[Adapted from a close colleague’s email:] This article by Marc Sheppard contains a technical discussion of details of some of the source codes uncovered by the recent hack of the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit e-mail servers. These computer codes are the ones used to create the global climate forecasts predicting a warming calamity. The leading global warming alarmists have for years denied all requests for access to these codes (such access is routine and essential to the validation of results in all other fields of science), and it’s now clear why. The codes document in explicit, damning fashion the fraudulent data manipulation that has been used to create false temperature records to support the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis. This is unquestionably the biggest fraud in the history of science, and as Sheppard notes:
“Advocates of the global governance/financial redistribution sought by the United Nations at Copenhagen in two weeks, and also those of the expanded domestic governance/financial redistribution sought by Liberal politicians, both substantiate their drastic proposals with the pending climate emergency predicted in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Kyoto, Waxman-Markey, Kerry-Boxer, EPA regulation of the very substances of life — are all bad policy concepts enabled solely by IPCC reports. And the IPCC in turn bases those reports largely on the data and charts provided by the research scientists at CRU — largely from tree ring data — who just happen to be editors and lead authors of that same U.N. panel.”
In a word, the citizens of the world (discounting the scientifically literate few who have smelled a rat from the beginning, after independently researching this subject) have been duped by the pernicious lies of a handful of so-called climate scientists who have sacrificed their integrity for the sake of fame, fortune and/or ideology (or perhaps all three). Every one of these liars should be removed from their respective institutions and forced to find a new line of work, as was once the practice when academic fraud was uncovered (cf. the case of J. Hendrik Schoen). It won’t happen due to the corruption of academia by government funding and monolithic ideology … UNLESS the unwashed masses finally get mad enough and bring enough pressure to bear so that justice is served.
Why such light punishment? Isn’t this more than an intellectual crime.
Disregarding a fame motive, if you could link it to an ideaology or money, then I think you have a case for treason and fraud – even terrorism.
Sternberg used this term before under a different cicumstnace, but here it would be most applicable. These scientists would be actual intellectual terrorists.
Afteall, the purpose of global warming hysteria was to instill fear to force an ideaology.
Send them to Gitmo.
This is a simple way to do something constructive now.
Email your Senator – simple – because it’s all web-based:
http://www.senate.gov/general/.....rs_cfm.cfm
Yes you can! (I did)
Sorry for the Obama slogan quip 😛
By the way, In the above link, under your senator, you will see the URL/link for the Web Form. From there, you can send a message to your senator.
Thankyou for the link. How should I word a request to my Senator that he seek the detention, and transportation to Gitmo, of people at a university in England? I don’t know whether the FBI have some jurisdiction in this matter or if it is a case best handled by Navy SEALs under the cover of darkness.
This climate change business never was about the science anyway. Its aboout power, the redistibution of wealth, the lining of the pockets of Al Gore, GE, George Soros and an assault on our sovereignty.
Because of this I do not expect this to permanently derail the climate change cabal. There are way to many powerful interests that have to much at stake just to walk away.
As for the true believers no amount of dedunking is going to change their thinking. They have embraced this powerful delusion. Crowd psychology has taken over. One need only to read “Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds” ( one of the books that started me questioning Darwinism) to see how history is replete with delusions caused by group think.
Vivid
waterbear
Simple: The corruption involves US climate scientists. Many of those involved in the ClimateGate emails are in the US taking US taxpayer funds. e.g. Michael Mann.
See: Inhofe seeks probe of climate science
Furthermore, evidence in the UK can be obtained to convict criminals in the US by letters rogatory.
@DLH #6:
I see. Gitmo is an appropriate destination for US citizens suspected of fraud?
These people should get no less than 20 years in prison and there should be public protests and demonstrations until there is legal action. I have been reading the emails at http://www.eastangliaemails.com
and noticed a lot of these guys are Russian Jewish scientists. Not that there is anything wrong with Russians or Jews but given the US’s historical relationship with Russia and the nature of the proposed legislation for this AGW theory- I think it is definitely noteworthy of pointing out. The implications for global or international policy makes this scandal BIGGER than the Madoff scandal. Why isn’t CNN and MSNBC and most of the big criminal failng newspapers raising awareness of this? Becauee Madoff was all part of their anti-american, anti-free market ideaology- and this Clmategete is totally AGAINST their one world governemnt, nanny state Ideaology.
Dr Dembski,
According to this post looking at the briffa_sep98_d.pro file the “fudge factor” in the valadj matrix highlighted by the author of the American Thinker article is not actually used anywhere in the program so does not affect the end result of the data being processed by the program. But IDL is not a language of mine just as it is not a language the author of the American Thinker article is familiar with, so we could both be wrong.
Does the “fudge factor” being unused agree with your analysis of the leaked source code?
waterbear.
I was not linking to the senators webwsite to get people sent to gitmo.
My intent was for us to let the senators know we are heavily tracking on this fraud, and that any bills or legislation inspired by the presumption of stopping global warming be rejected with a big “NO” vote.
