Global-warming bombshell
Humans cause climate change, right? Turns out scientists may have been suppressing data to the contrary
Do revelations of researcher bias prove that climate change predictions are all wet?
(Corbis/Adrianna Williams)
In what Michelle Malkin is calling "the global warming scandal of the century," emails hacked from a major British research center are being used to suggest that certain scientists have been over-simplifying the truism that humans cause climate change. Rival scientists, who question Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), pounced on this "evidence" as proof that the emailers have been cooking the research, squelching dissenting views, and committing ethical crimes. Is global warming a global conspiracy — or is this heated debate mostly just hot air? (Watch a report about hackers uncovering scientists' emails)
The emails reveal power-hungry fraudsters: The "scientific consensus" touted by "global warming alarmists" is apparently fiction, says Rob Port at Say Anything. Worse, these "scientists" were also deceiving the public to supply "phony, cooked research" to help politicians "enact a myriad of new taxes, regulations and a generalized expansion of government power."
“Washington Post publishes on hacked global warming letters"
This is overblown — everyone massages graph data: Admittedly, says Nate Silver in FiveThirtyEight, one email suggests that key climate researcher Phil Jones was "sexing up a graph to make his conclusions more persuasive." That’s unethical, and inexcusable, but sadly quite common on both sides of the debate ("I'd include some of the graphs in [Al Gore's] Inconvenient Truth" in this charge.)
"I read through 160,000,000 bytes of hacked files and all i got was this lousy e-mail"
No, these actions are seriously unethical: The evidence that scientists have been censoring contradictory views is "horrible," said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute, as quoted in the Wall Street Journal. "This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn't questionable practice. This is unethical."
"Climate emails stoke debate"
Climate change is real, but man-made? There are "plenty of unanswered questions about AGW," says Rick Moran in Right Wing Nut House, without "non-scientists" mucking up the debate with political conspiracy theories. Global warming is real, but its causes aren’t clear—which is why we need all scientific points of view. If these "pretty damning" emails break open the cracks in angtropogenic climate warning theory, great. Maybe scientists will go back to "discovering facts."
"Hadley emails don’t ‘prove’ global warming a crock"
.............................................................
SEE THE WEEK'S LATEST COVERAGE OF GLOBAL WARMING:
• Obama vs. 'Climategate'
• David Frum: A false lesson on climate change (exclusive to TheWeek.com)
• Climate change: time to eat Fido?
• Glenn Beck and PETA vs. Al Gore
• Debunking SuperFreakonomics
Show: Oldest | Newest
78 Comments
Posted by micky, Monday, November 23, 2009, 2:04 pm I blame global warming on Carrie Prejean's fake breasts and Sara Palin's fake personality.
Posted by Mitch, Monday, November 23, 2009, 2:09 pm Micky, that is possibly the least logical comment i've heard all day.....I like it.
Posted by Brett, Monday, November 23, 2009, 2:11 pm The polar ice caps are shrinking at faster rates than what scientists have been predicting, and we can now navigate the Northwest Passage through the Arctic Sea in summer for the first time in recorded history. Whatever the actual cause, something big is really happening. We've been able to reduce the amount of fish in the oceans by 90 in less than 100 years. Whether or not we are directly responsible for the warming, shouldn't we be thinking a little more about the possible consequences of our actions and find alternative methods?
Posted by I'm just sayin'..., Monday, November 23, 2009, 2:16 pm I'm pleased to be the first to say, I told you so.... I went to a hick high school in South Georgia for Heaven's sake, and even us backwoods country bumpkins knew that climate change is cyclical and inevitable. It's been the greatest hubris for the AGW alarmists to claim that it's our fault.
Posted by I'm just sayin'..., Monday, November 23, 2009, 2:20 pm Brett, the operative term in your post is recorded history. What that means is that it's happened before and will doubtless happen again. Disparate human populations will either adapt or die. We can't stop it or fix it, we just need to start relocating away from the coastlines... No one ever looks at the positive implications of climate change. One is that there should be more cultivatable land available. Wouldn't that be nice...?
Posted by a glass half full, Monday, November 23, 2009, 2:57 pm I'm just sayin', you have the best attitude about this phenomena or nonphenomena. I'd rather be hot and able to grow large crops with all the extra CO2, than be overwhelmingly cold and unable to grow any crops. Heat beats cold hands down for survival. One thing anthropogenic global warmers never address is how melting ice, which takes up more space than H2O liquid, still does not decrease or increase the ocean level. This phenomena means that the melted ice is just amassing as ice somewhere else. Greenland has its name for a reason.
Posted by an empty glass, Monday, November 23, 2009, 3:04 pm Brett, where did you get your statistic that the amount of fish in the oceans has decreased by 90 percent in less than 100 yrs? I can't find it anywhere. Please present your source for this data. Thanks.
Posted by global warming or ice age?, Monday, November 23, 2009, 3:11 pm In the 1970s, some scientists tried to pitch the horror of an inevitable ice age. The public didn't buy it and guess what, it didn't occur. Some of the same scientists in the 1990s pitched global warming. This time with the help of hucksters like gore, people began to buy into the bullshit. As the AGW religion increased aided by gullible nonscientists and edicts that scientists were in consensus, more and more chicken littles flocked to the new religion. Now we see from the hacked emails that the new religion is nothing more than a sham.
Post a Comment