Saturday, November 28, 2009

More on Climaquiddick: Eric S. Raymond on CRU's Global Warming Fraud

I've been reading the Air Vent blog periodically; and it's just fascinating -- and supremely affirming -- to follow along on this with someone how knows exactly what they're talking about. So obviously I'm pleased to find Reboot Congress' links to Eric S. Raymond's blog on technology, politics, and what not, "Armed and Dangerous." The Reboot post provides some samples from Raymond's commentary, especially some of his remarks in the comments at his posts. For example:

On 11/21, esr, set the tenor for his upcoming posts in Hiding the Decline: Prologue:

For those of you who have been stigmatizing AGW skeptics as “deniers” and dismissing their charges that the whole enterprise is fraudulent? Hope you like the taste of crow, because I do believe there’s a buttload of it coming at you. Piping hot.
Comments on Hiding the Decline: Prologue:

Those who claim “scientific consensus” as a justification for any position are attempting to perpetrate a fraud, and have only themselves to blame when it blows back on them. The proper justification of any theory is not “consensus”, it is predictive power.


The most data could tell you is that average temperature is rising and CO2 is too. Well, except that average temperature isn’t rising – it was flat between 1998 and 2008, plunged sharply in 2008, and has not resumed the previous trendline. This is embarassing to AGW alarmists, since CO2 has kept rising and their theories require anthropogenic CO2 forcing to swamp anything that mere nature might be doing – and that’s manifestly not happening.

My point is that the data fails to meet the criteria the alarmists themselves have set. That is, they’ve been quite willing to interpret a short-period temperature rise between 1975 and 1998 as indication that we’re on a long-term trend with that slope, but when we get a decade of flatness after that they ignore it. It’s not responsive and not honest to point out that a decade is too short to mean anything unless you’re also willing to dismiss the previous 23 years.

Over longer timeframes, I don’t think there’s any statistically significant evidence that we’ve deviated off the very shallow warming trend following the last Ice Age. If you scrutinize the alleged data claiming otherwise, you keep finding noise and fraud.
There's more at the link, via Memeorandum.

This has been a great Thanksgiving for news! Gosh, and everyone says "slow news day." Both, don't the AGW totalitarians wish?!!

See also, "

Cartoon Credit: Michael Ramirez at Investor's Business Daily.


Dennis said...

The sadness here for me is the progress we could have made given an open and free exchange of ideas and information. Suffice it to say that information has to be open, widely shared, and credible. Without this no scientist or layman can utilize this information to make those leaps ahead in progress that benefit all mankind.
Also we could have done it without the damage done by these people.

Rich Casebolt said...

Climaquiddick is proof positive of what I have asserted for a long time ...

... that greed and self-serving agendas are not the exclusive purview of those whose publicly-stated intention is to make a profit ...

... that even "non-profit" entities like the scientific, academic, and social-activist communities, and our various levels of government, can become environments for the expression and expansion of self-serving agendas that run counter to the public interest ...

... and therefore such as these are not inherently more noble than those engaged in free enterprise, which is what the statists keep wanting us to believe in order to enable their expansion.

The same goes for the perceived superiority of the "secular" over the "spiritual" ... for the zeal with which the participants in Climaquiddick were willing to fold/spindle/mutilate the evidence to preserve their belief system at all costs beats anything I've seen coming out of even the most fundamentalist communities in Christianity ... for at least the latter admits when they're operating on faith. OTOH, the behavior of the former smacks of the behavior you see in cults.

These inconsistencies in the Leftist/statist position need to be articulated repeatedly ... because years of deference to the conventional wisdom of our elites have led many to believe that the "non-profit" and "secular" are inherently more noble than the profit-making and spiritual, respectively ... and these beliefs must be debunked and discredited in order to reinforce the efforts underway to preserve our liberty, in the face of those who now are trying to Save the Legacy of Woodstock Nation by imposing it upon us all.

Dennis said...

Well stated Rich. Profit by any other name is still profit.