Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 11/30/2009 1:41:29 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
they knew it was lost years ago but failed to disclose it
In what is turning out to be the most astounding farce of our generation, the University of East Anglia's (UEA) Climatic Research Unit (CRU) has disclosed that it "threw away" the data upon which the predictions of global warming are based.
The Times of London is reporting that the disclosure was made by the CRU in response to requests for the data under the Freedom of Information Act. When pushed for it they could not produce the original data. All they have is the "adjusted" data that they have used to "prove" the earth is warming.
Not having the original data means that other scientist cannot verify the accuracy of the "adjusted" data nor the conclusions drawn from the data. Thus the models used to predict future climate cannot be proven correct.
Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. "The CRU is basically saying, 'Trust us'. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science," he said.
What makes the "loss" of the data even more alarming is the fact that the CRU knew years ago that the data did not exist. Yet they did not disclose it but continued to insist, as recently as last week, that it was "proprietary" and thus not subject to the FIA.
Thus the simple fact of the matter is that the "science" upon which all of the hype that has been created about global warming is based on non-peer reviewed science, generally making it meaningless unless it can be replicated by other scientists. None have done so.
The "science" of global warming was on tenuous ground to begin with. That is so because we do not have accurate data points that go back thousands of years. What they did was look at secondary affect, such as ice bores, tree rings and other secondary indications to conclude which geologic periods were colder than others. Then they took the data points they "did" have for the past 150 years (the data that is now missing) and developed models projecting both backward and forward. They compared the retrospective models to the secondary observations they had to "validate" the models. Based on those assumptions they projected how much global warming there would be in the future, depending on such things as carbon dioxide levels in each period. But without the data the models are invalid and thus the predictions about future global warming have no factual basis in legitimate science.
This could well explain why the models say that with the current level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere the average global temperature should be increasing. In reality it is decreasing. This was one of the points made in the hacked emails...that the scientists who claim the earth is warming could not account for the fact that it is actually cooling.
Now we know why.
To read more click here.
But in what could be even more ominous some blogs have published data from some of the hacked emails that show graphs that extend until last year. If these graphs indeed are correct and contained original data that CRU is now saying was destroyed years ago then we have yet another scandal on our hands. But what remains unknown at this time is whether the 2008 graphs were based on the original data or on the "altered" data. We'll leave that to you to judge: click here.
And in a related matter the Detroit News is reporting that the head "scientist" at the CRU has pulled in $22.6 million in grants since 1990.
Never can have too many articles about the Big Lie.
Headline is way too forgiving. Describing the data as “lost” implies an accidental cause. I think it’s obvious that the data, what little they had that supported their predetermined conclusion, was intentionally destroyed.
A forensic investigation on the hard drive(s) that stored the original data would be very interesting.
I don’t believe it would have ever been lost had it unambiguously proven their case.
It was lost on purpose because it would destroy their case.
CRU, STOP Eco Fascism!
Old historic documents...mostly lists of temperatures, pressure, rainfall...many hand written....a few signed by famous people like Shackelton, Amundsen, Darwin, Cook.
Makes neat wall paper for the den...great conversation peice...own a page of history...1c each...lots of 1000 at $49.99c
Makes one wonder how many other scams have been perpetrated upon the free world, doesn’t it?
Well, we know of quite a bit. AIDS “relief funding,” for example.
As the "Church Lady" used to say on SNL..., "How Convenient!"
A forensic investigation of the hard drive(s) that contained the original data is completely justified.
... and the dog ate my homework.
The original data was hard copy, all pre-computer going back 175 years or so.
> The original data was hard copy, all pre-computer going back 175 years or so.
And that implies that it has been shredded or burned on purpose. There was no “oops, I accidentally hit the delete key”.
The claim is that the original data was on dead trees and magnetic tape (nine track) that were discarded because they were too bulky to retain, only the “adjusted” data was retained.
Even if the “adjustment” was a mere units conversion, from fahrenheit to celius, for instance, one would think that it behooves them to keep some record of the original data. The hacked emails certainly makes one suspect that the “adjustments” many not have been performed in a neutral or unbiased manner.
Latest Weather Channel headline 11/30/09:
COLOSTOMY OF GORES’S ANUS REVEALS ONLY GORE’S GLOBAL FLATULENCE (HOT AIR)... MANY LIBERALS DISTRESSED!
Forgetting about the weighty consequences of this pseudoscientific nonsense, the absurdity of the lies are worth a good laugh. I remember getting in trouble with the principal in 9th grade for habitually misplacing and forgetting to bring my homework to school. Little did I know that I thus had the qualifications to become a "respected climate scientist"!
“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, I am the great and powerful OZ!!!”
bump
Making at least parts of it valuable antiques of historical significance. Losing it makes no sense or suggests that these people are too careless to be trusted with significant work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.