| Climate-Change Researchers
Admit Their Data Is 'Garbage'
The climate-gate revelations have exposed an unprecedented coordinated
attempt by academics to distort research for political ends. Anyone
interested in accurate science should be appalled at the manipulation
of data "to hide the decline [in temperature]" and deletion
of e-mail exchanges and data so as not to reveal information that
would support global-warming skeptics. These hacks are not just
guilty of bad science. In the United Kingdom, deleting e-mail
messages to prevent their disclosure from a Freedom of Information
Act request is a crime.
The story has gotten worse since the global-cooling cover-up
was exposed through a treasure trove of leaked e-mails a week
ago. The Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East
Anglia has been incredibly influential in the global-warming debate.
The CRU claims the world's largest temperature data set, and its
research and mathematical models form the basis of the United
Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) 2007
report.
Professor Phil Jones, head of the CRU and contributing author
to the United Nation's IPCC report chapter titled "Detection
of Climate Change and Attribution of Causes," says he "accidentally"
deleted some raw temperature data used to construct the aggregate
temperature data CRU distributed. If you believe that, you're
probably watching too many Al Gore videos.
Mr. Jones is the same professor who warned that global-warming
skeptics "have been after the CRU station data for years.
If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in
the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone."
Other revelations hit at the very core of the global-warming
debate. The leaked e-mails indicate that the people at the CRU
can't even figure out how their aggregate data was put together.
CRU activists claimed that they took individual temperature readings
at individual stations and averaged the information out to produce
temperature readings over larger areas. One of the leaked documents
states that their aggregation procedure "renders the station
counts totally meaningless." The benefit: "So, we can
have a proper result, but only by including a load of garbage!"
Academics around the world who have spent years working on papers
using this data must be in full panic mode. By the admission of
the global-warming theocracy's own self-appointed experts, the
data they have been using is simply "garbage."
For global-warming advocates, there is an additional problem:
The aggregated data appear to have been constructed to show an
increase in temperatures. CBS' Declan McCullagh finds that the
computer code contains programmer-written notes addressed to themselves
or future people who will be working with the program. The notes
include these revealing instructions: "Apply a VERY ARTIFICIAL
correction for decline!!" and "Low pass filtering at
century and longer time scales never gets rid of the trend - so
eventually I start to scale down the 120-yr low pass time series
to mimic the effect of removing/adding longer time scales!"
The programmers apparently had to try at least a couple of adjustments
before they could get their aggregated data to show an increase
in temperatures.
Other global-warming advocates privately acknowledge what they
won't concede publicly, that temperature changes haven't been
consistent with their models. Kevin E. Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research and a prominent man-made-global-warming advocate, wrote
in one of the discovered e-mails: "The fact is we can't account
for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that
we can't."
Still other e-mails document how global-warming advocates tried
to silence academic journals and professors who questioned whether
there is significant man-made global warming.
We read and reread these CRU documents in stunned amazement.
But rather than investigating all the evidence of so much academic
fraud and intellectual wrongdoing, the University of East Anglia
is denying there is a problem. Professor Trevor Davies, the school's
pro vice chancellor for research, issued a defensive statement
on Tuesday claiming: "The publication of a selection of the
emails 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."
Unlike these global-warming propagandists, we expect research
to be done in the open. Scientists who refuse to share their data,
who plot to destroy information and fail to tell other scientists
how their results were calculated should be severely punished.
|
More
More
