“Greatest Scandal In Modern Science”

“Greatest Scandal In Modern Science”

November 24th, 2009 Posted By Erik Wong.

climategate

Telegraph:

If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)

When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:

Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change sceptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting:

“In an odd way this is cheering news.”

But perhaps the most damaging revelations – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.

Here are a few tasters.

Manipulation of evidence:

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Suppression of evidence:

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:

Next
time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….

And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.

“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 !”

Hadley CRU has form in this regard. In September – I wrote the story up here as “How the global warming industry is based on a massive lie” – CRU’s researchers were exposed as having “cherry-picked” data in order to support their untrue claim that global temperatures had risen higher at the end of the 20th century than at any time in the last millenium. CRU was also the organisation which – in contravention of all acceptable behaviour in the international scientific community – spent years withholding data from researchers it deemed unhelpful to its cause. This matters because CRU, established in 1990 by the Met Office, is a government-funded body which is supposed to be a model of rectitude. Its HadCrut record is one of the four official sources of global temperature data used by the IPCC.

I asked in my title whether this will be the final nail in the coffin of Anthropenic Global Warming. This was wishful thinking, of course. In the run up to Copenhagen, we will see more and more hysterical (and grotesquely exaggerated) stories such as this in the Mainstream Media. And we will see ever-more-virulent campaigns conducted by eco-fascist activists, such as this risible new advertising campaign by Plane Stupid showing CGI polar bears falling from the sky and exploding because kind of, like, man, that’s sort of what happens whenever you take another trip on an aeroplane.

The world is currently cooling; electorates are increasingly reluctant to support eco-policies leading to more oppressive regulation, higher taxes and higher utility bills; the tide is turning against Al Gore’s Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. The so-called “sceptical” view – which is some of us have been expressing for quite some time: see, for example, the chapter entitled ‘Barbecue the Polar Bears’ in WELCOME TO OBAMALAND: I’VE SEEN YOUR FUTURE AND IT DOESN’T WORK – is now also, thank heaven, the majority view.

Unfortunately, we’ve a long, long way to go before the public mood (and scientific truth) is reflected by our policy makers. There are too many vested interests in AGW, with far too much to lose either in terms of reputation or money, for this to end without a bitter fight.

But to judge by the way – despite the best efforts of the MSM not to report on it – the CRU scandal is spreading like wildfire across the internet, this shabby story represents a blow to the AGW lobby’s credibility from which it is never likely to recover

Turkeys of the year

Michelle Malkin 

Lead Story

Turkeys of the year

By Michelle Malkin  •  November 25, 2009 09:59 AM

Turkeys of the year
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009

As we gather ‘round the Thanksgiving table, bow our heads in prayer, and feast on the holiday bird, it is only fitting to take a moment to fete the unforgettable turkeys of 2009.

1. The stimulus. Back in February, I wrote that if the trillion-dollar stimulus plan were a Thanksgiving dinner entree, it would be a Turbaconducken — the heart attack-inducing dish of roasted chicken stuffed inside a duck stuffed inside a turkey, all wrapped in endless slabs of bacon. And so it has come to pass. After the Democrat majority larded up the massive spending package with earmarks and bribes, President Obama declared it pork-free and has stubbornly touted its job creation benefits for out-of-work Americans.

Reality check? The Washington Examiner reports that more than ten percent of the jobs the Obama administration claimed were “created or saved” by the stimulus are doubtful or imaginary. ABC News uncovered countless examples of bogus congressional districts listed as stimulus beneficiaries by the Obama stimulus tracking website, Recovery.gov. The money has been lavished on shady beauty schools in New Hampshire, prison inmates in Texas, and wind companies in Spain and China. Just this week, a California audit found that the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation overstated the number of jobs saved by federal stimulus dollars by upwards of 13,000.

While this Generational Theft Act continues to soak up our tax dollars and add to our children and grandchildren’s debt, the Democrat majority is in the government kitchen cooking up a second stimulus turkey to provide federal infrastructure money to public-sector unions. Gobble, gobble.

2. President O-bow-ma. The candidate who pledged to restore America’s standing in the world couldn’t figure out how to stay standing in front of world leaders. In April, he crouched before Saudi King Abdullah. This month, he provoked global derision when he broke protocol and performed a spineless blunder in front of the Japanese emperor.

The kowtower-in-chief’s body language reflected the administration’s broader foreign policy prostrations – including scrapping missile defense in the Czech Republic and Poland, canceling a meeting with the Dalai Lama to appease China, sitting on its hands this summer during the Iranian election protests, and unveiling the 9/11 show trials in New York City that will provide a circus platform to jihadis and international Bush-haters.

The Left complained that George W. Bush was too much of a cowboy on the global stage. It’s better than having a waterboy.

3. Green jobs czar Van Jones. This deep-fried turkey was recruited by Team Obama’s Chicago consigliere Valerie Jarrett, who boasted about recruiting the Marxist rabble-rouser from Oakland. He openly crusaded to free Philadelphia Death Row cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, bashed capitalism with radical revolutionary rhetoric, and signed a 9/11 conspiracy petition that he meekly disavowed in a botched attempt to save his job. Jones is now at the Center for American Progress, run by Obama transition official and Democrat operative John Podesta.

