• Hello there guest and welcome to our forum!
    To gain full access you must Register. Registration is free and it takes only a few moments to complete.
    Already a member? Login here then!

Global Warming Scandal Makes Scientific Progress More Difficult, Experts Say

HisPony

Wondering where I am!?!?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578368,00.html


The trustworthiness of the scientific community's global warming data pool is being called into question as the scandal over climate data continues to unfold.


The latest revelation came on Sunday with the publication of a report by The Sunday Times of London that scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit in the United Kingdom confessed to throwing out most of the raw temperature data on which the theory of global warming is founded.


The loss of the data prevents other scientists from checking it to determine whether, in fact, there has been a long-term rise in global temperatures during the past century and a half.


"They are making scientific progress more difficult now," says Willie Soon, a physicist, astronomer and climate researcher at the solar and stellar physics division of the Harvard University-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. "This is a shameful, dark day for science," he said in an interview with FoxNews.com.



Soon also suggested that there has been systemic suppression of dissenting opinion among scientists in the climate change community, ranging from social snubs to e-mail stalking and even threats of harm.



Many in the environmental policy community are outraged about the disclosure that the data has been lost. "The scientific process has become so appallingly corrupted," James M. Taylor, senior fellow in environment policy at The Heartland Institute, told FoxNews.com.


Heartland is a libertarian think tank in Chicago that recently produced a conference featuring scientists and policymakers, like Jose Maria Aznar, the former prime minister of Spain, and Vaclev Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic, who dispute the theory of global warming.


The report in the Times quoted Roger Pielke, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, who requested the original records from CRU.


"The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us.' So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science," Pielke told the Times. He did not return repeated phone calls seeking additional comment. The university’s publicist also was unable to answer additional questions about the story.


"This closed-door conspiracy is harming everyone," says Soon. "I thought I had seen it all. Now I have."


A back story is also starting to emerge, depicting a rough world of suppression of dissenting opinion. Soon, who has been involved in climate change research for 15 years and has published in the field, said there was a general consensus that global warming was possible in the late 1990s. But at the time, the research community wanted to look back not just 150 years but 1,000 years, to see what the long-term trends had been.


Soon says some scientists became staunch advocates for their position that global warming was occurring, and that they they dug in and started refusing to publish papers with contradictory viewpoints.


"I read a paper on increasing heat in the ocean and asked the scientist in France for the backup data," Soon says. "She told me she did not distribute data to people who didn't agree with her conclusions."


Soon says he has been victimized by other "ugly" personal attacks from leading scientists in the global warming world when he has simply raised questions, as any scientific colleague would, about the veracity of the data.


"Seeing all of this controversy in the news is no different than dealing with them in person," he said. "There's a lot of personal ugliness."


Taylor, who is also outspoken in his questioning of climate change theory, says he too has encountered ugliness from global warming enthusiasts, including "e-mail stalking" and "people making thinly veiled threats to physically harm me and my family." He said his opponents at public forums have refused to shake his hand or even acknowledge his presence.


Much scientific research corroborates what the CRU has been reporting, despite the missing data. "It's true that GISS (NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies) and NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) ground-based temperature reports show temperature increases similar to CRU," Taylor said.


But then the CRU scandal erupted.


Hackers uncovered e-mails between leading global warming advocates, which expressed concerns that the temperature figures from the last decade simply did not demonstrate that global warming was continuing, as theorized.


Now, some critics are questioning even the seemingly reliable data from the U.S. government.


"The GISS and NOAA reports suffer from the same reliability concerns as the CRU ground-based temperature reports," Taylor says. "And, more importantly, are similarly staffed by outspoken global warming activists who are likely engaging in the same data rigging and data hiding as CRU."


But global warming backers aren’t so sure.


"I don’t think this is a big deal," Nick Berning, director of public advocacy and media relations for Friends of the Earth, an environmental group, based in Washington D.C., said. "These are people who want to get their panties in a bunch, so they’ve gotten their panties in a bunch."
 

Mach1Marauder

Well-Known Member
But global warming backers aren’t so sure.


"I don’t think this is a big deal," Nick Berning, director of public advocacy and media relations for Friends of the Earth, an environmental group, based in Washington D.C., said. "These are people who want to get their panties in a bunch, so they’ve gotten their panties in a bunch."

How typical!:nonono::nonono:
 

HisPony

Wondering where I am!?!?
Think 'Climate-Gate' Is Nonevent? Think Again

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/12/01/think-climate-gate-nonevent-think/

President Obama's climate czar, Carol M. Browner, and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs might think that Climate-gate is a nonevent, but on Monday Pennsylvania State University announced that it was launching an investigation into the academic conduct of Michael Mann, the school's Director of the Earth System Science Center. And Tuesday, Phil Jones, the director of the Climatic Research Unit at Britain's University of East Anglia, announced that he would stand aside as director while his university conducted an investigation.

