Major scandal; Now proven that the entire global warming threat is based on fabricated data

[qui_est_ce]

post 249

Science fascism? What is the alternative – Creationist Noah’s Ark science?

 

[qui_est_ce]

And the mother lode
Post 264

I’m more interested in exploring the social factors underlying the connection between evolution denial and global warming denial. Why are these two frequently linked? What issues are involved? What presuppositions might impel it?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I suggest we ignore all posts which derail the OP

The entire man-made global warming threat is based on fabricated, cherry picked, data.

This is the worst science scandal in history.

But, finally, the information is available.

TREEMOMETERS: A NEW SCIENTIFIC SCANDAL

The Register, 29 September 2009
theregister.co.uk/2009/09/29/yamal_scandal/

By Andrew Orlowski

I travel a lot and cannot participate here as much as I would like.

But I guess what has happened is that there is too much data that just contradicts the tree ring proxies for actual temperature data.

www.wattsupwiththat.com and others have been challenging the data record for quite a while and now the chickens have come home to roost.

The falsehood of proxy data has been finally revealed but it needs to be given the widest discussion and dissemination.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Can I sum up what most Catholics on this thread agree on?

• Climate Change is Real
• We should be good stewards of the earth and natural resources
• We should help people who are negatively impacted by climate change
• We should help people suffering from natural castrophes
• People who are skeptical of AGCC care about future generation
• It has not been proven that skeptics of AGCC believe Adam and Ever rode dinosaurs after the flood in Genesis
• Climate Change is real

 

[StAnastasia]

This isn’t an alternative perspective. It is a thinly veiled straw man.

Not at all. Steven Newton is a careful scholar with whom I’ve worked. He is a geologist by profession, and is exploring the links between various types of science denial. He has found a consistent correlation between AGW denial and evolution denial. I will see if I can find a link to his paper and post it.

It may be that the issues in AGW are so polarizing that accepters and deniers will simply never be able to agree. It seems that most people posting on this thread are adamantly on one side of the question or the other. I suspect we will arrive at post 1,000 with neither side having enlightened the other as to their genuine concerns.

StAnastasia

 

[buffalo]

Not at all. Steven Newton is a careful scholar with whom I’ve worked. He is a geologist by profession, and is exploring the links between various types of science denial. He has found a consistent correlation between AGW denial and evolution denial. I will see if I can find a link to his paper and post it.

It may be that the issues in AGW are so polarizing that accepters and deniers will simply never be able to agree. It seems that most people posting on this thread are adamantly on one side of the question or the other. I suspect we will arrive at post 1,000 with neither side having enlightened the other as to their genuine concerns.

StAnastasia

This begs the question - if it turns out global warming is false will this mean that evolution is false too?

 

[StAnastasia]

qui est ce;6063051[*:

It has not been proven that skeptics of AGCC believe Adam and Ever rode dinosaurs after the flood in Genesis]

Yes – at least one organization promotes this – “Answers in Genesis.” No doubt many AGW deniers do not agree.

Michael Oard wrote this piece for the YEC Answers in Genesis website. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/global-warming

He is coauthor of the book An Ice Age Caused by the Genesis Flood. Answers in Genesis affirm that Adam and Eve and their contemporaries saddled and rode dinosaurs.

 

[qui_est_ce]

This begs the question - if it turns out global warming is false will this mean that evolution is false too?

 

[qui_est_ce]

Yes – at least one organization promotes this – “Answers in Genesis.” No doubt many AGW deniers do not agree.

Michael Oard wrote this piece for the YEC Answers in Genesis website. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/global-warming

He is coauthor of the book An Ice Age Caused by the Genesis Flood. Answers in Genesis affirm that Adam and Eve and their contemporaries saddled and rode dinosaurs.

What has this to do with the topic of the thread.

 

[StAnastasia]

This begs the question - if it turns out global warming is false will this mean that evolution is false too?

Buffalo, that’s not what “begs the question” means, but no – AGW could be false without evolution being so. Steve Newton is simply researching the correlation between various manifestations of science denial, considering whether there is some underlying complex of presuppositions common to both AGW denial and evolution denial. Examples might be, suspicion of big science, commitment to biblical literalism, lack of experience with how science works.

A parallel would be New Age beliefs: is there some common set of presuppositions held in common by believers in as diverse views as UFO abductions, crystal healing, reincarnation, and the efficacity of ouija boards?

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

What has this to do with the topic of the thread.

I’m responding to your sixth point in post # 664.

