Climate change Skeptics baffled by CNN converage of "climategate"

[pilobolus]

Originally Posted by Noovuss

Proving that even an idiot can see the truth and you can't?? OK..
Pilo., you are constant entertainment..

Please, please stop misrepresenting me Noovus; I have pointed out time and time again that Phil Jones and others need to be strung up (legally, of course) on several fraudulent activities. I have stated it here and in other threads, yet you continue to try and lump me in his camp?

Why is that? Why can't you be honest for once?

[Noovuss]

Originally Posted by pilobolus

Please, please stop misrepresenting me Noovus; I have pointed out time and time again that Phil Jones and others need to be strung up (legally, of course) on several fraudulent activities. I have stated it here and in other threads, yet you continue to try and lump me in his camp?

Why is that? Why can't you be honest for once?

Looks like the guy you have been defending is in trouble..
Maybe you protested tooooooo long..

“Hockey Stick” Graph Creator Mann to Be Investigated by Penn State
Saturday, November 28, 2009, 9:25 PM
Jim Hoft
“Hockey Stick” Graph Creator & Junk Scientist Dr. Michael Mann to Be Investigated by Penn State
Watts Up With That reported:
This statement was released by Penn State here. Oddly, while mentioning the NAS report, there is no mention of the Congressional commissioned Wegman report, which you can see here full report (PDF). Or for a quick read the fact-sheet (PDF).

University Reviewing Recent Reports on Climate Information
Professor Michael Mann is a highly regarded member of the Penn State faculty conducting research on climate change. Professor Mann’s research papers have been published in well respected peer-reviewed scientific journals.
In November 2005, Representative Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) requested that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) convene a panel of independent experts to investigate Professor Mann’s seminal 1999 reconstruction of the global surface temperature over the past 1,000 years. The resulting 2006 report of the NAS panel (http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11676) concluded that Mann’s results were sound and has been subsequently supported by an array of evidence that includes additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions.
In recent days a lengthy file of emails has been made public. Some of the questions raised through those emails may have been addressed already by the NAS investigation but others may not have been considered. The University is looking into this matter further, following a well defined policy used in such cases. No public discussion of the matter will occur while the University is reviewing the concerns that have been raised.

This ought to be good.
Will Penn State end this investigation siding with truth and science?…
Or, will Penn State end its investigation siding with Dr. Mann and junk science?
Time will tell.

[Noovuss]

Hey Pilo., I have a new question..
Why is O-bow-mao still going to Copenhagen..

[pilobolus]

Originally Posted by Noovuss

Looks like the guy you have been defending is in trouble..
Maybe you protested tooooooo long..

It is not the "guy" I have been defending, but lines of evidence. Surely you can tell the difference. If I turn out to be wrong, it will have been an honest mistake on my part and I will willingly admit it.

I trust this system to be self-correcting, although it does appear as though other scientists have abused the peer review system to their own ends. That is as bad as you starting with a conclusion, and then saying "I told you so" once the evidence arises to support your previously unsupported speculations that scientists are trying to destroy our economy. I think they were improperly motivated by their previous conclusions and may have hid data that did not fit their expectations. This is a huge problem, but one that always wills out...it can't help but come out, and now the University System will investigate and deal with it.

I still think that in most cases, this system works, although it may take time for the self correction.

When that Korean scientist, Hwang Woo-suk faked images in papers on cloning, he was dismissed and charged with fraud. His papers were redacted.

When Victor Ninov forged two new elements on the Periodic Chart, he was investigated internally, the elements and papers redacted.

See Also the Shon affair.

This system is pretty good at self correction; if results are not repeatable or hypotheses don't pan out, they are dropped.

It is important to keep in mind that two lines of evidence, Mann's and Phillip's are now in question, not all observations of climate change. This is indeed HUGE because of the influence these two had on climate science and public interpretation and eventually, the potential to drive policy.

At the end of the day, fossil fuels do pollute, they won't last for ever, and we will be forced to switch to alternatives, but we need to get their honestly and at a pace that does not bring the destruction of our economy.

Now stop misrepresenting my position. OK?

[Noovuss]

U-CRU

29 11 2009 From Kate at Small Dead Animals: No U-turns allowed

Flashback to April 18th…

Dear Tom,
I find it hard to believe that the British Antarctic Survey would permit the deletion of relevant files for two recent publications or that there aren’t any backups for the deleted data on institutional servers. Would you mind inquiring for me? In the mean time, would you please send me the PP format files that you refer to here for the monthly sea ice data for the 20th century models discussed in your GRL article and the 21st century models referred to in your JGR article.
Regards, Steve McIntyre

Then in July… “Unprecedented” Data Purge At CRU Read the rest of this entry »

[Noovuss]

Telegraph’s Booker on the “climategate” scandal

28 11 2009
Excerpts from the Telegraph:
A week after my colleague James Delingpole, on his Telegraph blog, coined the term “Climategate” (Note: Delingpole reports via email he got it from WUWT, commenter Bulldust coined the phrase at 3:52PM PST Nov 19th – Anthony) to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.
The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Read the rest of this entry »

[Bronkowitz]

Originally Posted by pilobolus

Please, please stop misrepresenting me Noovus; I have pointed out time and time again that Phil Jones and others need to be strung up (legally, of course) on several fraudulent activities. I have stated it here and in other threads, yet you continue to try and lump me in his camp?

Why is that? Why can't you be honest for once?

That's kinda funny coming from you. :-)

[pilobolus]

Originally Posted by Noovuss

Hey Pilo., I have a new question..
Why is O-bow-mao still going to Copenhagen..

Maybe his tickets are non-refundable?

Why don't you allow the process of investigation and findings to take place before you demand reversal of policy?

[pilobolus]

Originally Posted by Bronkowitz

That's kinda funny coming from you. :-)

Is it? If you feel misrepresented, let me know. It is hard for me to misrepresent Noovus, he posts what bloggers write with little commentary.

[Noovuss]

Originally Posted by pilobolus

Maybe his tickets are non-refundable?

Why don't you allow the process of investigation and findings to take place before you demand reversal of policy?

I rest my case..
Good-by..