Climategate: The Little Scandal That Couldn't

[thatguyoverthere]

It’s been nearly 9 months since private emails from prominent climate scientists were hacked, stolen and anonymously posted on the web, sparking the controversy popularly known as “Climategate”. For some people, “Climategate” proved conclusively that global warming was a hoax. It was alleged that two scientists, Phil Jones and Michael Mann, by their reluctance to share data with hostile critics and the use of the words “trick” and “hide the decline” when presenting data about tree rings, had perpetrated one of the greatest frauds of all time.

To date, it appears “Climategate” hasn’t caused any scientific organization anywhere in the world to change its position on climate change. Instead, some have actually reaffirmed their positions. Furthermore, out of 6 known completed investigations into “Climategate”, all 6 have exonerated the scientists in question.

Some people out there might say that all those investigations were merely whitewashes, and all those organizations reaffirming their positions in the wake of “Climategate” just greedy scientists sticking together and trying to protect their grant money. If that’s so, then one is forced to conclude that in the minds of climate change deniers there are no scientific organizations that can be trusted, and that there are no investigatory bodies that can fairly verify the existence of what some deniers thought of as not just a smoking gun, but a “mushroom cloud” of proof that global warming is a hoax.

INVESTIGATIONS

The results of all 6 known completed investigations into “Climategate”:

Factcheck

In late November 2009, more than 1,000 e-mails between scientists at the Climate Research Unit of the U.K.’s University of East Anglia were stolen and made public by an as-yet-unnamed hacker. Climate skeptics are claiming that they show scientific misconduct that amounts to the complete fabrication of man-made global warming. We find that to be unfounded.

“Climategate” | FactCheck.org

-

Associated Press

E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

Review: Climate e-mails petty, not fraudulent - U.S. news - Environment - Climate Change - msnbc.com

-

House of Commons Science and Technology Committee

The focus on Professor Jones and CRU has been largely misplaced. On the accusations relating to Professor Jones's refusal to share raw data and computer codes, we consider that his actions were in line with common practice in the climate science community... In addition, insofar as we have been able to consider accusations of dishonesty—for example, Professor Jones's alleged attempt to "hide the decline"—we consider that there is no case to answer. Within our limited inquiry and the evidence we took, the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact. We have found no reason in this unfortunate episode to challenge the scientific consensus as expressed by Professor Beddington, that "global warming is happening [and] that it is induced by human activity"

House of Commons - The disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia - Science and Technology Committee

-

Science Assessment Panel

We saw no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit and had it been there we believe that it is likely that we would have detected it. Rather we found a small group of dedicated if slightly disorganised researchers who were ill-prepared for being the focus of public attention. As with many small research groups their internal procedures were rather informal.

http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/...statements/SAP

-

Pennsylvania State University

The Investigatory Committee, after careful review of all available evidence, determined that there is no substance to the allegation against Dr. Michael E. Mann, Professor, Department of Meteorology, The Pennsylvania State University. More specifically, the Investigatory Committee determined that Dr. Michael E. Mann did not engage in, nor did he participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions that seriously deviated from accepted practices within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research, or other scholarly activities.

The decision of the Investigatory Committee was unanimous.

http://live.psu.edu/fullimg/userpics...ion_Report.pdf

-

Climate Change Email Review

We went through this very carefully and we concluded that these behaviors did not damage our judgment of the integrity, the honesty, the rigor with which they had operated as scientists...

'Climategate' review clears scientists of dishonesty - CNN.com

-

POSITIONS

Some statements by scientific organizations and groups regarding climate change following “Climategate”:

American Meteorological Society

Impact of CRU Hacking on the AMS Statement on Climate Change
AMS Headquarters has received several inquiries asking if the material made public following the hacking of e-mails and other files from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia has any impact on the AMS Statement on Climate Change, which was approved by the AMS Council in 2007 and represents the official position of the Society. The AMS Statement on Climate Change continues to represent the position of the AMS.

Impact of CRU Hacking on the AMS Statement on Climate Change

-

American Geophysical Union

AGU reaffirms the position statement approved by AGU Council in 2007. This statement is based on the large body of scientific evidence that Earth's climate is warming and that human activity is a contributing factor. Nothing in the University of East Anglia hacked e-mails represents a significant challenge to that body of scientific evidence.

