A fair and impartial kangaroo court

March 23, 2010

In the wake of the scandals surrounding deep evidence of scientific fraud regarding claims that global warming was anthropogenic in nature, the UK’s Royal Society, which should be the gold standard for objectivity in science, has announced who will lead its inquiry into what’s been broadly called “Climategate.” James Delingpole gives us the comforting news:

And guess what? The man could scarcely be more parti pris if they’d given the job to Al Gore.

His name is Lord Oxburgh and, as Bishop Hill reports, he is:

  • President of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association
  • Chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables
  • A member of the Green Fiscal Commission

In other words, someone with a large financial interest in seeing the pro-alarmist cause redeemed. This is like asking Bill Gates to investigate Microsoft’s business practices.

If this produces anything but a gigantic cover for Dr. Jones and the CRU, I’ll eat my hat.

Well, if I had one, that is.


Climategate the music video

November 24, 2009

You just knew it was coming:

Mockery, the best weapon.

(via Watt’s Up With That?)


Iowahawk Geographic: The Secret Life of Climate Researchers

November 24, 2009

I used to love Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom, and I’m glad to see Iowahawk continuing the tradition of documenting wildlife in its natural state. In this episode, he looks at The Secret Life of Climate Researchers:

Within minutes of arriving on campus, the migratory researchers approach the entrance of the Climate Research Unit and perform the secret credential dance, fiercely displaying their prominent curriculum vitae. This signals to the security drone that they can be trusted with the sacred electronic lanyard badge that will grant them entrance to the hive’s inner sanctum.

During the upcoming research season, this hive alone will produce over 6 million metric tons of grant-sustaining climate data guano, but until recently little was known about the elusive genus of homo scientifica living inside. Where do they come from? What strange force draws them here year after year? In order to unravel the mystery, Iowahawk Geographic documentary filmmaker David Burge undertook a painstaking one-week project to finally capture the climate researchers in their native habitat.

In this exclusive footage, Burge warily approaches the hive’s security drone, disguising himself as smelly graduate student. Burge has theorized that as a member of the lowest stratum in the hive’s social system, the drone likely enjoys partying. He reaches into his backpack and offers the drone a pint of Guinness and a small bag of weed in exchange for the hive’s internal security tapes and email files. Success.

The never-before seen security tapes obtained by Burge provide a rare glimpse into the inner working of the climate research hive and its amazing guano production. In this sequence, we see one group of researchers entering the hive each carrying a datum they have retrieved from a distant climate measuring station. This is the cause of much excitement among their colleagues, who buzz around in a grant-writing frenzy.

Read and enjoy the whole thing.  Rolling on the floor

RELATED READING: Background on the scandal some are calling (predictably) ClimateGate here and here.


Even the MSM cannot ignore it

November 22, 2009

You know a scandal may have legs when even the mainstream media, which has generally hewed to alarmist line regarding global warming, reports on the evidence of scientific fraud:

Electronic files that were stolen from a prominent climate research center and made public last week provide a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes battle to shape the public perception of global warming.

While few U.S. politicians bother to question whether humans are changing the world’s climate — nearly three years ago the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded the evidence was unequivocal — public debate persists. And the newly disclosed private exchanges among climate scientists at Britain’s Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia reveal an intellectual circle that appears to feel very much under attack, and eager to punish its enemies.

In one e-mail, the center’s director, Phil Jones, writes Pennsylvania State University’s Michael E. Mann and questions whether the work of academics that question the link between human activities and global warming deserve to make it into the prestigious IPCC report, which represents the global consensus view on climate science.

“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report,” Jones writes. “Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!

(Emphasis added)

The highlighted segment of the Post article reiterates the point I made yesterday: results had become more important to significant players in the “climate alarmist community” than truth, leading to a willingness to corrupt the scientific process by excluding contrary articles from scientific literature. Again, this revelation and the others contained in the leaked emails should call all pro-alarmist research into question. As the article points out, most politicians in the US have been unquestioning sheep about anthropogenic climate change. Maybe this time they’ll develop a healthy skepticism.

(hat tip: Hot Air)

Further reading: Fausta has several good links, while Power Line presents a case-study of how alarmists do science.


Global warming fraud exposed?

November 21, 2009

These are dark times indeed for true believers in the religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming: not only is the empirical evidence going more and more against their Inconvenient Truths, but now there have come revelations of scandal within the walls of one of the Holy Places of the Faith. A hacker broke into the computer systems of the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit and stole over 60 megabytes of emails and other documents and released them to the public.

The significance of of these files is that they strongly indicate deliberate fraud and the illegal destruction of data by researchers seeking to bolster the case for AGW. They also speak of plans (at least) to corrupt the peer-review process by smearing skeptical scientists in order to blackball them, thus creating a review process slanted favorably toward research that supports the anthropogenic thesis of global warming and ignores any problems with that research.

James Delingpole of The Telegraph has a good overview of the ethical roaches uncovered by this (let’s be blunt) theft. Let me quote from one of the emails dealing with the corruption of the peer-review process:

“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”

Talk like this should mortify anyone concerned for the integrity of science. The peer-review process is crucial to maintaining this integrity. For any scientist to try to game and shape this system in their favor should lead to calling into question the whole body of their research, especially when global-warming alarmists, such as the scientists at the CRU, are demanding governments take extreme measures to fix a problem the scientists claim is incontrovertible fact.

If half of what was revealed is true, then any credibility possessed by the pro-AGW faction in the scientific community, national governments, and the UN is crippled or outright destroyed. The Senate should call an immediate halt to any further consideration its version  of the Waxman-Markey bill, passage of which would be disastrous for the US economy, until the truth about these revelations from CRU can be determined.

Besides Delingpole’s article, here are a few other links you’ll want to read to get an idea of the scope of this scandal:

The mind boggles at the possible scope of the fraud revealed today. For the sheer magnitude of its potential effect on the world’s economy, it dwarfs other scandals, such as fake fetal stem cell research. If true, it could be fatal to the Anthropogenic Global Warming movement.

Let’s hope it’s true, then.

LINKS: Others writing on this include Michelle Malkin, Gabriel Malor, Ed Morrissey, Stacy McCain, Climate Skeptic, SBVOR (which calls this the “Watergate of Global Warming”), Sister Toldjah, Big Government, and Blue Crab Boulevard. At Power Line, attorney John Hinderaker looks at the emails and thinks they reflect not so much an active conspiracy as a bunker mentality among true believers.

(hat tip: Watt’s Up With That?)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,127 other followers