The auto industry’s green efforts to meet strict new mpg rules are the dominant theme inside this year’s Detroit Auto Show. But outside Cobo Convention Center, it’s not just the frigid winter temperatures that have cast doubt on the global warming science driving the biggest regulatory challenge to the industry in a generation. E-mails leaked from the world’s top climatology center have put the environmental community in turmoil with allegations that scientific data has been doctored and debate suppressed. The uproar has provoked calls for a congressional investigation and cast doubt on auto mpg rules. Scandal? Or sideshow?
The issue cries out for debate at the world’s largest auto gathering, and The Detroit News-WJR Radio have assembled a world-class panel representing the automotive, scientific, and political communities to argue the facts and discuss its impact on the auto market...
It's open to the public. Details at the link.
Related - "Not entirely the “death of global warming” as many have claimed – what happened with Climategate is much more nuanced and exponentially more interesting than the headlines convey. What was triggered at this blog was the death of unconditional trust in the scientific peer review process, and the maturing of a new movement – that of peer-to-peer review."
h/t James
bring back the "454"!
CO2 AGW is not dead because it is a religion/belief system. Many of it's proponents will go to their grave true believers for a variety of reasons--none scientific.
"The science" has been unwittingly been debunked by it's most prestigious backers.
Simply put and logically it has been proven to be a hoax but the simple logic that if all the evidence was fabricated---hence CO2 AGW does not exist otherwise they would not have to lie.
saquatch
yuppers, and that about sums up my take on kristianity (and most other religions), no logic, no proof, and no reality, but there are those that need to believe because of their own "needs"
True ... AGW is not yet dead , but the US auto industry is hanging on by a thread , and most of the auto industry knows that imposing strict AGW driven rules will basically kill them.
I expect the auto industry will use ClimateGate as a major push-back against Obama's agenda driven green campaign ... they have no other choice.
... and don't talk about the BS of electric cars. In Ontario we barely have enough electricity now and no reserves if millions of electric cars were suddenly plugged into the net.
And does an EV have a heater?
Hey Brian, you think Ontario power is iffy now? Wait until they plug a couple thousand 40 megawatt wind turbines in there.
I consider myself lucky the nearest overhead wire is over two hundred feet from the house. I saw a bird short the lines feeding a hospital in Minnesota one time. Aluminum and copper ran off and splashed on the ground for a good ten minutes. Like water, not like molasses. It was -hot-.
We could see things like that happen on a regular basis every time the breeze kicks up. Twenty miles of transmission line melts and falls on the ground because of a sticky breaker on a wind turbine cluster. Every month.
Now add electric cars... Woohoo! People will be disconnecting and running gasoline generators just to keep the voltage spikes from burning their houses down. Clean air, baby! Yeah!
This morning in the local dinosaur - oil prices will begin to fall because gas consumption in the USA is lower than what was expected.
I think George Carlin nailed it in this piece titled "Saving the Planet". Hope you enjoy it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw
"that of peer-to-peer review."
How about climate whore-to- climate whore review?
(not to denigrate whores.At least they are honest in their job)
This is merely the tip of this "peer-to-peer review" iceberg (
Once, as I and a dozen fellow grad students observed birds in flight, at a distance, and nobody could identify them, I quietly suggested that White Ibises had black wingtips. The group's derision at me having offered an opinion, much less the opinion that a bird called the White Ibis could have black wingtips, was universal. To someone that knows birds, nothing could be more simple than identifying a White Ibis, at a distance; I had previously competed against students that could identify absolutely anything living in or near southern marine environments, down to the tiniest invertebrates. Grad school, however, at a different university, was not a competition; it was a democracy, where the dumbest, wrong idea prevailed.
One fellow student later looked it up; one. She approached me later, privately, and said, "You're right; White Ibises have black wingtips." She said it in a whisper and in a conspiratorial tone.
That was in the late 80s. Imagine, if you can, what it must be like for a biology grad student today to give any inkling that they may believe in limited government or the rights of the individual. It would be almost impossible to even get a place in graduate school; the professors would never allow it, regardless of grades or scores on the Graduate Record Exam.
If we ever clean up our universities, it will take generations to make up for the progress we have lost by advancing our numbskulls.
GYM, to even consider equating the very recent, tyrannical AGW cult and Christianity—which is why we live in a democracy, and, for hundreds of years, have had freedom (even to be an idiot), access to education, and any understanding of treating others as we wish to be treated, etc.—is ignorant in the extreme. (As Penny used to say, “Would you, perchance, be a young person?”)
Considering the altogether dumbed down, vacuous idea you’re trying to float, I’d say you need to really smarten up (if such a change is remotely possible).
"How green will your pony or antelope be? Or your Fiysler?"
Mark
Ottawa
Lookout has a point.
CO2 AGW is totally unlike Judeo/Christianity.
AGW is a belief/system but much like Islam (especially the Wahibist sect). It is has a signifigant political aspect and is also totally intolerant to non-compliance. The treatment and supression of scepticism of CO2 AGW, by it's priesthood is similar.....in principle....at times identical even to violence.
Peer review is still an effective process, I have been on both ends of it. It has faults, it is not infallible, one problem is well exampled by the AGW circus - where reviewers are colluding, and pulication bias is present.
Peer to peer review has been around a long time, and I suggest has actually been around before peer review, formed back during the formation of scientific societies.
In medicine, many a faulty experiment has been refuted by someone else taking another look at the science. This is a good thing, and something the AGW crowd need to embrace as it only improves science.
To my mind peer review is the biggest scam to enter academia. It allows completely unfounded theories to gain respectability before they are even remotely proven or indicated as true.
In engineering it doesn't matter how much peer review is done, if the bridge falls down the 'science' is bad. In medicine no matter how well it is peer reviewed, if the patient dies the 'science' is bad.
In AGW along with all the soft sciences peer review is simply a method of gaining credence so to prevent the theory from being laughed out of existence by the general population.