AGU News: AGU Statement Regarding the Recent Release of E-mails

-

Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change

Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) firmly stands behind the conclusions of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, the community of researchers and its individuals providing the scientific basis, and the procedures of IPCC Assessments.

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/presentations...nt04122009.pdf

-

American Association for the Advancement of Science

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has reaffirmed the position of its Board of Directors and the leaders of 18 respected organizations, who concluded based on multiple lines of scientific evidence that global climate change caused by human activities is now underway, and it is a growing threat to society.

AAAS - AAAS News Release - "AAAS Reaffirms Statements on Climate Change and Integrity"

-
United Kingdom scientific community

We, members of the UK science community, have the utmost confidence in the observational evidence for global warming and the scientific basis for concluding that it is due primarily to human activities. The evidence and the science are deep and extensive. They come from decades of painstaking and meticulous research, by many thousands of scientists across the world who adhere to the highest levels of professional integrity. That research has been subject to peer review and publication, providing traceability of the evidence and support for the scientific method. The science of climate change draws on fundamental research from an increasing number of disciplines, many of which are represented here. As professional scientists, from students to senior professors, we uphold the findings of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, which concludes that "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal" and that "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations".

Met Office: Statement from the UK science community

-

All 6 completed investigations have cleared the scientists of falsifying data. As far as I can tell, no scientific organizations anywhere in the world have changed their positions on climate change as a result of “Climategate”.

I’d like to explore “Climategate” as I think it relates to the mind of the climate change denier. Trying to understand the thought processes of the so-called “skeptics” is something that has fascinated me for years now. The following 2 statements I believe show a striking and noteworthy example of the ways deniers typically approach discussions on climate change:

Originally Posted by JaJae

It's also important to note that while the glaciers are melting at the north pole they're expanding at the south pole at what some consider to be an alarming rate...

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Ice in the north pole is shrinking and ice in antartica is growing at an alarming rate, yet all the media focuses on is the north pole. Fantastic...

The above bolded statements are lies. No one says Antarctic is is growing at an “alarming” rate. It is both sad and amusing to recognize the irony when the people who most loudly decry global warming “alarmism” end up using the very word “alarming” in an absolutely false context.

If any one of the investigative organizations listed above had come to a different conclusion about the conduct of Mann and Jones, you could be reasonably certain that the “skeptics” would have been here on the forum shouting it from the rooftops at the top of their lungs. There would have been no room for skepticism in their world view then. Any investigative body that would have found Mann or Jones guilty of falsifying data would have instantly become above reproach. The same phenomenon happened during the whole recent “global cooling” fracas, and can be demonstrated in the lies quoted above about Antarctic ice growing at an “alarming” rate. You see, in the climate change deniers world, when the scientists predict cooling, suddenly their computer models become accurate. If “some” mysterious individuals say the south pole ice is expanding at an “alarming” rate, magically their measurements reflect reality and their sounding of an alarm shouldn’t be questioned. Climate change deniers believe in science only when it supports their case.

Now, take a moment to imagine that all 6 investigations had found Mann and Jones guilty of falsifying evidence and making up global warming. After something like that, it would be ridiculous for anyone to come into a forum like this anywhere on the Internet, dismiss each and every investigation as a conspiracy, and attempt to argue that some sort of nefarious activity didn’t happen. Any defense of Mann and Jones would forever be constantly undermined by the 6 unanimous conclusions of fraud, and rightly so.

Looking at the results of the 6 investigations into “Climategate”, it seems that the worst the scientists did was forward scientific articles to one another without getting the permission of the authors of the articles. What the scientists did not do was hack into a computer to illegally obtain those articles. What the scientists also did not do was to forward the articles while actively trying to keep their identities secret in order to elude responsibility for what they knew to be criminal actions.

In short: In “Climategate” what the hackers did was worse than what the scientists did.

If the deniers are okay with stealing, if they’re fine with invasion of privacy, if they think that criminals should be allowed to lurk in anonymity instead of facing the same scrutiny as those accused, if they’re comfortable lying, if they think that scientific research is only reliable when the conclusions line up with their pre-established beliefs, if they choose to ignore the exonerations of scientists in favor of distortions of science, why should anyone trust anything at all that they have to say on the subject of climate change? Haven’t they already proven themselves completely untrustworthy? Their goal is not truth, otherwise they wouldn’t lie and ally themselves with anonymous thieves. Their goal is not fairness, otherwise they would follow up on their own threads and broadcast the results of investigations with the same zeal that they disseminated the accusations of misconduct.

