On Conspiracy and Fake Solutions
Posted by Jeff Condon on December 20, 2009
Faith, the final frontier.
These are the voyages of the human enterprise.
It’s hundred year mission, to predict new strife and constrain civilization;
To boldly hold, such that no man can expand before…..
Bah waaah da da da da daaaaaah
I (and actually we) have often been accused of promoting conspiracy theories in climate science. It’s meant to be an automatic disqualifier of tAV opinions, which from the large number of us who gather here, are shared in some part by much of the public.
First, to clear the air, conspiracies exist everywhere, so at least I’m guilty as charged. People collude though, for a common goal as part of our normal social structure. We are stronger in groups than individually – a basic fact which has led us to organize most everything we human demons do. When our views align, we work together toward our goal, often with unspoken intent to demonstrate what we believe is right. If you don’t agree with this basic point, consider that political parties are a conspiracy by definition, as are businesses, militaries, police forces, religions etc. Fortunately, there’s nothing wrong with most conspiracies.
The nice thing about businesses conspiracies is that you always know the motive- Money! You already know what the other guy wants to do before you begin negotiation. You also know that if it doesn’t work out for either one of you, the relationship won’t last. What you don’t know is, whether the other party gives a crap whether you make a dime or survive as a company at all. That’s where we get into gray areas.
In the case of science, the motive is supposed to be the continued advancement of knowledge. In practice, scientists ARE motivated by that common goal, but they also have pressure from money, the future ease of publication, acceptance by peers, and in the case of climate science – easy fame.
Politicians have different motives. They experience all kinds of monetary pressures, group pressures and rewards for decision making. The pressures and rewards are so great that when listening to a politician, we non-braindead know that the words we hear are an expression of their individual pressures more than a belief in their truth.
So then we come to climate science. In normal science, the literally trillions of dollars are NOT on the line. In normal science, theories are provable, money is minimal, and fame comes when you do something truly unique. In climate science, proof of correctness is probably 20 years out as a minimum. There is massive and immediate money on the line, and perks for concluding unprecedented global warming include, huge fame, easier publication, financial rewards, and control over government policy. Therefore, it should be no surprise that the politics of the situation have thoroughly corrupted the science of climate.
The evidence for this corruption is everywhere, but it does not mean that all of the science is bad. Climate scientists like to claim the emails represent a small problem in a local group of people. The global warming isn’t proven wrong they say. They contend that we still have disasters looming and we need to address them. It’s true that climate science wasn’t proven wrong, but it was proven corrupt. The very fact that climatologists sit in groups and insist/believe they have full agreement of their peers demonstrates, not the quality of understanding the science, but rather the quality of the penetrations of politics into an uncertain and VERY YOUNG science.
Do the scientists who are at the top of their fields realize the above, not all. But guys like Keven Trenberth, Michael Mann and Phil Jones do. They understood the need to maintain a perfect consensus to achieve the IPCC goals. Do they believe in what they do? I dunno. I don’t think Mann does, but how can you tell what another thinks?
What further complicates the situation, is that scientists like all people, come to opposing conclusions. In the case of politics, choosing the right scientists affects the outcome far more than actually committing fraud. Fraud is not the keystone of a good conspiracy, subtleties of choice are.
Here’s an email which like many others, makes the point:
Just finished reading your paper with Mike M in Rev of Geophysics which I
very much enjoyed – will let you know when it hits the Mission Beach
Hope all is well
Janice M. Lough
Dr. Jones reply’s with this email.
Most of the data series in most of the plots have just appeared on the CRU web site.
Go to data then to paleoclimate. Did this to stop getting hassled by the skeptics for the
data series. Mike Mann refuses to talk to these people and I can understand why. They are
just trying to find if we’ve done anything wrong. I sent one of them loads of series
and he barely said a thankyou. It seems they are now going for Tom Crowley, Lonnie
Thompson and Gordon Jacoby as most of their series are not on web sites.
Below is a link to an awful piece by Legates. He told me he is a writing a paper, but
wrote the press release first ! The pdf is worth getting for a couple of sentences, when
said that MJ restricted their use of paleo series to those that had correlations with
instrumental data ! It is a classic. ‘Our uncertainty estimates are based solely on how
the proxy records match the observed data’ !
The Legates piece must have been sent to loads of environment correspondents across
the world and a number of op-ed pieces appeared. Some were awful. Most have had
responses from Ray Bradley, Caspar Amman and others.
Hope all is well with you and all the best to all. Glad you enjoyed the paper.
PS Do you want to get involved in IPCC this time? I’m the CLA of the atmospheric obs.
chapter with Kevin Trenberth and we’ll be looking for Contributing Authors to help the
Lead Authors we have. Paleo is in a different section this time led by Peck and Eystein
Janssen. Keith is a lead author as well.
Is there anything wrong with that? Not really, but you see the scientist sorting mechanism in action. It does exist, and pretending it doesn’t is for fools. Another point which is not spoken is that the scientists at the top are of a far left political persuasion as well. You almost have to be in order to feel good about working for the IPCC.
Remember these scientists and politicians just got on the world stage and literally screamed at the world that, if we don’t let them tax us hundreds of billions of dollars and send it to small generally communist, ‘undeveloped’ countries , the world will die. As an ignorant conservative, you couldn’t get me to do that except by gunpoint. Of all things we know, we know the solution presented, was a FAKE!
And as this allegedly apolitical group of “scientists” took the world stage they smiled while standing hand in hand with the politicians. They expressed joy as they politicians peddled what can only be described as socialist global wealth redistribution, combined with the voluntary destruction of our capitalist world economies. All accomplished through FACTUALLY unreachable emission standards.
So the politicians and scientists, in a single unified voice, demand for us to believe. They don’t ASK for faith in the consensus, it’s demanded!! And they won’t even share the DATA!! They don’t want to share the data so badly, Phil Jones said he would destroy it rather than share it. In fact, they actually did delete all Email conversations related to the IPCC, simply to prevent the possibility of disclosure of what was written during the creation of the IPCC consensus.
In the face of multi-trillion dollar political insanity, we would do well to remember these ‘scientists’ are nothing but glorified weathermen. The same as the much derided group of science minded individuals who tell us if it will rain next week. These ‘climatoknowledgists’ claim to know the average temperature a hundred years in the future within two degrees C, yet can’t nail down the temp of St. Louis within 5C in two weeks.
If there’s anything I’ve learned in the past year, I’ve learned that the science of climate isn’t settled. The politics however, are a different story.
Reason seems to be winning the day now, but a multi-billion dollar political adventure won’t be going away anytime soon.