Professor Tim Ball intervjuad på Corbert Report.
länk
Tim Ball nämner hur klimatforskningen först togs över av folk som gör datormodeller...
"...and then by a small group of people associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But of course the diffuculty was that even though I sensed that there are things going on, proving it is extremely difficult, but now suddenly with exposure of these files it's not only a smoking gun, it's a battery of machine guns that has been exposed"
Ball nämner sedan bl a att NAS-ordföranden Edward Wegman noterade att en begränsad grupp forskare skrev klimatstudier tillsammans, och att de i den kretsen (de som driver bloggen Real Climate ingår där och skapande samt hur kommentarer där ska censurer nämns förresten i CRU-mailen; min kommentar) negligerat all forskning som inte godkänts i rätt vetenskapliga tidskrifter (dock har många "skeptiska" studier, t ex Svensmarks, publicerats i de bästa tidskrifter och även NOAA publicerar vad klimatforskarsamfundet negligerar; min kommentar).
Här påpekar Ball hur mailen avslöjar att gruppen kontrollerat peer review-processen.
Ett exempel på detta är mailet jag nämnde här, där man uppenbarligen såg till att få sin en egen editor inför att publicering av en proxystudie med tvivelaktiga data -- avseende lilla istiden och medeltida värmeperioden -- att det hela annars kunnat avslöjas. Editorer kontrollerar bl a en studies publicering samt offentliggörande av data.
Uppdatering: Tim Balls artikel om detta i Canada Free Press.
Uppdatering II: Kartor på nätverk som Wegman nämner: "Mann Co-author" samt "Top 75 Co-author", från Wegmans rapport (pdf), kap. 5 "Social Network Analysis of authorships in temperature reconstructions".
(HT: Anthony Watts)
Klimat i media: AB, AB, AB, DN, DN
Andra bloggar om: miljö, vetenskap, klimatvetenskap, klimat, climategate, scoop, cru, skandal
Climategate -- The Crutape Letters, by Steven Mosher and Thomas W. Fuller
The Deniers
Hejsan,
ReplyDeleteehh har du kollat upp Tim Ball? Han är rätt skum. Kolla här: http://www.desmogblog.com/timothy-f-ball-tim-ball
Hälsningar, Magnus
(Då humor kan vara ett bra sätt att få igenom budskapet från Climategate, får envar gärna använda nedanstående, som man vill. --AE)
ReplyDeleteCLIMATE CHANGE IS NOTHING COMPARED TO LIGHT-BULB CHANGE
The first few jokes in this file are by ahrvid@hotmail.com. Feel free to add your own and share the fun with others!
Question: How many Climategate deniers does it take to change a light bulb? (Q repeated for every answer)
What light bulb? The EU has banned them for environmental reasons.
None. Media prefers to stumble around in the dark.
Thirty. Because when you’ve done you need a whole platoon to dig trenches and put up barbed wire to defend your position to the very last man.
2501. That’s the number in the Intergovernmental Panel of Light-bulb Change. 2451 of them are only formally members and couldn’t care less, though everyone flies their jet planes to expensive international conferences to get pisssed and allow their names to be used in several thousand pages thick reports, sure to lay substantial areas of forests barren. There are about 50 that sit and cherry-pick the light bulbs that are suited for “the cause”. Of these only about a dozen check that the correct light bulb – and only the correct light bulb – is selected. Finally Al Gore climbs to the very top of the ladder and make sure that everything becomes totally screwed up.
What a bloody bickering about light bulbs! We will not change light bulbs. The light-bulb science is settled once and for all. You’re only a gang of conspiracy theorists that deny the Holocaust, think the US Government blew up the Twin Towers and see Flying Saucers in the sky.
None. because you can use the trick of hiding the decline in luminosity.
What’s a ”light bulb”? We only have camp fires, where we come from, and are almost freezing to death. Oh, how we long for Medieval times! It’s supposed to have been a Warm Period then.
It will be impossible to change any light bulbs. You see, even if we here on the BBC are about 23 000 employees, every single one of us is fully occupied with making new programmes where we repeat the same old message about “climate change”, day out and day in. That’s public service TV for you!
Changing a light bulb, you said? I’m from the government and I’m here to help you. Of course you have to pay the light-bulb tax, the electricity tax and of course the CO2 tax, not to forget the climate-change fee, the environment duty and the fossil-fuel charge. What? Well, mortgage your house, for heaven’s sake! Think of the poor panda bears, please. First we must make sure that the light bulb complies with regulation 4.71, paragraph B) in sub section…
To: Phil@cru.co.uk
Subject: Annoying idiot wants scientific openness
Howdy amigo!
I got this outrageous E-mail by some idiot that wants to check our light-bulb figures. If I see him I promise you I'll beat the crap out of him. Suggest that you immediately delete everything. Chris will do the same. We can't have others coming and checking our light bulbs. Scientific scrutiny and freedom of information in my ass! I propose that we gang up and oust this annoying man from everything. BTW, I attached the latest version of our program code, with should fix the travesty about that the increase simply hasn't happened.
--Mike
Ps. Send the money in chunks below 10 000 dollars, so authorities won't find them, though I know that's a heck of a job for the 100 billion of tax-payer's money we have gotten so far.