Maybe global warming is a hoax, and maybe every scientific and academic organization in the world is in on the scam. I dunno. But, I do know this: If global warming truly is a hoax, then it seems to me this particular conspiracy has now triumphed completely and utterly by surviving “Climategate”, a.k.a. the “final nail in coffin”.

A new study of climate scientists' opinions shows 97 percent agree that global warming is driven mainly by human activity - emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Global warming? 97 percent of experts agree - KansasCity.com

[stolz25]

It didn't prove global warming was a hoax, it just proves that global warming believers are willing to manipulate data they don't like.

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by stolz25

It didn't prove global warming was a hoax, it just proves that global warming believers are willing to manipulate data they don't like.

That's the thing, none of the data was manipulated in any way.

[stolz25]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

That's the thing, none of the data was manipulated in any way.

Then what's the issue? If it can be proven the data is valid it doesn't matter. Of course as I understand it the data was already being questioned.

As an aside, polls show that the more a person knows about global warming the less they tend to care about it.

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by stolz25

Then what's the issue? If it can be proven the data is valid it doesn't matter. Of course as I understand it the data was already being questioned.

As an aside, polls show that the more a person knows about global warming the less they tend to care about it.

That's exactly the thing. There is no issue. When the accounts were hacked, those who are strongly opposed to the notion of global warming jumped on it to search for anything to show that the scientists were in some sort of conspiracy to promote global warming to get grants. The results of the investigation show that there was no such manipulation of data, and that the findings still hold.

Now, on to the next part

As with any scientific research, nothing is conclusive until put into law. So yes the data is questioned and should be. However there was no intent to decieve and the data gathered was done via honest means and done appropriately.

[Donkey®]

There have been 4 or 5 separate investigations (including the US Government) into "climategate" and all have found nothing was forged or lied about...no data was messed with.


Wonder if Fox News reported this?

[gipper]

Very cold here the past week or so. Lows in the teens and snow. Damn. If only global warming was real.

Do you think there's a single person left out there who's still stupid enough to believe in global warming?

When it's hot, the greenies tell you it's proof of dangerous climate change. But when it's cold, they tell you it's just 'weather'

How dumb must you be to be a silly tree hugging warmist?

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by gipper

Very cold here the past week or so. Lows in the teens and snow. Damn. If only global warming was real.

Do you think there's a single person left out there who's still stupid enough to believe in global warming?

When it's hot, the greenies tell you it's proof of dangerous climate change. But when it's cold, they tell you it's just 'weather'

How dumb must you be to be a silly tree hugging warmist?

When your weather has anything to do with global warming let us know.

[gipper]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

When your weather has anything to do with global warming let us know.

You might be the last person in the whole world who still believes in global warming? You are a dying breed my four legged friend.

I sure will be saddened when you leave us. They will put on your headstone "Here lays the last F**L who chose to believe in a LIE."

Sad because you are a dying breed. And, I being somewhat sentimental, am always disheartened when something comes to an end. Even as silly and stupid as is global warming....

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by gipper

You might be the last person in the whole world who still believes in global warming? You are a dying breed my four legged friend.

I sure will be saddened when you leave us. They will put on your headstone "Here lays the last F**L who chose to believe in a LIE."

Sad because you are a dying breed. And, I being somewhat sentimental, am always disheartened when something comes to an end. Even as silly and stupid as is global warming....

Way to use science to prove your theory.

[The Esteemed Gentleman]

Originally Posted by gipper

Very cold here the past week or so. Lows in the teens and snow. Damn. If only global warming was real.

Do you think there's a single person left out there who's still stupid enough to believe in global warming?

When it's hot, the greenies tell you it's proof of dangerous climate change. But when it's cold, they tell you it's just 'weather'

How dumb must you be to be a silly tree hugging warmist?

There is no scientific debate on this issue. There is an overwhelming and broad scientific consensus that climate change is real and is a problem. What you decide to believe in the face of facts is your choice, but the fact is that there is only a very small minority of climate scientists who adopt your view.

The only real debate on this issue is political: there are deniers (like yourself); there are believers who do not think action is needed because the earth will correct itself; and there are believers who think human action is needed to reverse our detrimental effects on the environment.

