The Problem With Obama

Posts Tagged ‘scientific fraud’

There are sev­eral updates from folks review­ing the CRU soft­ware code that paint a deves­tat­ing pic­ture of the sci­ence of global warm­ing (More below). As I read these, I keep com­ing back to the 1960 date. Newer data did not bear out global warm­ing which global warm­ing advo­cates had staked their careers. There­fore they played with it and made it up to get the results they wanted. What they seem to miss in this sci­en­tific fraud is that the newer data might be more relaible and that instead of it being wrong, maybe their old data and the entire approach or method­ol­ogy was the problem. 

The code doc­u­men­ta­tion and write read me files releaseed last week are so incred­i­bly unpro­fes­sional to be almost unbe­lie­ve­able. They raise big red flags about what was tran­spir­ing. Didn’t any­one ever look at the code?!

Read the rest of this entry »

Incon­ve­nient for Whom? (National Review’s planet gore)
“It’s been a tough cou­ple of days for Al Gore. Anthro­pogenic global warm­ing — his cash cow since leav­ing the White House — has been dis­cred­ited thanks to leaked e-​mails which show lead­ing climate-​change sci­en­tists mer­rily manip­u­lat­ing data.” Where is Al Gore any­way? [This is actu­ally a blog of all about Al Gore and his global warm­ing cash cow.]

A lot of folks are look­ing at the CRU Code that lays the foun­da­tion for the fraud of global warm­ing. Bishop Hill has a grow­ing list of find­ings (below). Bore Patch offers another take (above).

Read the rest of this entry »

Media Ignore Cli­mate Sci­ence Scan­dal (Accu­racy in Media)
This col­umn reviews media cov­er­age of the unfold­ing global warm­ing scan­dal. They con­clude that while “this infor­ma­tion could com­pletely destroy any cred­i­bil­ity global warm­ing alarmists once claimed” it is vir­tu­ally ignored by media.

Global Warm­ing With the Lid Off (Wall Street Jour­nal)
Sub­ti­tle is “The emails that reveal an effort to hide the truth about cli­mate sci­ence..” WSJ writes: “How­ever, we do now have hun­dreds of emails that give every appear­ance of tes­ti­fy­ing to con­certed and coör­di­nated efforts by lead­ing cli­ma­tol­o­gists to fit the data to their con­clu­sions while attempt­ing to silence and dis­credit their crit­ics. In the depart­ment of incon­ve­nient truths, this one surely deserves a closer look by the media, the U.S. Con­gress and other inves­tiga­tive bodies.”

Edito­r­ial: Hid­ing Evi­dence of Global Cool­ing (Wash­ing­ton Times)
Con­clu­sion: “These rev­e­la­tions of fudged sci­ence should have a cool­ing effect on global-​warming hys­te­ria and the pan­icked poli­cies that are being pushed for­ward to address the unproven theory.”

Anthony Watts (WattsUp­With­That) and Andrew Bolt (Her­ald Sun) are out with new posts and arti­cles not­ing a so-​called “apol­ogy” from George Mon­biot, “one of the fiercest media pro­pa­gan­dists of the warm­ing faith.” (Watts). What apology?!

Read the rest of this entry »

Scien­tist: Leak of Cli­mate E-​Mails Appalling (AP)
Inter­view with Kevin Tren­berth, who is included in around 125 of the Cli­mate Report emails released last year. Tren­berth is more con­ser­v­a­tive than his cohorts and recently exchanged heated email with them ques­tion­ing global warm­ing meth­ods and data.

Anthony Watts at WattsUp­With­That has a new post out show­ing com­ments in the code that was released by the alleged hacker last week. First, he says fur­ther review of the email shows that among the datasets Phil Jones used, some con­cluded that ‘global warm­ing’ ended back in 1960 and that only with edited dated to “hide the decline” did Jones pro­duce the cur­rent global warm­ing trend. He shares that Jones now denies manip­u­lat­ing the data even if the email clearly state otherwise.

Any­way, Watts says that a review of the soft­ware code released by the alleged hacker includes com­ments clearly doc­u­ment­ing data manipulation.

Read the rest of this entry »

George Mar­shall writes in the block Cli­mate Change Denial a post bemoan­ing “Swift­boat­ing the Cli­mate Sci­en­tists.”

The theft of 1,000 pri­vate e-​mails from the Cli­mate Research Unit at the Uni­ver­sity of East Anglia (UEA) shows that deniers have learned lessons from dirty pol­i­tics and are run­ning a new cam­paign to under­mine pub­lic trust in cli­mate sci­en­tists. The fee­ble response from the UEA and the cli­mate sci­ence com­mu­nity shows that sci­en­tists are still totally under­es­ti­mat­ing the fragility of that trust and the cru­cial role it plays in build­ing pub­lic belief.

Read the rest of this entry »