James Taylor, Contributor
I write about energy and environment issues.
OP/ED
|
11/23/2011 @ 11:38AM
Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate
A new batch of 5,000 emails among scientists central to the assertion that humans are causing a global warming crisis were anonymously released to the public yesterday, igniting a new firestorm of controversy nearly two years to the day after similar emails ignited the Climategate scandal.
Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.
Image via Wikipedia
Regarding scientific transparency, a defining characteristic of science is the open sharing of scientific data, theories and procedures so that independent parties, and especially skeptics of a particular theory or hypothesis, can replicate and validate asserted experiments or observations. Emails between Climategate scientists, however, show a concerted effort to hide rather than disseminate underlying evidence and procedures.
“I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI [Freedom of Information] Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process,”writes Phil Jones, a scientist working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in a newly released email.
“Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” Jones writes in another newly released email. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.”
The original Climategate emails contained similar evidence of destroying information and data that the public would naturally assume would be available according to freedom of information principles. “Mike, can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith [Briffa] re AR4 [UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 4th Assessment]?” Jones wrote to Penn State University scientist Michael Mann in an email released in Climategate 1.0. “Keith will do likewise. … We will be getting Caspar [Ammann] to do likewise. I see that CA [the Climate Audit Web site] claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!”
The new emails also reveal the scientists’ attempts to politicize the debate and advance predetermined outcomes.
“The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out” of IPCC reports, writes Jonathan Overpeck, coordinating lead author for the IPCC’s most recent climate assessment.
“I gave up on [Georgia Institute of Technology climate professor] Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but its not helping the cause,” wrote Mann in another newly released email.
...
Read more here/Leia mais aqui: Forbes
+++++
NOTA CAUSTICANTE DESTE BLOGGER:
O que dizer de tudo isso? Eu só posso dizer uma coisa - alguns cientistas do IPCC são desonestos, bandidos e políticos mafiosos!!!
Queria vera a cara do Marcelo Leite, da Folha de São Paulo, que defende ardorosamente o aquecimento global ser antropogenicamente provocado, e, até onde li dele, não entende o comportamento desses cientistas como desonestidade acadêmica...
Read more here/Leia mais aqui: Forbes
+++++
NOTA CAUSTICANTE DESTE BLOGGER:
O que dizer de tudo isso? Eu só posso dizer uma coisa - alguns cientistas do IPCC são desonestos, bandidos e políticos mafiosos!!!
Queria vera a cara do Marcelo Leite, da Folha de São Paulo, que defende ardorosamente o aquecimento global ser antropogenicamente provocado, e, até onde li dele, não entende o comportamento desses cientistas como desonestidade acadêmica...