Dozens of researchers at other institutions could soon face similar investigations. While Dr. Jones has been the center of much of the discussion because the e-mails were obtained from the server at his university, Mann is named in about 270 of the over 1,000 e-mails, many of which detail disturbing and improper academic behavior.

Last week, Mann told USA Today that the controversy over the leaked e-mails was simply a "smear campaign to distract the public from the reality of the problem and the need to confront it head-on in Copenhagen" next week at the climate summit.

Take one of Mann's e-mail exchanges with Jones. In an e-mail entitled "IPCC & FOI" (referring to the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Freedom of Information Act) Jones, head of the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, wrote Dr. Mann: "Mike: Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith [Briffa] re [the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report]? Keith will do likewise. . . . Can you also e-mail Gene and get him to do the same? I don't have his new e-mail address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise."

Mann acknowledges that he received the e-mail, but he claims that neither he nor anyone else actually deleted any e-mails to hide information from a Freedom of Information Act request on how the U.N.'s IPCC report was written. Yet, his response is quite damning as it seems that he goes along with Dr. Jones. Far from criticizing the request, Dr. Mann wrote back: "I'll contact Gene about this ASAP. His new e-mail is: generwahl@yahoo.com. talk to you later, Mike."

After the first week of revelations of academic fraud and intellectual wrongdoing, the University of East Anglia denied there was a problem. Professor Trevor Davies, the school's pro vice chancellor for research, issued a statement on Tuesday claiming: "The publication of a selection of the e-mails and data stolen from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) has led to some questioning of the climate science research published by CRU and others. 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."

The move to investigate the destruction of information requested under the Freedom of Information Act is a big change. In Britain, the destruction of such documents is a criminal offense and the e-mails indicate that Jones had been warned at least once against destroying such information.

On Monday, Mann tried to justify the damaging e-mails by telling the Penn State college newspaper: "Someone being constantly under attack could be what causes them to make a poor decision." On the one hand, he denies that anything improper happened, but he then seems to accept that improper actions did occur. Regarding pressure, possibly, Mann should ask what the academics, who Mann and others involved in Climate-gate tried to prevent them from publishing in academic journals, think about these events. The e-mails discussed above involve the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's controversial assessment report and raise additional questions about what subterfuge might have been involved in its production.

The big question is whether universities have too much at stake, both ideologically and financially, to impartially investigate what has happened with Climate-gate. Given the amount of taxpayer money at stake, Congress should follow Sen. Inofe's suggestion and investigate these charges issues of destroyed documents and data as well as the general unwillingness to share the raw data paid for by taxpayers.
 

Mach1Marauder

Well-Known Member
Another OBAMMY Tard!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAo4rqqmkFA&feature=player_embedded#"]YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.[/ame]
 

Fighting Sailor

San Angelo TX
The Vast majority of scientists agree that "global warming" is BS.. A natural cycle which has hardly been disrupted at all.. Whatever happened to the so called Hole in the Ozone? dont here much about that anymore do ya? Reason? It was BS... No doubt we should be more careful with our environment than in the past, but Global warming proponents have (as usual) gone off the deep end.. How bout the rising sea levels? Global warming activists would have you believe that melting polar Ice caps will flood all low lying areas (like Florida)... BS! try an experiment: fill a glass with water and put ice in it. Mark the water level with the ice. Allow the ice to melt and mark the water level again... Surprise! the level will be the same! Ice dispaces its weight in water, and when it melts it still displaces its weight as water, no diference whatsoever!
So are we all doomed by our cars, factories, etc..? I think not.
 

Mach1Marauder

Well-Known Member
The Vast majority of scientists agree that "global warming" is BS.. A natural cycle which has hardly been disrupted at all.. Whatever happened to the so called Hole in the Ozone? dont here much about that anymore do ya? Reason? It was BS... No doubt we should be more careful with our environment than in the past, but Global warming proponents have (as usual) gone off the deep end.. How bout the rising sea levels? Global warming activists would have you believe that melting polar Ice caps will flood all low lying areas (like Florida)... BS! try an experiment: fill a glass with water and put ice in it. Mark the water level with the ice. Allow the ice to melt and mark the water level again... Surprise! the level will be the same! Ice dispaces its weight in water, and when it melts it still displaces its weight as water, no diference whatsoever!
So are we all doomed by our cars, factories, etc..? I think not.

Well.......to be perfectly factual, you scenario only applies to the northern polar ice and the ice shelf in Antarctica. If the ice in Antarctica and Greenland were to melt, then is would raise the ocean levels.
 
Top