Climategate and the Big Green Lie

[IanC]

Climategate and the Big Green Lie - Clive Crook - Politics - The Atlantic

By way of preamble, let me remind you where I stand on climate change. I think climate science points to a risk that the world needs to take seriously. I think energy policy should be intelligently directed towards mitigating this risk. I am for a carbon tax. I also believe that the Climategate emails revealed, to an extent that surprised even me (and I am difficult to surprise), an ethos of suffocating groupthink and intellectual corruption. The scandal attracted enormous attention in the US, and support for a new energy policy has fallen. In sum, the scientists concerned brought their own discipline into disrepute, and set back the prospects for a better energy policy.

I had hoped, not very confidently, that the various Climategate inquiries would be severe. This would have been a first step towards restoring confidence in the scientific consensus. But no, the reports make things worse. At best they are mealy-mouthed apologies; at worst they are patently incompetent and even wilfully wrong. The climate-science establishment, of which these inquiries have chosen to make themselves a part, seems entirely incapable of understanding, let alone repairing, the harm it has done to its own cause.

The disaster called 'Climategate' has besmirched the good name of science. The inquiries were worthy of Orwell or Tolstoy. And now some of the principals involved, like Mann and Jones, are hitting the media trail to rehabilitate their reputations without acknowledging the egregious errors in judgement that caused their fall in the first place.

Instead of exposing the dark wrongdoings in a timely fashion, the climate science elite are being dragged kicking screaming and lying into the light. Every inquiry has left a set of lies and evasions that are exposed as soon as they are made public. There have been inquiries into the inquiries, and there will be more to come. I wish honour and integrity were more important to the scientists involve but I find it incomprehensible that institutions like UEA and Penn would be willing to abase themselves by trying to whitewash the problems away.

 

[Old Rocks]

bullshit

 

[Revere]

Real scientists need to step up and kick this to the curb.

 

[Ernie S.]

bullshit

Such an intelligent response! You mush be an enlightened liberal.

 

[The Infidel]

bullshit

Such an intelligent response! You mush be an enlightened liberal.

No.... just a tree hugging dumbass!

 

[The Infidel]

Climategate and the Big Green Lie - Clive Crook - Politics - The Atlantic

By way of preamble, let me remind you where I stand on climate change. I think climate science points to a risk that the world needs to take seriously. I think energy policy should be intelligently directed towards mitigating this risk. I am for a carbon tax. I also believe that the Climategate emails revealed, to an extent that surprised even me (and I am difficult to surprise), an ethos of suffocating groupthink and intellectual corruption. The scandal attracted enormous attention in the US, and support for a new energy policy has fallen. In sum, the scientists concerned brought their own discipline into disrepute, and set back the prospects for a better energy policy.

I had hoped, not very confidently, that the various Climategate inquiries would be severe. This would have been a first step towards restoring confidence in the scientific consensus. But no, the reports make things worse. At best they are mealy-mouthed apologies; at worst they are patently incompetent and even wilfully wrong. The climate-science establishment, of which these inquiries have chosen to make themselves a part, seems entirely incapable of understanding, let alone repairing, the harm it has done to its own cause.

The disaster called 'Climategate' has besmirched the good name of science. The inquiries were worthy of Orwell or Tolstoy. And now some of the principals involved, like Mann and Jones, are hitting the media trail to rehabilitate their reputations without acknowledging the egregious errors in judgement that caused their fall in the first place.

Instead of exposing the dark wrongdoings in a timely fashion, the climate science elite are being dragged kicking screaming and lying into the light. Every inquiry has left a set of lies and evasions that are exposed as soon as they are made public. There have been inquiries into the inquiries, and there will be more to come. I wish honour and integrity were more important to the scientists involve but I find it incomprehensible that institutions like UEA and Penn would be willing to abase themselves by trying to whitewash the problems away.

This is why I am so sceptical of the global warming kooks... In the 70's it was population.. we were'nt going to be able to feed all the worlds populus... Then the world was going to fall into a spiral of cold that would bring on the next ice age.... Now the earth is going to bake in its own atmosphere and we are all going to die....

What a bunch of crap!

Thanks IanC for an insightful post.

 

[westwall]

Climategate and the Big Green Lie - Clive Crook - Politics - The Atlantic

By way of preamble, let me remind you where I stand on climate change. I think climate science points to a risk that the world needs to take seriously. I think energy policy should be intelligently directed towards mitigating this risk. I am for a carbon tax. I also believe that the Climategate emails revealed, to an extent that surprised even me (and I am difficult to surprise), an ethos of suffocating groupthink and intellectual corruption. The scandal attracted enormous attention in the US, and support for a new energy policy has fallen. In sum, the scientists concerned brought their own discipline into disrepute, and set back the prospects for a better energy policy.