 

[StAnastasia]

post 249

Indeed – Buffalo was the one who first mentioned (post 247) the “science fascism” of Anthropogenic Global Warming proponents. I was merely asking buffalo to elaborate upon the alternative.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Climategate: Something’s Rotten in Denmark - and East Anglia, Asheville, and New York City

By Joseph D’Aleo, Pajamas Media exclusive

The familiar phrase was spoken by Marcellus in Shakespeare’s Hamlet - first performed around 1600, at the start of the Little Ice Age. “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark” is the exact quote. It recognizes that fish rots from the head down, and it means that all is not well at the top of the political hierarchy. Shakespeare proved to be Nostradamus. Four centuries later - at the start of what could be a new Little Ice Age - the rotting fish is Copenhagen.

The smell in the air may be from the leftover caviar at the banquet tables, or perhaps from the exhaust of 140 private jets and 1200 limousines commissioned by the attendees when they discovered there was to be no global warming evident in Copenhagen. (In fact, the cold will deepen and give way to snow before they leave, an extension of the Gore Effect.) .

:coolinoff:

According to NPR Copenhagen left a huge carbon footprint. But it’s okay, because the are going to neutralize it by planting some trees.

t’s the data, stupid
If we torture the data long enough, it will confess. (Ronald Coase, Nobel Prize for Economic Sciences, 1991)

The Climategate whistleblower proved what those of us dealing with data for decades know to be the case - namely, data was being manipulated. The IPCC and their supported scientists have worked to remove the pesky Medieval Warm Period, the Little Ice Age, and the period emailer Tom Wigley referred to as the “warm 1940s blip,” and to pump up the recent warm cycle.

Attention has focused on the emails dealing with Michael Mann’s hockey stick and other proxy attempts, most notably those of Keith Briffa. Briffa was conflicted in this whole process, noting he “[tried] hard to balance the needs of the IPCC with science, which were not always the same,” and that he knew “…there is pressure to present a nice tidy story as regards ‘apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data.’”

“Much recent attention has been paid to the email about the “trick” and the effort to “hide the decline.” Climate scientists have complained that this email has been taken “out of context.” **In this case, I’m not sure that it’s in their interests that this email be placed in context because the context leads right back to the role of IPCC itself in “hiding the decline” in the Briffa reconstruction.”
**
In the area of data, I am more concerned about the coordinated effort to manipulate instrumental data (that was appended onto the proxy data truncated in 1960 when the trees showed a decline - the so called “divergence problem") to produce an exaggerated warming that would point to man’s influence. I will be the first to admit that man does have some climate effect - but the effect is localized. Up to half the Sr., and many others. The rest of the warming is also man-made - but the men are at the CRU, at NOAA’s NCDC, and NASAs GISS, the grant-fed universities and computer labs.

Programmer Ian “Harry” Harris, in the Harry_Read_Me.txt file, commented about:

“[The] hopeless state of their (CRU) data base. No uniform data integrity, it’s just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they’re found…I am very sorry to report that the rest of the databases seem to be in nearly as poor a state as Australia was. There are hundreds if not thousands of pairs of dummy stations, one with no WMO and one with, usually overlapping and with the same station name and very similar coordinates. I know it could be old and new stations, but why such large overlaps if that’s the case?

icecap.us/

 

[buffalo]

Indeed – Buffalo was the one who first mentioned (post 247) the “science fascism” of Anthropogenic Global Warming proponents. I was merely asking buffalo to elaborate upon the alternative.

The alternative to science fascism?

Science by truth not consensus or ideology.

 

[StAnastasia]

The alternative to science fascism? Science by truth not consensus or ideology.

Indeed, Buffalo. And ideological commitments drive the extremes at both ends of the current climate debate.

 

[buffalo]

Indeed, Buffalo. And ideological commitments drive the extremes at both ends of the current climate debate.

And where are you sitting right now?

 

[qui_est_ce]

If AGCC is real, this evidence tampering by UN sanctioned scientists is a real setback for the credibility needed to act now.

 

[qui_est_ce]

If AGCC is real, this evidence tampering by UN sanctioned scientists is a real setback for the credibility needed to act now.

It’s like being on the witness stand. Once a person has been caught in a lie, he loses credibility, even if the next thing out of his mouth could be true.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Again…the thread topic is global warming threat is based on fabricated data.
Stay on topic. Derailing a thread is a violation of forum rules.
Thank you.

 

[StAnastasia]

And where are you sitting right now?

With the consensus of mainstream climate scientists. “Climategate” is a diversion based on hysteria, and doesn’t change the fundamental nature of the scientific research.

StAnastasia