Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
- Status
A must read article written by someone who is actually reading the emails.
A 2,000-page epic of science and skepticism
A 2,000-page epic of science and skepticism
Attacking a point of view is one thing. Attacking a Member with a personal
attack for their point of view is something completely different, & is unneeded,
unwanted, and against the rules of the Forum, which can be found at the bottom
of every page on the forum in a link titled "Terms of Service."
attack for their point of view is something completely different, & is unneeded,
unwanted, and against the rules of the Forum, which can be found at the bottom
of every page on the forum in a link titled "Terms of Service."
ClimateSpin: Using the Stolen Emails to Cripple Policy
Tags: James Hoggan
This article, by Stephen Hayward in the Weekly Standard, is a mash of good information and bad analysis - a strident overstatement of the case "proven" by the emails that were stolen from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia and released last month. It also seems to provide a case study for how the emails will be used to undermine action by people who are not well-informed about climate science and can be misled with a few sensible-sounding references.
It's appropriate to acknowledge - on this and every occasion - that the emails in question, 13 years worth, contain some embarrassing excerpts. They show some of the quoted scientists to be frustrated, sometimes petty and, in a few unfortunate cases, prepared to hide data from critics.
An independent analysis of the emails, however, show that they did not, in any way, undermine the scientific foundation for our understanding of how and why the climate is changing. Even Hayward acknowledges that "Climate change is a genuine phenomenon, and there is a nontrivial risk of major consequences in the future."
Having acknowledged that, however, he spent thousands of words arguing that the emails had inflicted a fatal blow on the science of climate change. He used the existence of the emails to argue points that are not, in fact, supported by the documents themselves.
He implied, for example, that the emails undermined the "notorious 'hockey stick'" - a climate reconstruction graph that several of the email correspondents had worked on together.
This is simply not true. There is no compelling new criticism of the hockey stick in the emails. There is evidence that the scientists had debated fervently among themselves, working to ensure that they could account as far as possible for the potential problems in the reconstruction. There is evidence that they worked to withhold data from an enthsiastic critic of the "stick."
But the emails go no further - and in dismissing this important scientific study, the Standard overlooks a huge body of independent evidence that shows that the hockey stick can be replicated by other scientists, using other information sources and other methodologies. That's one of the most respected mechanisms for confirming a scientific theory: ensuring that results can be replicated.
In concentrating on the hockey stick, the critics are trying to pick at what they perceive to be a weak spot, and in doing so, they draw focus away from a larger body of evidence. It is a public relations sleight of hand.
The most serious charges arising from the emails is that the scientists tried to hide data - in one cases that the director of the Climatic Research Unit, Phil Jones, urged others to delete information that might be made available through freedom of information laws in the UK. This is a very serious charge that the University of East Anglia is investigating. Jones has stepped down pending a resolution.
But, without justifying any alleged activities, it's worth looking at the behavior of the critic from whom the scientists sought to hide data. Canadian mining official Stephen McIntyre has been a tireless critic of the scientists in question, reinterpreting their work in a way that tends to undermine their conclusions. That, too, is fair game in science - within reason.
But even since the stolen emails were released, McIntyre has shown himself capable of handling information in a way that must lead you to question his own motives - even his integrity. If he is capable in the current circumstances of removimng critical pieces of text from an email to substantially change its meaning, you could understand why the scientists would have been reticent to give him their data - to invite him to approach their carefully wrought science with the same, agenda-driven determination.
That, ultimately, is the issue here: what is the agenda of the people who stole the CRU emails? And what is the agenda of those who are so loudly criticizing the scientists as a result?
"Hacking" into the East Anglia system was not the act of some under-challenged 18-year-old. This is one of the more sophisticated computer systems in the world. Breaking in would have demanded serious expertise. And rounding up 13 years of emails from within that computer would have been a considerable additional technical burden.
Then, someone sifted through those emails, choosing to release 1,000, but aggressively highlighting just a few. This again is not the act of a youthful "hacker" indulging in a bit of harmless mischief. Someone spent a great deal of time on this project - someone who had a serious motivation to make us all doubt climate science.
There is, at this point, no proof that the people in question work for the fossil fuel industry. There are suspicious trails leading through Russia and Saudi Arabia, but no proof. There also is no proof that people like Hayward are other than credulous dupes of a decades-long campaign to make us all question climate science.
But when you look at the way this information is being used - when you read accounts like this, which allege a body of evidence which does not, in fact, exist within the email documents - you have to be suspicious.
There are lots of good reasons to address climate change, because doing so has may other benefits. Conserving energy saves money. Searchng for affordable alternatives to fossil fuels extends the supply of a finite resource. Avoiding the burning of fossil fuels promises health benefits for people around the world, and especially for those who live in crowded, polluted cities or near coal-fired electrical plants.
There are also real dividends to be had from being first in the race to develop great, green alternative technologies. You don't have to be a climate activist to benefit from reacting to the threat of climate change.
