Thursday, December 3, 2009

Global Warming Hucksters Continue Self-Destruction

At the Times of London, "Climategate: Phil Jones Accused of Making Error of Judgment by Colleague":

Prof Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) has been accused of manipulating climate change data following thousands of leaked documents that suggested academics delete sensitive emails to evade Freedom of Information requests from climate change sceptics.

Prof Jones, who has denied altering figures,
has since said he would stand down from his post while an independent review is carried out.

One of the scientists to whom the emails were addressed, Professor Michael Mann, the Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University has moved to distance himself from some of the comments in the emails that suggest scientists did not want the IPCC, the UN body charged with monitoring climate change, to consider studies that challenged the view global warming was genuine and man-made.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4's The World Tonight, Prof Mann said: "I can't put myself in the mind of the person who wrote that email and sent it. I in no way endorse what was in that email."

Prof Mann also said he could not "justify" a request from Prof Jones that he should delete some of his own emails to prevent them from being seen by outsiders.

"I can't justify the action, I can only speculate that he was feeling so under attack that he made some poor decisions frankly and I think that's clear."

Prof Mann then argued however that there was "absolutely no evidence" that he too had manipulated data, while he also said "I don't believe that any of my colleagues have done that".

While climate change sceptics argue the emails are proof scientists have been hiding evidence of temperature decline, Prof Mann said he believed the incident "false controversy" manufactured by sceptics "to distract the public and to distract policy-makers to try to thwart efforts next week in

"The emails are genuine and have been misrepresented, cherry-picked, mined for single words and phrases that can be completely twisted to imply the opposite of what was actually being said, manufactured controversy and the timing of it is not coincidental as far as I'm concerned," he added.
Michael Mann is a total fraud, a bloody liar. And behold as the edifice of deception among climate "scientists" is being ripped apart, much by way of an intensifying self-destruction.

See more on Michael Mann at the hoax-portal Climate Progress, "
Michael Mann updates the world on the latest climate science and responds to the illegally hacked emails."

See also, the Washington Times, "
Gore cancels personal appearance in Copenhagen."

Plus, from Rasmussen Reports, "
Americans Skeptical of Science Behind Global Warming."

Hat Tips:
Climate Depot and Memeorandum.


Left Coast Rebel said...

Great aggregation of information here, keep up the great work!

Cargosquid said...

Where's my popcorn? Bwahahahahaha!

Dennis said...

There is some talk that James Hansen may be the person who leaked the emails. True or not some of what he is saying is diametrically opposed to his former opinions. He seems to be hoping for a big failure in Copenhagen.
It would be nice to assume that when Hansen saw the emails that his scientific background caused him to see AGW in a very different light, but one will have to wait for the answer to that.
One should NEVER trust computer models as an answer to any of the issues we deal. Computer models are a tool that can be used for good or bad depending on the agenda of those involved. They are far too susceptible to human frailties and manipulation.
When I went to college it was called Statistical Inference not statistical fact. The emphasis was on INFERENCE.
That we can use statistics, given the unknown variability underlying them, for our only/or main decision making tool seems to stretch credibility. It is indicative of what happens when access to monies gets involved in almost any issue, but here it only succeeded in turning climate sciences into climate politics.
The damage done to science will play out over the next few years, probably to its detriment. Trust once lost is very hard to regain.

Dennis said...

If true, the collapse of emission permits on the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) from $7.40 per ton to $0.10 -$0.15 is something that would strike at the fortunes of all these AGW frauds.