Climategate

[RDK]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...n-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...idence-of-global-cooling/?feat=home_top5_read

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/27/the-global-cooling-cover-up/?feat=home_top5_read

No doubt most of you have heard of the recent "scandal" in the scientific community involving AGW. Right-wingers have dubbed the incident "Climategate" in an attempt to slander what they view as "Big Science" and believe that this one incident invalidates every other scientific field out there.

This thread is for further discussion of the events surrounding the hacking of the CRU unit's email correspondence at East Anglia University and as a general discussion on the repercussions of the incident.

Note: the sources I have posted are known to have a right-wing bias, as I had trouble finding any independent-minded journalism sources, so be warned before you read them. The original source files can be found here.

Edit: here are some more reliable sources from Scienceblogs, as well as an honest analysis of the original email hack:

http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2009/11/the_hacked_climate_science_ema.php

http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2009/11/hacked_emails_tree-ring_proxie.php

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/11/on_those_stolen_cru_emails.php

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/11/competitive_enterprise_institu.php

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/11/copenhagen_diagnosis.php

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/11/no_bbc_was_not_sent_the_stolen.php

 

[Sucumbio]

At least Al Gore was doing something positive. Now all the naysayers will have plenty of fuel to fire their grim dispositions. I am glad it happened, I suppose. You can't fake science. All you'll end up doing is more harm. At least now any science on the matter that does get done will be so scrutinized that we'll all end up being experts. As for me, I chose long ago to reduce my carbon footprint (even before it was so popularly coined). The smog problem in major cities cannot have been good for the environment. So perhaps the problem is not as catastrophic as CRU was obviously trying to portray for its own purposes. It's still important for the world to get away from using fossil fuels, and to work strongly towards reducing pollution of all types.

 

[Aesir]

http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-vine/how-important-are-those-stolen-climate-e-mails

More stuff on the "climategate" fiasco.

There's no doubt that these scientists may have bordered on an ethical violation, but the right wing seems more inclined to believe this invalidates global warming. Some of the emails as pointed out talk about deniers in such negative light. However think of this way, do you really think biologists have high opinions of Micheal Behe? Of course not.

I'm loving this though, seeing the right wing take these emails and quoting them out of context. They want so hard to believe that Global Warming uses manipulated data. Scientists should take this time now and just completely blow them out of the water. Now that people are questioning the scientific consensus they can reinforce it in the public domain.

 

[Ryan Ludovic]

31,072 scientists and counting have signed a petition saying that

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth. "

If five of those scientists got some MSM time, there would be an interesting result

 

[CRASHiC]

31,072 scientists and counting have signed a petition saying that

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth. "

If five of those scientists got some MSM time, there would be an interesting result

No no no no no. The Debate Hall already looked into this so called petition.

Also, one thing in that video that I found hilarious was John Coleman mentioning a petition signed by 19,000 scientists that global warming is false. I looked up that petition (it has 31,000 signers now). If you look up a lot of the names in that list, you'll find that many of them are not "scientists" at all. A lot of them are just people who have PhDs in social sciences and liberal arts like economics, or political science, or in literature and history and stuff. There are a bunch of doctors and veterinarians on that list, and scientists who are in fields entirely unrelated to global warming/the environment/climatology. There are a number of scientists who have no significant work under their belt; when you google their names, the first result that pops up is the website for the petition (never a good sign). There are a ton of people with no credentials at all, and there are a number of names that are clearly a joke (eg VA senator Robert C. Byrd, who is not a "scientist" in any sense of the word). And then there are a whole slew of other errors that make this thing a complete joke, covered well in this article:
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/new...g/2008/02/19000_scientists_doubt_warming.html

Oh, and here is another source on the Climate Gate scandal, this time from a liberal source, so it should be taken with a grain of salt.
http://mediamatters.org/research/200911250005