I had hoped, not very confidently, that the various Climategate inquiries would be severe. This would have been a first step towards restoring confidence in the scientific consensus. But no, the reports make things worse. At best they are mealy-mouthed apologies; at worst they are patently incompetent and even wilfully wrong. The climate-science establishment, of which these inquiries have chosen to make themselves a part, seems entirely incapable of understanding, let alone repairing, the harm it has done to its own cause.

The disaster called 'Climategate' has besmirched the good name of science. The inquiries were worthy of Orwell or Tolstoy. And now some of the principals involved, like Mann and Jones, are hitting the media trail to rehabilitate their reputations without acknowledging the egregious errors in judgement that caused their fall in the first place.

Instead of exposing the dark wrongdoings in a timely fashion, the climate science elite are being dragged kicking screaming and lying into the light. Every inquiry has left a set of lies and evasions that are exposed as soon as they are made public. There have been inquiries into the inquiries, and there will be more to come. I wish honour and integrity were more important to the scientists involve but I find it incomprehensible that institutions like UEA and Penn would be willing to abase themselves by trying to whitewash the problems away.

We're talking about serious money here Ian, that trumps all ethical considerations with these people.

 

[IanC]

Climategate and the Big Green Lie - Clive Crook - Politics - The Atlantic

By way of preamble, let me remind you where I stand on climate change. I think climate science points to a risk that the world needs to take seriously. I think energy policy should be intelligently directed towards mitigating this risk. I am for a carbon tax. I also believe that the Climategate emails revealed, to an extent that surprised even me (and I am difficult to surprise), an ethos of suffocating groupthink and intellectual corruption. The scandal attracted enormous attention in the US, and support for a new energy policy has fallen. In sum, the scientists concerned brought their own discipline into disrepute, and set back the prospects for a better energy policy.

I had hoped, not very confidently, that the various Climategate inquiries would be severe. This would have been a first step towards restoring confidence in the scientific consensus. But no, the reports make things worse. At best they are mealy-mouthed apologies; at worst they are patently incompetent and even wilfully wrong. The climate-science establishment, of which these inquiries have chosen to make themselves a part, seems entirely incapable of understanding, let alone repairing, the harm it has done to its own cause.

The disaster called 'Climategate' has besmirched the good name of science. The inquiries were worthy of Orwell or Tolstoy. And now some of the principals involved, like Mann and Jones, are hitting the media trail to rehabilitate their reputations without acknowledging the egregious errors in judgement that caused their fall in the first place.

Instead of exposing the dark wrongdoings in a timely fashion, the climate science elite are being dragged kicking screaming and lying into the light. Every inquiry has left a set of lies and evasions that are exposed as soon as they are made public. There have been inquiries into the inquiries, and there will be more to come. I wish honour and integrity were more important to the scientists involve but I find it incomprehensible that institutions like UEA and Penn would be willing to abase themselves by trying to whitewash the problems away.

We're talking about serious money here Ian, that trumps all ethical considerations with these people.

money is a corrupting influence, no doubt. but when given the choice between honour and personal gain I would think that most, or at least many, scientists would choose to do the right thing. after all they certainly didn't get into research to become rich. perhaps they can't get past the groupthink aspect of things. I wonder who released the climategate emails and whether he is still playing on the 'hockey team'.

 

[IanC]

bullshit

Look- I know you believe in AGW. I can understand that you have had 10 or 20 years to get that paradigm set into your worldview. What I don't understand is your refusal to acknowledge the major ethical problems involved. You should be totally pissed at Mann, Jones et al for causing such suspicion and skepticism for your personal cause. They lied and perverted the scientific method. They are still lying and trying to pervert the judicial method. Isn't truth and justice important to you? Do you think that the ends justify the means? Are you blind to the ethical problems involved or do you just refuse to look at the evidence in the first place? And there is lots of evidence. More comes out every week. Its not going away. We need to clear the air, fix the systems, get back to work on understanding what is happening with the climate, wherever that takes us. But right now the world doesn't know which side to believe because your side is the only one that is demonstrably lying.

 

[Old Rocks]

I see. Evolution is group think and to be doubted because Darwin did not get it totally right? That is essentially what you are saying. Mann's first graph was inaccurate in the details. It overstated the case because, at the time, there was not enough data. Now, if you look at the research that he, and others, have continued to do, you see a much more accurate portrayal of the past climate. However, there is still a very significant spike at the end of the graph.

As for the e-mails, the scientists that do research are also humans. The people researching climate have for two decades been used as punching bags by the Conservative press, and people like Senator Inhofe. They stated what they thought of these people, and what they thought of the paid for conclusions that the people published for the energy corps. They were correct in their statements.

One has only to read the articles concerning climate in peer reviewed publications to see the research that is being done, and how it is done. But damned few people do that, they just mindlessly repeat the blatherings of the wingnuts like Limpbaugh that are paid to lie about the science involved.