But failing to react, especially on the strength of an agenda-driven and poorly informed argument - an argument that misinterprets or misrepresents information that was tainted from the moment it was stolen, would be a serious mistake.
It might not be the whole equation but perhaps it is a factor that need exploration. It would see that two factors could end up having the same result. If the sun itself can radiate minutely different amounts of 'heat' then our climate should follow those patterns. Earth has a wobble that only come full cycle after 10's of 1,000's of years. In that same time-frame we might have a pattern that varies the distances from the sun in our yearly orbit. Would having all the 'gravity' influences that the big planets can muster result in a few more miles away from the sun than if they were all on the other side of the sun. Is there any variation in our plane around the sun that would result the poles getting more/less light simple because the earth is higher/lower from the 'normal plane' to the sun.
Pretty simple to plot when the big ones were lined up and plot that year onto the current graphs available. 600,000 years should show if there is a pattern.
I'm not convinced you grasp it either DB. Sun is not solely responsible for the temperature of the earth, the sun provides the heat but the atmosphere maintains it, otherwise we'd be frying up during the day and turn to a block of ice at night. :lol::lol:
I will not argue any further with heathen atmosphere worshipers. I believe that the sun drives the atmosphere as well. If you believe in old stories it (the earth) has fried and froze lots of times. I maintain that the sun is responsible for every atom in this system and without it absolutely nothing would be the same. The sun is god as far as we are concerned and I will not budge from that position one millimeter. Not even if I was to be bribed with a large case of beer and dancing girls.:lol:
There's no one so dumb as he who refuses to learn...............:lol::lol::lol:
I might be inclined to sit through a few classes, just to be polite mind you. KIETHS and long legged womens of any colour alien or not.
There's definitely no warming going on:
Global warming, photography, pictures, photos, climate change, impact, science, weather, arctic, antarctica, climate zones, glacier, arctic warming, antarctica warming, documentation, effects, effects of climate change, paleoclimate, mountain glacier
It's easy to sit back and say it isn't happening when you aren't one of the millions of people in Florida, Bangladesh, etc. being affected. Freaking stupid, too.
Global warming, photography, pictures, photos, climate change, impact, science, weather, arctic, antarctica, climate zones, glacier, arctic warming, antarctica warming, documentation, effects, effects of climate change, paleoclimate, mountain glacier
It's easy to sit back and say it isn't happening when you aren't one of the millions of people in Florida, Bangladesh, etc. being affected. Freaking stupid, too.
What is even scarier is that it will happen and there is not a thing anyone can do about it. The sea will rise. First to go probably will be the Ganges and Bramaputra deltas low lying islands in pacific, then New York City, low coastal areas in NE N. America, Holland and other Northern European countries. For some reason they will see a rise in water before places like Florida do. The Gulf Stream is now 76 degrees F. Roughly about 4 deg. higher than normal this time of year. Temp. in Florida has been about 10 degrees higher also. All of this rise in water levels will cause starvation, mass migrations and probably wars.
Erosion
Neap tides
Storm surges
I live by the shore. High tides and low tides vary. But every once and awhile you can get a surge and the road will be awash. Everyone gets out their cameras and snaps away. Then alas the surge ends, the tide recedes and it is back to the usual.
The pictures of the beach here in Nantasket look no different than they did from the pictures from the 1920s except the Boardwalk has changed and the clothing. Same landmarks, same rocks...it's all still there.
You don't have to be factual to be elected as a politician.
How's this for coldest winter?
Go to the UAH AMSU daily data page, assembled by Dr. Roy Spencer and Dr. Danny Braswell. Draw the graph, then redraw with all of the years available. This is the warmest January, almost certainly will be the warmest January in the UAH record, in a solar minimum no less.
Funny that, ehh Walt? Godfrey is too stupid (on this subject) to know why he's stupid. I wouldn't make a habit of quoting from him Walt.
How's this for coldest winter?
Go to the UAH AMSU daily data page, assembled by Dr. Roy Spencer and Dr. Danny Braswell. Draw the graph, then redraw with all of the years available. This is the warmest January, almost certainly will be the warmest January in the UAH record, in a solar minimum no less.
Funny that, ehh Walt? Godfrey is too stupid (on this subject) to know why he's stupid. I wouldn't make a habit of quoting from him Walt.
That would surprise although I have no exact figures to disprove it, but I distinctly remember a winter back in the late 80s, where the temperatures in EDmonton rarely fell below freezing and of course in the interior of British Columbia 1958 was the mildest winter in most people's memory.
My 92 year old aunt in Manitoba recently told me that in the winter of 1939-40, it wasn't very cold and didn't snow at all in southern Manitoba until they had a "skiff" in mid-March of '40. I was born well after that, but don't recall a winter like that in the years I lived there...it was more like Siberia...colder than a ... well, very cold! My aunt has a very clear mind...her recollections are always bang-on. Now I wonder how that fact works its way into statistical analysis of this subject?
- Status