Posted by Jeff Id on November 26, 2009
Ok, after this I’m done blogging today. I’ve got two papers to review and a pile of other work. In the meantime Reuters finally reported the story. Of course it was within the context of a paper released by realclimate scientists which exaggerates the climate issues to policy makers as we expected from the emails.
“We’re facing an effort by special interests who are trying to confuse the public,” said Richard Somerville, Distinguished Professor Emeritus at Scripps Institution of Oceanography and a lead author of the UN IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.
There is one thing I know for absolute certainty, NO special interests are involved. Would you risk your 501C company on hackers for this? I would call it ignorant if I didn’t think it were simply a lie.
The next quote is:
Dissenters see action to slow global warming as “a threat,” he said.
I have to say, I’m not a dissenter but I see the proposed action to stop global warming as a threat greater than Russia ever was. What these leftists are proposing is nothing less than the total destruction of free society couched in nice words. We therefore must agree.
The scientists—Somerville, Michael Mann of Penn State and Eric Steig of University of Washington—were supposed to be discussing their new report, the Copenhagen Diagnosis, a dismal update of the UN IPCC’s 2007 climate data by 26 scientists from eight nations.
Instead they spent much of the time diffusing the hacker controversy, known in the media as “Climate Gate.”
This is a fun paragraph for me. I’m glad they spent some time discussing their advocacy rather than their agenda. I’ve had a few emails with Doc. Steig and am not sure he’s of the advocate group but it’s hard to imagine how he could be in the same room with Mann if he weren’t. Mann wouldn’t stand for it.
Here’s a beauty:
CRU Vice-Chancellor of Research Trevor Davies responded in an official statement:
“There is nothing in the stolen material which indicates that peer-reviewed publications by CRU, and others, on the nature of global warming and related climate change are not of the highest-quality of scientific investigation and interpretation.”
People wouldn’t read the Air Vent if it weren’t about honesty. So I’ll be honest to Vice Chancellor of Research Trevor Davies — LIAR!!
Michael Mann the continual creator of absolutely horrifically bad science had this to say.
Michael Mann, co-author of the Copenhagen Diagnosis and lead author of the UN IPCC Third Assessment Report, blamed skeptics for taking the personal emails out of context.
“What they’ve done is search through stolen personal emails—confidential between colleagues who often speak in a language they understand and is often foreign to the outside world. Suddenly, all these are subject to cherry picking,” he said.
First, it more likely was a whistleblower action. Perhaps a group of students pissed off with the lies, collusion and manipulation. Perhaps it was a professor who got sick of listening to his colleagues lie about the issues. Maybe a file was left out where it was easily accessible. There is no proof that this was illegal, not that it matters. It’s just not reasonable for the scientists to make that claim.
They’ve turned “something innocent into something nefarious,” Mann added.
The vital point being left out, he said, is that “regardless of how cherry-picked,” there is “absolutely nothing in any of the emails that calls into the question the deep level of consensus of climate change.”
This is a “smear campaign to distract the public,” said Mann. “Those opposed to climate action, simply don’t have the science on their side,” he added.
The great thing about this is that I know Mikie reads this blog on occasion whether he wants to or not. He knows I’m on to his bullcrap, and he ought to know I ain’t letting up soon. His lies about the emails will do nothing, but it’s amazing that the press is so willing to report them without question. We’ve all shown dozens of problems in the emails– and just a hint, it is not anywhere near over. By the way, despite what Mannie says, science is on our side, because we are on the side of science. If massive IPCC levels of warming is the reality, I don’t know of any serious blogger who wouldn’t accept it at the drop of a pin. It’s a done deal, the science is the science. Show us the code and data and we agree.
What is not science, is hiding of data, manipulation of peer review, elimination of papers from the IPCC by any means necessary and the elimination of data which doesn’t support your conclusion.
This post is getting to be too much, so I’ll leave it here. Read the article linked and let Mikie know what you think. While he won’t admit it, he does read here on occasion. Mike never reads here as he stated below, and he never will.