[Smogger]

Technical but extremely damnning. Much more damnning then any e-mail. Brush up on your IDL and Fortran and join the fun.

[fhayek]

And to do so without declaring as such in a footnote on every chart in every report in every study in every book in every classroom on every website that such a corrupt process is relied upon is not just a crime against science, it’s a crime against mankind.

I need add no further comment.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Michael E. Mann (born 28 December 1965) is an American climatologist, and author of more than 80 peer-reviewed journal publications. He has attained public prominence as lead author of a number of articles on paleoclimate and as one of the originators of a graph of temperature trends dubbed the "hockey stick graph" for the shape of the graph. The graph received both praise and criticism after its publication in an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. In August 2005 he was appointed Associate Professor at Pennsylvania State University, in the Department of Meteorology and Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, and Director of the university's interdepartmental Earth System Science Center. He previously taught at the University of Virginia, in the Department of Environmental Sciences (1999 - 2005). He was a Lead Author on the “Observed Climate Variability and Change” chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Scientific Assessment Report (2001). He has been organizing committee chair for the National Academy of Sciences ‘Frontiers of Science’ and has served as a committee member or advisor for other National Academy of Sciences panels. He served as editor for the Journal of Climate and has been a member of numerous international and U.S. scientific advisory panels and steering groups. Dr. Mann has been the recipient of several fellowships and prizes, including selection as one of the 50 leading visionaries in Science and Technology by Scientific American, the outstanding scientific publication award of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and recognition by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) for notable citation of his refereed scientific research. Mann is one of several climate scientists who contribute to the RealClimate blog. He is best known for his paleoclimate 'hockey stick' reconstructions of the past several millennia from tree ring, ice core, coral and other data. See temperature record of the past 1000 years for more details and dispute. Mann's recent work has been on modelling El Niño, and he has said that "we are already committed to 50 to 100 years of global warming and several centuries of sea level rise" and that reduction in fossil fuel emissions is required to slow the process down to a level that can be coped with.[1]

Wicki

[Girlene]

WOW, let the fun continue.

[Psycho_Bunny]

wow...I’d like to see the whole procedure.

[kempo]

Now that there is a crack in the dam that’s been holding back the lies, the leaks will start pouring out at a steady rate. It’s going to be fun watching all of the finger pointing between the climate scientist.

[PeaceBeWithYou]

[Danae]

OMG

Oh now that is the coders Nukler BOMB.

Hugh and Series.

No seriously, this is RED HOT. Heads should ROLL.

[Doogle]

POSIC Odumbo will be off to Copenhagen to play the game and pledge the US into oblivion

[avacado]

I happened to watch CBS Evening News last night and Katie Couric didn’t mention a thing about this climate scam. MSM trying to bury it hard and deep.

[mmichaels1970]

Here's the "fudge factor" (notice the brash SOB actually called it that in his REM statement):

yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]

valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor

Yikes. Don't need to know FORTRAN to understand that.

Reminds me of computer games I used to write when I was a kid. I'd randomize dice rolls, but skew the roll based on who was playing. I was more likely to get a 6 while my sister took her chances.

Oldest programming trick in the book.

[Stegall Tx]

I doubt if this will have any affect on the GW thing at all. I mean, facts have been on our side of the debate throughout this entire argument, but they (the GW believers) have never allowed facts to get in the way of their presentation. And they (the GW believers) have been very effective in getting others on board in spite of the lack of factual data.

I just don’t see how this admission that the few “facts” they presented were just created out of thin air will sway anyone.

[Think free or die]

These ethical breaches sicken me.

For quite a few years before the derivatives mess imploded, I was uncomfortable with the sheer complexity of hyper-finance. It seemed that things had reached a point at which most investors couldn't critically evaluate what was going on. We have since seen how trust was abused, and how the skills and technological tools available on Wall Street were too often used to fleece investors rather than to enhance productivity of capital.

Now in the realm of climate science, we again see complex modeling using data which are relatively inaccessible to citizens. The data were held confidential or altogether obscure. Computer models were either hidden or difficult to comprehend. Many people put their trust in experts wielding technology. Again, their trust was abused and their pockets picked.

Dishonesty is nothing new. Unfortunately, with the addition of technology and globalization, fraud and abuse of intellectual power can have a huge impact. With the amplifying effect of technology and global reach, the need for ethics and transparency is perhaps greater than ever. I'm grateful we have so many keyboard experts willing to dig into these specialized subjects. Sunshine is good.

[sergeantdave]

“Kyoto, Waxman-Markey, Kerry-Boxer, EPA regulation of the very substances of life — all bad policy concepts enabled solely by IPCC reports.”

I’m confused. Simple question: Can we lawfully hang these bastards? And I include Waxman, Markey, certain members of the supreme court and the traitor kerry and his drunk wife Tereezaa.

I really want to see the crypto-Nazi Tides Foundation nailed, which is funded by the ketchup heiress tereeeza. Tides leads back to the Nazi kappo Soros and his crimes of murdering Jewish citizens for 30 pieces of silver in Hitler’s Germany.

We need an American-style Nuremburg trial to sort out those who need to be hanged and those who we ship one-way to North Korea.

BTW, you people who understand this GW farce are doing a great job exposing it. Mucho thanks.

[rawhide]

Whew! Do you have a simple man’s Reader’s Digest version of your post?

[Marty62]

Hummm this is interesting since I remember being innundated with talk of GLOBAL COOLING during the 60’s and 70’s.
I would like to know WHO decided to start the GLOBAL WARMING BS.

[Marty62]

Check this out very readable.

http://www.climatecooling.org/Current-USA-Climate-Change-Review.html

[dr_who]

At least one ex-climate researcher at Cato Institute was complaining about the University of East Anglia’s lack of transparency long before the email story broke. Amazing.

[dr_who]

Patrick J. Michaels, September 2009: The Dog Ate Global Warming

[ICU812]

I’m a programmer for a small college. FORTRAN is not one of my languages but I can follow it. I’ve also been lurking in programming forums and blogs where they are talking about this.

From the programming side of this the most damning thing I’ve learned is that they are not using source control! Any professional programmer uses some kind of source control, whether its CVS, Subversion, Mercurial, Git or even god awful SourceSafe. Source control allows you to track each revision in a code file, knowing when changes were made, what changes were made in what lines of code and who made the changes. This allows you to figure out when bugs were introduced to the code, for example. But it also allows you to roll the code back to a prior state.

How do I know they don’t use it? Because in these files “Harry” the programmer complains about identically named files being differentiated by where they reside in the folder tree. And not knowing which version of a program a previous programmer used to achieve a certain output. Also he complains about a file that has a comment with one ‘Modified Date’ but that same file has a different modified date in its file properties. Suggesting that the file has been modified in an undocumented way.

As I read Harry’s comments I feel sorry for him. He’s inherited a giant clusterf*ck of an application with completely inadequate documentation. He’d rather start over from scratch than try to maintain that monstrosity (we’ve all been there!)

So how does not using source control affect the science? Because real science is repeatable. Someone else should be able to follow the same procedure and produce the same result. If you don’t keep an accurate record of all the revisions of your code this is impossible.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Juicy!