What we have is real scientists involved in real research stating their finding and the implications of those findings, and people, like Anthony Watts, with no scientific background or degree, stating that these scientists are lying. And people like yourself choosing to believe Watts.

 

[IanC]

I see. Evolution is group think and to be doubted because Darwin did not get it totally right? That is essentially what you are saying. Mann's first graph was inaccurate in the details. It overstated the case because, at the time, there was not enough data. Now, if you look at the research that he, and others, have continued to do, you see a much more accurate portrayal of the past climate. However, there is still a very significant spike at the end of the graph.

As for the e-mails, the scientists that do research are also humans. The people researching climate have for two decades been used as punching bags by the Conservative press, and people like Senator Inhofe. They stated what they thought of these people, and what they thought of the paid for conclusions that the people published for the energy corps. They were correct in their statements.

One has only to read the articles concerning climate in peer reviewed publications to see the research that is being done, and how it is done. But damned few people do that, they just mindlessly repeat the blatherings of the wingnuts like Limpbaugh that are paid to lie about the science involved.

What we have is real scientists involved in real research stating their finding and the implications of those findings, and people, like Anthony Watts, with no scientific background or degree, stating that these scientists are lying. And people like yourself choosing to believe Watts.

you're not seriously comparing evolution to the catastophic predictions of AGW are you? there are many natural causes to climate change and a few manmade ones as well. you have fixated only on CO2 to the exclusion of all the others. you have decided that mankind has sinned and brought the end of the world upon us. I personally believe that the earth has lasted this long because the physics involved contain stasis towards favoured conditions, even after perturbations to the system. you believe we are on a one way track to hell. I don't really care about our difference of opinion on that subject. I am concerned that you condone and even approve the lying, the cheating and the attempts to cover up past indiscretions by the elite of climate science. any honourable institution would seek to find and repair past mistakes when they were pointed out. your side has stonewalled and perjured themselves while trying to use 'appeal to authoriity' to cover everything up.

 

[westwall]

Climategate and the Big Green Lie - Clive Crook - Politics - The Atlantic




The disaster called 'Climategate' has besmirched the good name of science. The inquiries were worthy of Orwell or Tolstoy. And now some of the principals involved, like Mann and Jones, are hitting the media trail to rehabilitate their reputations without acknowledging the egregious errors in judgement that caused their fall in the first place.

Instead of exposing the dark wrongdoings in a timely fashion, the climate science elite are being dragged kicking screaming and lying into the light. Every inquiry has left a set of lies and evasions that are exposed as soon as they are made public. There have been inquiries into the inquiries, and there will be more to come. I wish honour and integrity were more important to the scientists involve but I find it incomprehensible that institutions like UEA and Penn would be willing to abase themselves by trying to whitewash the problems away.

We're talking about serious money here Ian, that trumps all ethical considerations with these people.

money is a corrupting influence, no doubt. but when given the choice between honour and personal gain I would think that most, or at least many, scientists would choose to do the right thing. after all they certainly didn't get into research to become rich. perhaps they can't get past the groupthink aspect of things. I wonder who released the climategate emails and whether he is still playing on the 'hockey team'.

Scientists are people. The same percentages of good, bad apply just as much to us as to anyone else. Most people are lazy. Good science requires hard work. I think you see the issue.

 

[westwall]

I see. Evolution is group think and to be doubted because Darwin did not get it totally right? That is essentially what you are saying. Mann's first graph was inaccurate in the details. It overstated the case because, at the time, there was not enough data. Now, if you look at the research that he, and others, have continued to do, you see a much more accurate portrayal of the past climate. However, there is still a very significant spike at the end of the graph.

As for the e-mails, the scientists that do research are also humans. The people researching climate have for two decades been used as punching bags by the Conservative press, and people like Senator Inhofe. They stated what they thought of these people, and what they thought of the paid for conclusions that the people published for the energy corps. They were correct in their statements.

One has only to read the articles concerning climate in peer reviewed publications to see the research that is being done, and how it is done. But damned few people do that, they just mindlessly repeat the blatherings of the wingnuts like Limpbaugh that are paid to lie about the science involved.

What we have is real scientists involved in real research stating their finding and the implications of those findings, and people, like Anthony Watts, with no scientific background or degree, stating that these scientists are lying. And people like yourself choosing to believe Watts.

Really? You are trying to use that old cannard of "peer review" KNOWING that the process was horribly perverted? Get real olfraud, the alarmist camp has zero credibility. They are continuing to harm science as a whole due to their continuing unethical behaviour.

 

[glew]

Isn't truth and justice important to you? Do you think that the ends justify the means?

Is this a serious question for a liberal? The answer is easy...No and Yes

 

[skookerasbil]

bullshit

ps s0n..................

nobody wants to buy hybrids..........................

Obama Bolsters U.S. Hybrid Automobile Sales in Waning Consumer Market - Bloomberg



Happy Thanksgiving s0n!!!