Even conservative scientists are on board:

Emanuel sees himself as a conservative. He believes marriage is between a man and a woman. He backs a strong military. He almost always votes Republican and admires Ronald Reagan.

Emanuel is also a highly regarded professor of atmospheric science at MIT. And based on his work on hurricanes and the research of his peers, Emanuel has concluded that the scientific data show a powerful link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.

"There was never a light-bulb moment but a gradual realization based on the evidence," Emanuel said. "I became convinced by the basic physics and by the better and better observation of the climate that it was changing and it was a risk that had to be considered."

[s]cientists such as Emanuel rattle the political pigeonholes. Some are speaking out, using their expertise and conservative credentials to challenge what many researchers consider widespread distortions about climate change.

Texas Tech atmospheric scientist Katharine Hayhoe is an evangelical Christian who travels widely talking to conservative audiences and wrote a book with her husband, a pastor and former climate change denier, explaining climate change to skeptics.

A physicist by training, John Cook is an evangelical Christian who runs the website skepticalscience.com, which seeks to debunk climate change deniers' arguments. Barry Bickmore is a Mormon, a professor of geochemistry at Brigham Young University and the blogger behind Anti-Climate Change Extremism in Utah, where he recently rebuked Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) for his climate views and posted editorials mentioning his Republican affiliation.

Your problem is you are letting your far-right-wing ideology trump simple scientific fact. Unfortunately, there are more and more people like yourself in the GOP camp, which is why people like myself and Mr. Emanuel are leaving the GOP:

Although more scientists are pushing back against climate change denial, Emanuel is not convinced it can help, given the corporate interests and the weight of the GOP arrayed against them. All of this is making him reconsider his political loyalties: For the first time in his life, he voted for a Democrat, Barack Obama, in 2008.

"I am a rare example of a Republican scientist, but I am seriously thinking about changing affiliation owing to the Republicans' increasingly anti-science stance," he wrote in an e-mail. "The best way to elevate the number of Republican scientists is to get Republican politicians to stop beating up on science and scientists."

Keep up the good work, Gip. You'll be the "Party of Nobody" soon enough.

[Salty Dog]

Originally Posted by gipper

You might be the last person in the whole world who still believes in global warming? You are a dying breed my four legged friend.

I sure will be saddened when you leave us. They will put on your headstone "Here lays the last F**L who chose to believe in a LIE."

Sad because you are a dying breed. And, I being somewhat sentimental, am always disheartened when something comes to an end. Even as silly and stupid as is global warming....

The fact that you're blindly saluting such falsehood to what contradicts 95% of what the Earth's scientists all agree is happening (Climate Change) shows how vastly warped your logic on simple scientific research is.

Bill Nye, ya know, the Science Guy? Probably one of the best educators in modern science stands behind climate change and how simple to understand it is that we are contributing to altering the planet's weather.

Your lack of reasoning in this case is no better than you having the argument that throwing trash into the local creek won't pollute the water or the inhabitants who live or consume the water.

Frankly, you're unAmerican for your stupidity. Then again, alot of Americans are clueless and stupid. You've found your spot on the carpet. Pick your nose and have fun.

[gipper]

It is really sad that so many people can be so easily duped. If only you would educate yourself instead of following the herd like sheep.

Read this simple short paragraph that completely blows up AGW altogether.

The CO2 that is supposed to warm the earth is mostly in the upper atmosphere, where it is very cold. Yet that CO2 is said to warm the earth. How can heat flow from a cold body to a hot one? Strange thermodynamics! 1st law - you can't get more energy out of a system than you put into it. Second law - hotter bodies heat cooler bodies not vice versa.

And this applies too...

Global warming has taken the place of Communism as an absurdity that "liberals" will defend to the death regardless of the evidence showing its folly. Evidence never has mattered to real Leftists and their useful idiot followers.

[The Esteemed Gentleman]

It's simple science Gipper. You throw enough heat-trapping elements into the atmosphere via industry, cars, etc., they will react chemically with the atmosphere and change its composition. That change is resulting in the trapping of warmth that would otherwise escape into space. This will gradually warm the planet and generate changes in weather patterns, temperatures, water levels, and other elements of our climate. It's pretty straightforward and you do not need to be a rocket scientist to understand it. Denying this is akin to suggesting the world is flat. I don't expect you to change your mind, though; you've made it clear in various posts that you are anti-all education you do not provide yourself in complete isolation from schools and universities.

