging" consequences. (Like maybe Al Gore and cronies lose a few billion and the U.S. maintains its sovereignty.) When cornered, Holdren called the email and code disclosures "not remotely sufficient to demonstrate a culture of corruption." He must be spending too much time with the Attorney General, who thinks that two uniformed, armed Black Panthers standing guard outside a polling place doesn't intimidate voters.In an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world's pre-eminent climate scientist, said any agreement likely to emerge from the negotiations would be so deeply flawed that it would be better to start again from scratch.
"I would rather it not happen if people accept that as being the right track because it's a disaster track," said Hansen, who heads the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.
7. Climate cabal misrepresents glacier-melting estimate by 325 years. An examination of the IPCC's widely published claim that the Himalayan glaciers would be destroyed by global warming by 2035, a mere 25 years from now, revealed that the estimate, arrived at by a Russian researcher, was actually 2335, that is, 325 years from now. Pretty clever, actually. If you can't make it up or cover it up, you can always pretend it was a typo. Is it possible that nobody expects these climate hotshots to actually read primary research? They weren't smart enough to figure out that the Himalayan glaciers might be a little large to melt in 25 years? Here in New York State I have seen snowbanks in a public park that didn't melt until late July. And those snowbanks were put there by snowplows, for pity's sake, and were not the size of mountains! For exposure to a bit of sanity, read this. (H/t: Gathering of Eagles:NY)
Update Australia (12:00 noon): Australia's Senate voted down Australia's version of cap and trade, which would have made Australia one of the first countries to adopt an emissions trading system. The opposition wants to wait at least until the U.S. adopts cap and trade and it becomes "part of the international trading system." The government plans to reintroduce the bill in February. (H/t: Minnesotans for Global Warming)
Update John Stewart (12:15 p.m): Stewart still believes in global warming and the disappearance of polar bears, but he's not too happy with scientists throwing out raw data from the 80s when he still has Penthouse magazines from the 70s. (H/t: Watts Up With That--ClimateGate)
Update IPCC (3:03 p.m.): Hans Labohm, a Dutch economist and member of the IPCC told an EU parliamentary hearing that, "We are told that temperatures and sea levels are rising and the polar caps are melting. That is the bad news. The good news is that none of it is true." Fred Singer of the University of Virginia and former Reagan climate advisor, told the group that "the world is pursuing policies on climate which are irrelevant."
__________
Related:
The alleged villains this time are the climate scientists at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NiWA) – New Zealand’s answer to Britain’s Climate Research Unit. And to judge by this news alert by the Climate Science Coalition of NZ, both institutions share a similarly laissez-faire attitude to scientific accuracy.
Compare and contrast these two graphs and you’ll see.
This is the graph from NiWA’s website, showing mean annual temperature over New Zealand from 1853. Note the dotted straight line showing the upward trend. Worrying, isn’t it? Almost enough to make you fall in love your flickery, yellowy new eco-light bulbs, recycle your kids and commit yourself to a binding agreement at Copenhagen.
Now have a look at this analysis of the raw data taken from exactly the same temperature stations.
Can you see the difference? I can – and I know as little about science as Al Gore. But lets allow the experts at Climate Science Coalition of NZ to explain:
Straight away you can see there’s no slope—either up or down. The temperatures are remarkably constant way back to the 1850s. Of course, the temperature still varies from year to year, but the trend stays level—statistically insignificant at 0.06°C per century since 1850.
Putting these two graphs side by side, you can see huge differences. What is going on?
Why does NIWA’s graph show strong warming, but graphing their own raw data looks completely different? Their graph shows warming, but the actual temperature readings show none whatsoever!
For explanations of how New Zealand got hotter without actually getting hotter, read on here.
Meanwhile, Gerald Warner, also of the Telegraph, intrepidly suggested that Phil Jones of the East Anglia Climate Research Unit and Michael Mann of Penn State move their climate propaganda show from the world stage to kids' TV, thus:
Hi, kids, now I’ve finished working with the computer, let’s see what Michael is holding. It’s a graph, showing how hot the world is getting because of motor cars and American Republicans and horrid people called Deniers – Oh, look, Michael is holding his graph upside down. No, he’s not being silly, he’s being responsible. Because, you see, although the words are upside down, the lines are pointing upwards, which is what matters. And when we send it to our colleagues in New Zealand, who are becoming almost as famous as we are, the words will be the right way up, because it’s an upside-down country…
It's funny, but not really. As everybody knows, the weight of an imminent, human-caused global warming catastrophe has already been moved to the frail shoulders of our innocent ones, and children around the world firmly believe that they are responsible for the killing off of the world's polar bear population and the drowning of Pacific Islanders and the end of the world, and they don't even know that it's all a fiction.
Today starts the One-Week Countdown to the Copenhagen Climate Conference, officially known as COP15, the United Nations Climate Conference Copenhagen Dec 7-Dec 18 2009.
The Children's Climate Forum in Copenhagen has already begun.
Shame on you, Phil and Mike, and your friends in New Zealand, too.
The scientific method was invented to prevent this sort of thing, as if you didn't know.
__________
Related Posts:
