Climategate - The Sequel

The hacker/leaker that gave the world the Climategate emails two years ago has struck again. FOIA.org (zip) has produced an enormous zip file of 5,000 additional emails similar to those released two years ago in November 2009. Additionally there are some 220,000 emails locked behind a password, which the organization does not plan on releasing at this time.

The newly released emails seem to span the same time frame as the original release. Possibly they were part of the same Freedom Of Information request. There isn't anything shockingly new in them, but it puts a little more colour on the context of the original release. And it certainly provides more evidence of conduct unbecoming a scientist.

A few choice quotes can be read in the README accompanying this new release. The README is reproduced in it's entirety here and here. James Delingpole is having the time of his life with this.

For me, the juiciest bit is the email by a climatologist who reproduced McIntyre experiment and found hockey-stick curves even when he fed the analysis random sequences.
[4241] Wilson:

I thought I’d play around with some randomly generated time-series and see if I
could ‘reconstruct’ northern hemisphere temperatures.
[...] The reconstructions clearly show a ‘hockey-stick’ trend. I guess this is
precisely the phenomenon that Macintyre has been going on about.
The 'hockey team' actually knew that Michael Manns infamous curve was a fake. There is even the odd voice of dissent:
[3373] Bradley:

I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should
never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year
“reconstruction”.
They knew, yet they chose not to come out and expose the fraud, this hideously expensive falsehood. And in so doing they have destroyed the credibility of climate science, and hurt the credibility of science in general. I hope that Nobel prize was worth it.

But there's a bright side to all this. In a few weeks we will have the Durban conference on climate. The MSM in Holland and around Europe are gearing up to make as big a hoola-hoop of it as they can get away with (which isn't that big compared to, oh, two years ago). But indications are that Durban will be a bit of a non-starter to begin with. Hopefully this new release will make Durban the farce it ought to be.

Plus, as of today we get to laugh at anyone who still maintains we should do something about the changing climate, because 'we' caused it. That is good news, you'll all agree.

Via WUWT and EURef, who both have a thought or two of their own. Plus additional links.

And the Dutch MSM? They are studiously looking away.

[UPDATE001] Thanks to Dr. North for the kind linkage. MSM reaction in the low countries is still muted, with exactly two mentions of Climategate II, one Belgian and one Dutch. There is, however, also an official reaction from the Vereniging voor Weerkunde en Klimatologie (Association for Weather Study and Climatology). It does not disappoint in that it is relentlessly disappointing. Dismissing the published emails as 'a distraction from the real problems', the VWK goes on to state:
The facts are and continue to be: World temperature is rising, the amount of sea-ice is declining, land-ice on Greenland and Antarctica decreases, glaciers become smaller, the sea-level is rising. Not evenly from year on year, but in the long term. The climate is changing and humanity has an important contribution to it.
How is that for denialist fervour? Points for tenacity. But I still LOL-ed. Who are they trying to kid anymore?

The Dutch blogosphere is not exactly lighting up either. But there are some useful contributions. Most notably by DDS' Hans Labohm and Climategate.nl (both NL).

But that's about it. We said it two years ago, we're still saying it now: Where the HELL is our media?

6 reacties:

DP111 zei

The science of Climate is not a science, and is unlikely to be ever a
science, as it involves too many ‘sciences’. For a start a real climate
scientists would have to be expert in Solar dynamics, planetary mechanics,
thermodynamics, electromagnetics and radiation, oceanography- particularly the
thermodynamics of heat exchange in the oceans, and the behaviour of living
organisms. Thats for a start.


Then the interaction, linear and non-linear, time delayed, feedback, noise,
etc etc. Can’t see how it can be done.




It is not the science of AGW that concerns the BBC and
governments, but the monies and politics of AGW. They have invested too much
political and other capital, for them to let it go, especially as the gains are
in trillions in tax levies, and the bonanza of patronage that results from such a
huge windfall in taxes. The others reason is that the West will be locked into a
command and control, economy for the foreseeable future - which is an allure to Leftists and totalitarians. 


 

Klein Verzet zei

Yes, but isn't this a grand vindication of the blogosphere? The truth will out, and all that?

DP111 zei

KV wrote: The truth will out, and it already is out.

But the purpose of this scam, perpetrated by Western governments, has already been accomplished. The hidden taxes on our energy bills(they are not shown),  are already in place. How are we to get rid of this fraud when our representatives (politicians), the corporate (Big Oil and gas) and  media structures (BBC),  are all in it for the money?

As for the emails from these so-called scientists - they are just so much drama to distract from the real ripoff in play.  

These "scientists" were in universities that had just been promoted from polys. They were then asked to attract research grants and produce research papers as per a normal university,  or their funding would cease. It was quite unfair to do this, as they neither had the brains or the knowledge to do so. This made them particularly vulnerable to pressure from the government to make up an AGW case. They were given grants and they came up with the results. As for the quality of the research - even a 10 year old or a group of them, can go around taking temperatures around the globe, and plotting it on an Excel spreadsheet.   More sophisticated 3D colour plots can be done at the click of a mouse button. Any kind of statistical scamming can also be done at click of a mouse. This is not physical science, this is playing to the tune of the authority that payed for it.
 
Then the output. It is trivial. Nothing else can be said about it, as it is trivial.
 
As evidence that these climate researchers are of low character, and their thoughts and research capacity reflect this, read their emails to each other. Bad language, and sometimes foul language, and accepting deception and false direction as normal part of their business. This is not the way good scientists think or behave.

stopcpdotcom zei

Norfolk Constabulary is more interested in finding the leaker of the emails than investigating the massive fraud and abuse of public funds that has been perpetrated at the UEA.

I bet the Common Purpose crooks controlling the AGW fraud at the UEA are in a bit of a tizz: http://stopcp.com/cpclimategate.php

Klein Verzet zei

All of that is true. Yet it is still my conviction that we would not know this (or much less of this) were it not for the internet and the blogosphere. Making seemingly convincing graphs is dead easy nowadays. I agree. But on the other hand there exists a large pool of blogs providing scrutiny and explanation as to why things are not what 'they' want us to believe.

Yes, we're financially raped by a conglomerate of politics, industry and media. But at the very least we know this is happening. That has got to count for something, even if the population at large is (as yet) unwilling to act. In the long run this is not a sustainable state of affairs. Knowing one is lied to breeds healthy distrust. And in the long run there will be a price to pay for lying like this. Of that I am convinced.

Klein Verzet zei

Thanks for the link. I've been keeping an eye on this outfit for some time now.

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...