sda2.jpg

June 19, 2007

The Sound Of Settled Science

One of these is not like the other.

britta.jpg

The Briffa data deletions;

"If a practising scientist selected a 1987 data set over more recent versions, failed to cite it correctly, altered the appearance of the data without a clear explanation and didn’t include the data from the last 20 years then I think we’d all be asking serious questions about their professionalism."

Read the whole thing - or as much as you still can. Note at the end that the IPCC forced the deletion of the embarrassing content.

More detailed discussion of Briffa.

Posted by Kate at June 19, 2007 10:27 AM
Comments

"Ok everyone, what do we need to cut out of this graph to fit our theory? Briffa post 1960? Make it happen. What? No no no, no need to worry about scientific method. We are after more grant money here, not something as blase as the truth."

Posted by: Jim at June 19, 2007 12:38 PM

Mann, IPCC, Gore, Strong, Kyoto.

Ever get the feeling this may be leading to 'The Mother Of All Lawsuits ??

The needless fear being instilled in our public school students could be one of many claims, IMO.

Posted by: ron in kelowna at June 19, 2007 12:39 PM

Nothing like skewing data sets when they are "INCONVENIENT TRUTHS".

Isn't that right Goracle?

Science as predetermined outcomes.

And now for an introduction to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

It's a good thing Prime Minister Stephen Harper has alloted $9.2 billion in Science & Tech funding so we can get away from this patent idiocy.


Cheers :)

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht BGS, PDP, CFP

Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion

Knecht Rupprecht Division

Hans Corps

1st Saint Nicolaas Army

Army Group “True North”

Posted by: Hans Rupprecht at June 19, 2007 12:57 PM

Nothing like lies and propaganda to further your left-wing agendas.

Scum. There day will come.

Posted by: Warwick at June 19, 2007 1:01 PM

It's not science it's politics...waddaya expet from politicians with a science degree?

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at June 19, 2007 1:02 PM

It's not science it's politics...waddaya expect from politicians with a science degree?

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at June 19, 2007 1:02 PM

Hello Darkness My Old Friend,
The Goreacle Says the World Will End...

Posted by: Doug at June 19, 2007 1:27 PM

I was polled by environics yesterday and it went something like this:

Poller: How worried are you about environmental issues?

Me: Not at all worried, I was outside earlier today and the Earth looked just fine to me.

Poller: What is the most important environmental benefit to having government designated green space around Ontario's Golden Horseshoe?

Me: No benefit.

Poller: We can't except that as an answer!

Me: If you already know the answers why are you asking me these questions?

Posted by: Brian S. at June 19, 2007 1:31 PM

[ The world will end in 2060, according to Newton.

Luckily for modern scientists in awe of his achievements, Newton based this figure on religion rather than reasoning.

In a letter from 1704 which has gone on show in Jerusalem's Hebrew University, Newton uses the Bible's Book of Daniel to calculate the date for the Apocalypse. ]thisislondon.co.uk

//www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23401099-details/The+world+will+end+in+2060%2C+according+to+Newton/article.do

So, ya see, 'Big Al' you are nothing new. The world has already been forcast(TWN) to end ---- many times already :)

Only difference now is the Prophets do not use a Bible, they use a Brible ----- falsified data and carbon-credits.

Posted by: ron in kelowna at June 19, 2007 1:35 PM

Hehe ... I like the squabbling in the comments that follow his post!
Some of the products of our liberalised educational system are just priceless.

Posted by: OMMAG at June 19, 2007 1:42 PM

The deletion of the data is very strange, especially since the other data sources support the authors' model quite well. I have read literally hundreds of scientific papers during my career as a geologist and invariably, the approach to discordant data has been to report it and then attempt to explain why it doesn't undermine the model proposed. It is even more unconventional to report part of a data set, but not the whole of it. Either the data is credible, in which case you must include all of it and explain the discordance or it is poor data and you don't include any of it.

Posted by: RM at June 19, 2007 2:06 PM

Anyody else fall asleep while trying to read this post? From what I did manage to digest, I'd say that some scientists get their data the same way politicians do. Eenie, meenie, minie...

BTW Hans, I much prefer the Robertson-Schrödinger relation to Heisenberg. ;-)

Posted by: Texas Canuck at June 19, 2007 2:11 PM

and for more fun, read the June 18th entry that links the Nifong fiasco with the same kind of fraud that promotes global warming.

