Ever wonder how the whole global warming scare all came about? As it turns out, the original data used to get us all alarmed is MISSING, and the scientists that first massaged it to ‘prove’ global warming don’t have the original data anymore. What a convenient loss of truth!
You can read the entire story in The Dog Ate Global Warming, written by Patrick J. Michaels, author of Climate of Extremes: Global Warming Science They Don’t Want You to Know. Here’s a money quote from the article:
Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that +/- came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was:
“We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Reread that statement, for it is breathtaking in its anti-scientific thrust. In fact, the entire purpose of replication is to “try and find something wrong.” The ultimate objective of science is to do things so well that, indeed, nothing is wrong….
Roger Pielke Jr., an esteemed professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, then requested the raw data from Jones. Jones responded:
Since the 1980s, we have merged the data we have received into existing series or begun new ones, so it is impossible to say if all stations within a particular country or if all of an individual record should be freely available. Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e., quality controlled and homogenized) data.
Global Warming Alarmism is just one of the manufactured crises of modern day liberal politics. What about the 4000 unborn children killed daily? What about the fact that half of all black American pregnancies end in abortion? Not a crisis?
Ah, yes, the wicked liberals are now responsible for "Global Warming Alarmism"! Coming soon: Science, Evil Liberal Conspiracy."
Here ya go, seeker.
There is a conspiracy of dishonesty and bad science driven by political rather then scientific environmentalism. It's skewed and hurting people. It's a manufactured crisis to drive liberal priorities.
The fact that data is missing? Typical.
What a wacko.
If you think science isn't political you are pretty ignorant of the facts of life, Louis. Everyone knows that the science reflects the money/power. Hitler was a good example, right?
What a wacko.
Ouch. Louis called me a wacko.
haha
Louis your a tard and so is Al Gore lol.
When you want to contract "you are" you should write "you're."
Who's the "tard" now?
you got me Louis, you got me! How stupid of me…
Damn, so much for intelligent conversation.
But I think it *is* damning that the data that started the whole alarm is missing, and current data seems to indicate that we are NOT warming in the last decade or so.
The 'tards' are those who take what political activists say as truth without examining the data themselves.
Agreed "Daniel son" there is so much coruption and too many greedy evil people trying to make a name for themselfs that makes not looking at the data that is shoved down our throats very very dangerous.
I agree chacha.
And, speaking of greedy evil people trying to make a name for themselves, take Patrick J. Michaels (author of the book daniel cites):
Michaels' firm does not disclose who its clients are, but leaked documents have revealed that several were power utilities which operate coal power stations. On a 2007 academic CV, Michaels disclosed that prior to creating his firm he had received funding from the Edison Electric Institute and the Western Fuels Association. He has also been a frequent speaker with leading coal and energy companies as well as coal and other industry lobby groups…
Michaels prominence also led to new funding from fossil fuel interests. In 1991-92 an anonymous donor made of grant of $50,000 to Michaels for his work on climate change, the Edison Electric Institute paid $25,000 between 1992 and 1995 for a literature review of climate change and updates. Western Fuels Association contributed $63,000 for "research on global climate change" and between 1994 $98,000 from Gesamtverband des Deutschen Stenkohlenbergbaus in Germany.[3] As Michaels corporate funding was taking off, in 1994 he founded and is the sole owner of New Hope Environmental Services, which refers to itself as "an advocacy science consulting firm". Aside from publishing the World Climate Report, the firm boasts that its staff often provide testimony to Congress and commentary on climate issues to media outlets.[21].
Writing in Harpers Magazine in 1995, author Ross Gelbspan noted that "Michaels has received more than $115,000 over the last four years from coal and energy interests. World Climate Review, a quarterly he founded that routinely debunks climate concerns, was funded by Western Fuels."[22]
One substantial benefit in having created New Hope Environmental Services was that corporate funders could route financial support for Michaels work via the firm which was under no obligation to disclose who its clients were. After its was created, further corporate funding was noticeably absent from Michaels university curriculum vitae.[3] He continued to attract public funding for projects, such as $195,000 from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality for "research on science and policy on global warming." He also gained $98,000 from the Cato Institute to underwrite the the production of The Satanic Gases: Clearing the Air about Global Warming, a book he co-authored with Robert C. Balling, Jr.[3]
A furor was raised when it was revealed in 2006 that, at customer expense, Patrick Michaels was quietly paid $100,000 by an electric utility, Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA), which burns coal to help confuse the issue of global warming. In a nine-page memo, the general manager of the Colorado-based IREA co-operative, Stanley Lewandowski Jr., railed against the the scientific consensus supporting the need to curb greenhouse gases. The memo, which was circulated in mid-July 2006 to more than 900 members of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, was leaked to ABC News. "We decided to support Dr. Patrick Michaels and his group (New Hope Environmental Services, Inc.) … In February of this year, IREA alone contributed $100,000 to Dr. Michaels." Lewandowski also wrote that IREA had rattled the tin for Michaels amongst other groups and "have obtained additional contributions and pledges for Dr. Michaels group." The memo also reports on others campaigning against taking action to limit climate change. "The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) has been running two ads in ten states that were financed by General Motors and the Ford Motor Company," he wrote.[23] [24]
There's more at the site I linked to. Suffice it to say, this man is not an independent, objective source for climate change information, beholden, as he so obviously is, to special interests whose profit margins depend on continuing to spew carbon into the atmosphere.
This is one thing I've noticed about daniels scientific sources: they are invariably outliers in their profession, fringe or eccentric or with an obviously political/social ax to grind (I've called him before on this regarding homosexuality and evolution studies). Now, dissenters are perfectly fine: they are the gadflies which drive the mainstream to refine and defend its positions. But daniel regards them as the end-all and be-all of the topics at hand, as if a tiny minority always trumps majority and mainstream scientific thought and evidence. Of course, he has to rely on these fringe scientists as his views are so outside mainstream and legitimate thought that he can find no support elsewhere. Regard his posts with skepticism, chacha; research for yourself.
Louis good Post.
Everyone in the end is out to make a name for themself's one way or another. It just comes down if they have evil intentions or how they are willing to accomplish there goals. The right and truthful way or the wrong and evil way.