Also, we can let them know we want them to investigate this fraud to it’s source. And prosecute the batch, unless there is an invovled whistle blower, in which case he/she is granted mercy.
Highly recommend climate scientist Dr. Judith Curry‘s two recent opinions:
An open letter to graduate students and young scientists in fields related to climate research (Mirrored)
And “Curry: On the credibility of climate research”
(Be patient. CA is overloaded at present. Discuss at new CAmirror)
Article is at: at ClimateAudit.org
Curry’s discussion of “Tribalism” in science is insightful. That well describes some of the conflicts between Neo-Darwinian advocates vs ID.
waterbear @ 7
Even if anyone were to go to Gitmo, I wouldn’t suggest sneidng any US citizen. Keep in mind, this is not an American fraud. It’s international.
Any americnas involved can join Madoff and his multiple life term.
waterbear @ 9
Waterbear! You’re are missing the elephant in the room.
Sure, they have semicolons to diable parts of code in THIS rendition. But that is something programmers can do to test code with and without the extra code. Can you come up with a benevlonent reason as to why they would make “unused” code to hide a decline?
Here are a few lines of that code:
;; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
;
; title='Northern Hemisphere temperatures, MXD and corrected MXD'title='Northern Hemisphere temperatures and MXD reconstruction'
Explain why they would have a section of code for a VERY ARTIFICIAL correction?
Think about it.
Now, think about which versions of the plot was publicised? Ooops.
Don’t forget the hockey stick chart…ooops again.
Is it clicking yet?
@JGuy 1, 12.
Britain is unlikely to agree to surrender citizens to be sent to Gitmo, and will likely point out that US courts extradite and prosecute and punish foreign fraudsters by the normal route. As an approach to the UK authorities by normal channels will keep these people out of Gitmo, this would leave the option of snatching them covertly. Would it be best to do this now, or to wait for more evidence to come to light, risking that guilty parties might cover their tracks while we wait?
waterbear
Even though I think they could classify as terrorists of some kind. I never would expect any of them to go to gitmo.
It’s hyperbole that alluded you.
However, I do think they should be prosecuted very severly. And again, any whistelblowers I’d expect to receive significant leniency.
Waterbear at 9.
What evidence do you have that it was not used? Conversely, see:
The Code at Bishop Hill’s blog
See the associated detailed discussion of the code.
The programmer himself states it was being used as a “correction for decline!!” or “hiding the decline” per Jones and Mann.
With the clear statement of it being used, you / Jones/Mann bear the burden of proof to show that it was not used.
JGuy @13
I thought that coming to a conclusion that this is unquestionably the biggest fraud in the history of science on the basis of some comments in some out of hundreds of source code files would be possibly premature. But now you’ve asserted that the data they published had been processed by the particular program with this comment in it I realise I was wrong.
waterbear @ 17
The basis for calling this fraud need not rely on the discovery of that line of code. There is more evidence, e.g. the intended suppression of the skeptics.
But the fact that they even thought to make such code – commented out in the source here or not – is a compelling evidence of a serious problem.
waterbear.
I retract my first ‘oops’ steatement. That is, I can not (yet) say for certain that output of this code was publicised with the “ARTIFICALLY CORRECTED” data.
However, the second ‘oops’ comment still stands i.e. They did publish the bogus hockey stick chart.
Evidence of tribal barriers in climate science in Steve McIntyre’s Invitation:
On a related note:
Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman says,
“dissent is what will save us.”
Amy Goodman felt ‘violated’ when Canadian border officials grilled her for no apparent good reason.
… Canadian Border Services Agency officials ultimately allowed her to enter Canada but returned her passport with a document demanding she leave the country within 48 hours.
This is what you get when you allow governments to inch closer to a totalitarian state. The moment you try to stifle one voice, however wrong you might think it is, the moment you inject new blood to the emergence of a kind of thought police in all aspects of your life.
Hi everyone. Here’s an UPDATE on the global warming fiasco.
Emphases are mine (VJT).
Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation by Christopher Booker, in The Telegraph, November 28, 2009.
Climate Change Data Dumped by Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor, in Times Online, November 29, 2009.
The data has been lost. How convenient.
The fabrications and evasions keep piling up. If anyone still believes in global warming after all this, then all I can say is: they’ve got rocks in their heads.
An explanation for declining to release the data in response to applications filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has already been offered:
There is a comment further down from a member of the Icelandic Meteorological Service which develops the explanation further.
On the face of it, the fact that the CRU has thrown out some of the raw data is troubling. It would be interesting if any scientists who comment here could tell us if this is normal or not.
The means by which this data was obtained may well be criminal. We have no way of knowing what, if anything, was done to the data by the hacker(s).
If the researchers at the CRU have behaved improperly then they should suffer the usual penalties for academic misconduct. But until that has been shown, they are entitled to the presumption of innocence at the very least and I would hope that academics like yourself and Dr Dembski would uphold that right.