I especially like the line where Dr. Mann, father of the infamous Hockey Stick, now sends his lawyer to answer Congressional questions . . . . if ya can't take the heat, take yourself out of the global warming Kyoto ponzi scheme.


http://www.climateaudit.org/

Posted by: Fred at June 19, 2007 2:13 PM

Texas Canuck:

Yes and where did Schrödinger's cat get to anyway?

Do you get Niels "Bohr'ed" by quantum mechanics?

I am still defending against those vicious Danes, exhibiting Viking tendencies, trying to invade Hans Island!!

I am in the midst of finding them an orthogonal world per the Copenhagen interpretation!

Cheers :)

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht BGS, PDP, CFP

Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion

Knecht Rupprecht Division

Hans Corps

1st Saint Nicolaas Army

Army Group “True North”

Posted by: Hans Rupprecht at June 19, 2007 2:53 PM

Waiting for the day when all of these weasels get charged with the biggest fraud in history and are prosecuted and convicted accordingly.

Ron in kelowna,

Just read a book by Frank J. Tipler, professor of mathematical physics at Tulane University and he claims that many phycisists also believe the world is going to end around the same time as Newton (2050), due to a combination of events including a singularity in space/time.

Posted by: irwin daisy at June 19, 2007 2:53 PM

Texas Canuck, will you wake up when Gore and the boys come to take away your lifestyle. The 'stick' underpins their whole warming calamity claim :)

Posted by: ron in kelowna at June 19, 2007 2:56 PM

Then of course, there's this:

http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/saisons/image_e.html?img=sfe1t_s

Posted by: Wallen at June 19, 2007 3:27 PM

let's raise the level of discourse. liar, liar pants on fire.

Posted by: jmorrison at June 19, 2007 3:39 PM

And then Steve McIntyre says this:

Does your work disprove global warming?

We have not made such a claim.

Cherry pick all you want Kate.

Posted by: Wallen at June 19, 2007 3:42 PM

So environment Canada is correct 49% of the time in its 3 month forecasts.....which is why I get the farmer's almanac. Same level of accuracy. For winter cold predictions I check the size of my neighbour's woodpile.

Posted by: Buglady at June 19, 2007 3:48 PM

There is no scientific project immune from climate change

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6768821.stm

For Professor Paul Tyler, a marine biologist, the expedition is a chance to establish a baseline of data about this undersea world - so the effects of climate change can be assessed.

Climate change will impact even remote ecosystems
"We've seen signs of change at the surface and in other parts of the deep ocean at 5,000m; so we need to see what's changing here.

"There is nowhere on the planet that is immune from climate change."

Posted by: Wimpy Canadian at June 19, 2007 4:05 PM

And more about the fraudulent Mann hockey stick graph here:
http://tinyurl.com/2wsy9s

All in a Good Cause
By Orson Scott Card March 4, 2007; First appeared in print in The Rhinoceros Times, Greensboro, NC

Posted by: andycanuck at June 19, 2007 6:22 PM

Kinda makes one wonder just what's included ( as in deleted ) , from previous IPPC reports and summaries . Nothing like making the crime fit the punishment .

Posted by: Bill D.Cat at June 19, 2007 10:25 PM

Sorry , IPCC , of course .

Posted by: Bill D.Cat at June 19, 2007 10:30 PM

That graf kind of reminds you of the opening to THE OUTER LIMETS. THERES NOTHING WRONG WITH YOUR TELEVIOSION SET WE ARE CONTROLING TRANSMITION WE WILL CONTROL THE HORIZONTAL WE WILL CONTROL THE VERTICAL WE CALL ROLL THE PICTURE IF YOU LIKE WE CAN BROING UP THE VOLUME OR TUNE IT TO A WHISPER WE CAN TUNE IP TO A SOFT BLUR OR SHARPEN IT TO CRYSTAL CLARITY FOR THE NEXT 60 MINUTES WE WILL TAKE YOU FROM THE INTER MOST MIND TO THE OUTER LIMETS

Posted by: spurwing plover at June 20, 2007 12:54 AM

Way to go Buglady Ya can't get much more scientific than that.Probably more accurate than cbc fer sure.Beautiful out here on the east coast taday.

Posted by: madasl at June 20, 2007 6:41 AM

If any of this is true why is David Suzuki able to make the statement that of 958 peer reviewed articles published in major science journals over the last 5 years not one article disputed the human impact on global warming?

Posted by: adrian smits at June 20, 2007 4:17 PM
Site
Meter