AN
INCONVENIENT TRUTH
"CHERRY-PICKED" DATA
By: Geoff Metcalf
"One of the common failings among honorable
people is a failure to appreciate how thoroughly dishonorable some other people can be,
and how dangerous it is to trust them." -- Thomas
Sowell
The brouhaha over the recent epiphany regarding junk science and climate change
duplicity is a big deal.
Science is supposed to be all about facts, evidence and proof. The
scientific method that kids are taught at an early age is explained as "A method of
discovering knowledge about the natural world based in making falsifiable predictions
(hypotheses), testing them empirically, and developing peer-reviewed theories that best
explain the known data." It is not supposed to be a sporting event of
us versus them or team competition.
Reportedly, computer hackers obtained some 160 megabytes of emails from the Climate
Research Unit a University in England. The e-mails were exchanges between researchers and
policy advocates who shared a similar gospel according to them. Shockingly, authorities
were discussing the "destruction and hiding of data that did not support
global-warming claims". HELL-0!?!?
Protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, exchanges about "the trick of
adding in the real temps to each series
to hid the decline (in temperature)," is
way egregious. Professor Phil Jones, head of the Climate Research Unit and professor
Michael E. Mann at Penn State are now tap dancing.
Mann, in an effort to defend the indefensible, told the New York Times,
"scientists often use the word trick to refer to a good way to solve a
problem and not something secret. Yeah
right!
There is a boatload of damning evidence about concealing information that does not
coincide with the gospel according to Al Gore.
Jones went so far as to encourage Mann to delete e-mail exchanges about the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes controversial assessment report.
The rats are scrambling big-time. Jones told Mann, Professor Malcolm Hughes at
University of Arizona and Professor Raymond Bradley of UMass/Amherst, "Im
getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data.
Dont any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information
Act!" Too late pal!
Another co-conspirator at CRU, Professor Tim Osborn, was told by Mann to hide data
because it supports critics of global warming.
Hackers are reprehensible criminals. However, their sins pale in comparison to the
intentional deceit of lofty academics conspiring to delete data that does not conform to
their fantasy hypothesis. Although we only know of the CRU emails and dont know what
we dont know about the broader conspiracy, we do know that facts, evidence, and
documentation that contradicts the global warming theocracy have intentionally been
destroyed, alerted and massaged.
This scandal is scientific fraud of epic proportions.
Conspiracy
Collusion
Illegal destruction of embarrassing data
Organized resistance to disclosure
Manipulation of data
Private acknowledgment of flaws
Ive been grousing about global warming for over a decade. Last year I was
debating the issue with a professor from the University of North Carolina and quoted an
interview I had done years ago with Dr. Fred Singer http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/qa/19633.html
. It was a long interview and rich in data that debunked the gospel according to Al. The
professors refutation consisted of blowing off Singer and "one of those".
Talk about those who dont want to be confused with facts that contradict a
preconceived opinion and prejudice, there it is.
I told Dr.Singer "Im getting the feeling they can manipulate data to get the
results they want? He replied, "I don't think they quite do that." Now we learn,
gosh-oh-gee-golly, that is EXACTLY what they have been doing. |