[gipper]

Pretend for a moment that the discredited theory about human CO2 emissions making it be hot out is valid. What would be the main factor in causing this meteorological oppression of discomforted polar bears? The answer: hysterical opposition to nuclear energy.

We haven't started a new nuclear plant since 1974 because Jane Fonda wouldn't like it. Consequently, nuclear power only accounts for 20% of our electricity; 71% is produced from fossil fuels.

The graph below compares our actual CO2 output in blue with the higher output we would produce if our handful of nuclear plants were replaced with coal plants in green. In red we see the lower output if planned nuclear plants had been built instead of strangled in red tape by moonbats. The purple line indicates the still lower output if instead of wringing our hands about the fanciful "China syndrome," we had been responsible enough to build a nuclear infrastructure like energy-exporting France did:


Obviously our allegedly harmful carbon emissions would be drastically lower if instead of being put in charge of our energy policy, Hanoi Jane had been shot for treason, as she so richly deserved, back in 1972. More importantly, energy and therefore everything else would be much cheaper, and we wouldn't find ourselves up to our necks in the hostile and unstable Middle East.
Anti-Nuclear Power Hysteria and its Significant Contribution to Global Warming | Watts Up With That?

Crazy leftists always do stupid sh*t and never accept the consequences of their ignorant policies.

[illavbill]

Originally Posted by gipper

Crazy leftists always do stupid sh*t and never accept the consequences of their ignorant policies.

Ughh you honestly don't understand basic science. You're one of those "special breed" conservatives.

[Salty Dog]

Originally Posted by illavbill

Ughh you honestly don't understand basic science. You're one of those "special breed" conservatives.

I'm sure he'd declare the 1960s space race a leftist PR stunt had we not been racing the Soviet Union.

[gipper]

You silly warmers never give up do you? No matter the facts and the overwhelming evidence disproving your kooky religious like faith in a hoax...

I just wish I could figure out a way to take all your money...cause that should be easy...

I wonder how foolish you will consider yourself once you actually learn the truth.

From the Great Professor Hal Lewis...please read and comprehend...if you can...

‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
Posted on April 4, 2011 by stevengoddard
Can’t repeat this often enough.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare.
As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’ | Real Science

[The Esteemed Gentleman]

Originally Posted by gipper

From the Great Professor Hal Lewis...please read and comprehend...if you can...

I thought you hated professors? (Or was it just professors who disagree with you?)

Also, can you please explain why you think it is okay - the issue of global climate change notwithstanding - that humans toss their garbage into the oceans, rivers, lakes, and land of the earth where ever they want, and why such behavior should not be prevented? Why is it okay to plunder all of the earth's resources? Would you like the entire planet to have a covering of smog like Beijing? Or is the gigantic omnipresent cloud of toxic gas that hangs over the Chinese capitol another "myth" that you know the truth about? (Even though we have pictures of it.) Would you like the entire planet to end up looking like the STAR WARS version of the planet Coruscant? Or is it okay to prevent unmitigated development of the planet serving our own selfish needs?

Things you need to think about.

[gipper]

Originally Posted by The Esteemed Gentleman

I thought you hated professors? (Or was it just professors who disagree with you?)

Also, can you please explain why you think it is okay - the issue of global climate change notwithstanding - that humans toss their garbage into the oceans, rivers, lakes, and land of the earth where ever they want, and why such behavior should not be prevented? Why is it okay to plunder all of the earth's resources? Would you like the entire planet to have a covering of smog like Beijing? Or is the gigantic omnipresent cloud of toxic gas that hangs over the Chinese capitol another "myth" that you know the truth about? (Even though we have pictures of it.) Would you like the entire planet to end up looking like the STAR WARS version of the planet Coruscant? Or is it okay to prevent unmitigated development of the planet serving our own selfish needs?

Things you need to think about.

Oh please...stop thinking with your ass and use your brain...if it hasn't been too negatively impacted by all that drug use.

Your post has nothing to do with the hoax you have chosen to believe other than it proves you are NOT thinking. And, it is representative of how many people believe the lie that is global warming. They just FEEL it is right...think man!!!

You think because there IS pollution and because we USE the Earth's resources, global warming must be TRUE. Ugh...And, you say I do not know science.

Is it any wonder some are so easily duped by this hoax? I must admit I admire Al Gore's ability to take money from people like you while promoting a silly lie. I am working on an idea to do the same thing.