In politics, we’re used to being lied to. But in science?
Revelations coming out of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit spark such questions, and more.
Hackers have released onto the Internet confidential emails of the CRU climatologists largely responsible for the “global warming” conclusions in the famous report by the International Panel on Climate Change, known as the IPCC.
The emails include ugly stuff, like researchers’ fantasies about beating up catastrophe skeptics. They also include the tricks catastrophists used to cook up their numbers.
In particular, scientists reported temperatures in the Medieval Warming Period as cooler than they were, and more recent cooling trends as warmer. Anthropogenic global warming catastrophists have engaged in a massive public fraud.
Now, you might not bat an eye were you to learn that economists associated with, say, our recent bailouts, had been fudging numbers. Trillions of dollars to spend!
But when climate scientists get caught lying — as well as conspiring to keep their basic data secret, and hijacking the peer review process — it’s hard not to feel a bit abused. Natural scientists are supposed to be above this.
Public, open criticism is the hallmark of science. Climate researchers who stonewalled to keep their actual data hidden from critics were scuttling science.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
7 replies on “Global Warming Conspiracy?”
It appears INTELLECTUAL HONESTY is no longer viewed as a guiding principal among scientists. While there is serious, often acrimonious, competition among scientific “camps”, how is an ordinary citizen to know who to believe.
Soon, I expect to see a bumper sticker on a politician’s car that says “My scientist can beat up your scientist”!
Deniers have been shouting ‘Fraud’ for years but nobody would listen. Nobody should be surprised, the US government has a long history of rewarding researchers that support the conclusions of public officials rather than those that don’t. Everyone involved should be prosecuted including government officials or this type of fraud will continue. Scientists involved should be fined and blacklisted so that any project they are working cannot receive government funding.
If the government continues to fund research, it must develop an unbiased way to make funding decisions.
Finally we should note that politics corrupts everything it touches, including the press, health care and the free market.
What’s this guy been smoking? Why is the polar icecap melting? Why are islands disappearing?
This is EXACTLY the kind of thing that happens when questionable “research” can be bent to a political end. In this case, non-sense (and non-science) hysteria reinforces the growth of government, so the theft of public monies is entirely justified in the minds of the thieves.
Polar icecap melting? Islands disappearing? John needs a source other than algore and his “science” minions, who have $billions to gain from this fantasy.
(By the way: lanczos: Ph.D., Physical/theoretical Chemistry, 1999, top-10 program.)
I knew that the IPCC and climatologists were lying five years ago. The data they used in their 2004 report was obviously doctored, the “science” behind CO2 as a global warming agent was based on wishes rather than experimental data, and the climate model they created had a known flaw: it markedly overestimated temparatures in the polar regions thereby guaranteeing that polar ice melting and sea level rising were in their predictions. The recently released e‑mails just document what many of us global warming skeptics already knew.
Dear John Ken:
If islands were disappearing due to a rising sea level, don’t you think we might notice that Boston, New York City, Miama, New Orleans, Houston, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Seattle were flooding? Small islands disappear because their underpinnings collapse or erode, not because sea level has risen twenty meters. Use your brain.
[…] of the upward temperature spike in recent times. Mann was also one of the biggest offenders in the Climategate scandal, where emails showed more politicking than objectivity going into how climate models were concocted […]