The other turkey in the story, Val Jarrett, escaped unscathed and went on to push the Obamas into their failed crony campaign for the Olympics 2016 bid in Copenhagen – a taxpayer-funded, hubris-infused debacle that ties with Van Jones for third biggest turkey of the year. Rio got the Games.

olympicsob
Photoshop: Paul Croteau

America got a closer look at the pay-for-play patrons, power brokers, and developers in the Windy City that have put an indelible Chicago stamp on the Potomac.

4. The New York Times. Scooped by Fox News, conservative blogs, and talk radio on the exploding ACORN scandal, the paper whitewashed its own role in covering up the community organizing criminal racket’s financial shenanigans last fall when it cut off a reporter’s investigation a few weeks before Election Day. Jill Abramson, the Times’ managing editor for news, acknowledged that her staff was “slow off the mark” and blamed “insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues that are dominating Fox News and talk radio.” They assigned a new “opinion media monitor” to track the competition, but refused to identify the watchdog for fear that he/she would get too many mean, intrusive e-mails and phone calls.

More recently, the paper’s website demonstrated that it’s real motto is “All the inconvenient news that’s fit to suppress.” The Times’ lead environmental blogger, Andrew Revkin, haughtily refused to reprint damning e-mails leaked by a hacker in the burgeoning “ClimateGate” scandal. The documents reveal a long trail of manipulated data, but Revkin balked at the ill-gotten trove. The blabbermouths at the Times had no problem exposing national security secrets to undermine George W. Bush. But shed light on scientific hoaxes that undermine Al Gore? Unethical!

5. Tea Party-bashers. Millions of ordinary, peaceful Americans joined the Tea Party movement to revolt against big government, backroom deals, and the Beltway culture of corruption. For their exercise of free speech and free assembly, they were smeared nationwide.

janeane.jpg Hollywood has-been Janeane Garafolo called them “racist, backward motherf**kers.” SEIU labor thug Dennis Rivera accused them of “terrorist tactics.”

CNN anchor Anderson Cooper used a vulgar sexual epithet to describe them. Team Obama’s astroturfers declared all-out war on them.

For refusing to sit down and shut up in the face of such unhinged bigotry, and for exposing the foulness of the political fowl, I have two words for them: Thank you.

Obama plans to send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan– Too Little Too Late

Obama plans to send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan

November 25th, 2009

McClatchy

 Obama should officially announce his decision soon

President Barack Obama met Monday evening with his national security team to finalize a plan to dispatch some 34,000 additional U.S. troops over the next year to what he’s called “a war of necessity” in Afghanistan, U.S. officials told McClatchy.

Obama is expected to announce his long-awaited decision on Dec. 1, followed by meetings on Capitol Hill aimed at winning congressional support amid opposition by some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury and whether Afghanistan has become a quagmire, the officials said.

The U.S. officials all spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly and because, one official said, the White House is incensed by leaks on its Afghanistan policy that didn’t originate in the White House.

They said the commander of the U.S.-led international force in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, could arrive in Washington as early as Sunday to participate in the rollout of the new plan, including testifying before Congress toward the end of next week. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry also are expected to appear before congressional committees.

Read More:

Obama’ Muddled Logic

Obama’ Muddled Logic

November 25th, 2009

by Tom Bevan, RealClear Politics

 Obama is rushing on every issue except the one where decisive leadership is needed

Question: why is it that on every issue save one, the Obama administration has had its foot on the gas, pressing ahead with all manner of speed and urgency?

Eight hundred billion worth of tax payer money had to be rammed through Congress to avoid an economic apocalypse, we were told. No delay could be tolerated in revamping one sixth of the American economy with health care reform. It needed to be done by August, the President initially said, before letting his self imposed deadline slip to the end of the year.

But on Afghanistan, the administration has said just the opposite: things must be taken slow; the problem must be studied from every angle; and all possible deliberations must be made before coming to any conclusion.

Why hasn’t the same logic applied to the administration’s approach to health care, for example?

Read More:

The Numbers within the Numbers

The Numbers within the Numbers

Gene Schwimmer

Often, “reading between the lines” of a writer’s prose will reveal a more interesting message than the one the writer ostensibly intended.  Similarly, by parsing the data – the “numbers within the numbers” of a political poll, one can sometimes glean some interesting insights.

Today, Rasmussen publishes a poll intended to show how a Lou Dobbs independent presidential run would affect the 2012 presidential election if the GOP candidates were Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee or Sarah Palin.  Here are the numbers:
Mitt Romney (R):  34%
Barack Obama (D)  42%
Lou Dobbs (I):  14%
Not Sure:  11%
Mike Huckabee (R):  36%
Barack Obama (D):  42%
Lou Dobbs (I):  12%
Not Sure:  10%
Sarah Palin (R):  37%
Barack Obama (D):  44%
Lou Dobbs (I):  12%
Not Sure:  7%
The article’s purpose and headline is, “Dobbs in 2012 Gets Up to 14% of Vote, Hurts GOP Chances,” but a look at these numbers reveals an additional message:  The GOP candidate who does best against Obama in this scenario, albeit by a small amount, is… Sarah Palin.  She also generates the fewest undecideds.
Furthermore, the same article reports the results if “Lou Dobbs” is replaced with “Some Other Candidate.”  In that scenario, among Romney, Huckabee and Palin, Romney does best, tying Obama at 44-44.  But Palin comes in second-best, trailing Obama by only three points, 46-43 – with a full three years to go before the election.
Elites – in both parties – who dismiss a Palin candidacy may be due for a rude awakening.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/11/the_numbers_within_the_numbers.html at November 25, 2009 – 03:59:13 PM EST

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 56 other followers