ClimateGate: Man-Made Global Warming May Be What Some Scientists Chose to be True
Posted by: Blue Collar Muse in Breaking News, Energy, Environmental Issues, Geopolitics, Individual Responsibility, Special Interests, VideoUPDATED LINKS AT BOTTOM 11/22 at 09:32 CST
When discussing scientific things with a friend of mine, a scientist himself, the notion of Science as the dispassionate, neutral observer willing to fearlessly proceed wherever the evidence leads - even if it leads in a personally distasteful direction - colors his conversation. In truth, that’s probably how we all view Science. More to the point, it’s how we should view Science because it’s how Science should be. We should be able to trust its conclusions.
But what happens if the scientific community, for whatever reason, abandons its neutrality concerning the conclusion the evidence is pointing to and decides to actively promote a conclusion unsupported by the facts? It takes no great leap to imagine that, in such a scenario, some evidence would be suppressed and other evidence would be gussied up. Not with a view to finding the Truth. With a view to manipulating the conclusion.
For years, common citizens and scientists alike have wondered: from whence comes all this support for Anthropogenic (man made) Global Warming (AGW)? Not only did the same scientific community predict just a few years before all the AGW hysteria that we were headed for a new Ice Age, but research often points away from AGW as a scientific conclusion.
If Science is, indeed, the dispassionate neutral observer, the best conclusion would seem to be to keep on studying and make no definitive statements. A scientific version of “We can neither confirm or deny the existence of either AGW or an imminent Ice Age.” New evidence has emerged, however, which seems to show the scientific community did just the opposite.
The Telegraph’s James Delingpole writes:
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
The trap my scientist friend falls into with his belief in Science as an arbiter of knowledge and Truth is not that Science sometimes comes to conclusions that are later shown to be wrong. The very quest that Science embarks on recognizes there are things we now believe that are wrong. That’s why Science exists, to ferret out the Truth.
My friend errs in trusting scientists. Human nature, as it exists in scientific leaders, political leaders, religious leaders and others engaged in the quest to improve the life and condition of their followers, is not exempt from the call and response of greed, deception, hypocrisy and hubris because their cause is noble.
As with Politics and politicians; as with Theology and theologians; so with Science and scientists. When looking for Truth, our greatest concern should not be the analysis of the conclusions being reported. It should be an analysis of the character of those doing the reporting.
SEE ALSO:
The Evidence of Climate Fraud by Marc Sheppard @ The American Thinker;
Climate Research Unit Hacked - Sensitive Documents Dumped to Internet by DPayton @ Redstate - value here is in comments where discussion begins that it may not be a hacker after all but a whistle-blower with hacking story spun as CYA;
Link to page with all emails from Hadley posted as searchable - valuable tool!
Popularity: 93% [?]
Tags: , AGW, Anthropogenic Global Warming, Hadley CRU, James Delingpole, UK Telegraph, University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit
Entries (RSS)
November 21st, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Thanks for the post, Ken. I was intrigued to learn recently that “scientia,” or knowledge, is the latin root of “science”; nonetheless, there is a lot of inference that is passed off as “knowledge,” or things we KNOW.
That being said, I guess that we’d soon tire of attempting to discern the character of persons in the public sphere. But we should be wary of dogmatism in grey areas, and we should ruthlessly condemn those who push conclusions while concealing important data.
November 21st, 2009 at 4:14 pm
[…] ClimateGate: Man-Made Global Warming May Be What Some Scientists Chose to be True | Blue Collar Muse conservablogs.com/bluecollarmuse/2009/11/21/climategate-man-made-global-warming-may-be-what-some-scientists-chose-to-be-true – view page – cached When discussing scientific things with a friend of mine, a scientist himself, the notion of Science as the dispassionate, neutral observer willing to fearlessly […]
November 21st, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by stix1972: ClimateGate: Man-Made Global Warming May Be What Some Scientists Chose to be True http://bit.ly/5hFwOM #MANBEARPIG…
November 21st, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Great article further exposing the hypocrisy of the left, Fiction that supports the Left vs Fact. Keep up the great work! I’m posting a link to the article.
Derrick
November 24th, 2009 at 1:43 am
Right on. This and the evolution hoax are making our country weaker every day.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
it’s not that i don’t want to choose a side here, but i think the facts really aren’t straightened out. i’m not letting society off the hook, i think we should treat the environment better, but i don’t think we’re all doomed anytime soon.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
@Bill -
You make an excellent point. Just because our behavior may not be contributing to Global Warming does not mean there are not things that we do that are destructive to the planet or environment.
Which has always confused me. The argument against the non-AGW crowd is that we don’t care about the planet. Yet we have to breathe the air and drink the water. Of COURSE we care about the planet!
We should be continually evaluating our behavior in light of new discoveries to make sure we are stewarding it well. But that does not equate to destroying economies and world markets because of a contrived, junk science.
Thanks for stopping by …
December 7th, 2009 at 12:27 am
Excellent post Ken - the wheels have come off the AGW bus & it’s mired on the side of the road, but the passengers still pretend it’s going down the road with no problem.
Of course we’re for clean air, water, & a healthy environment - arguments that we’re not are silly. What these AGW acolytes want to do is take our money & give it to the third world, after they take a big cut for their “trouble.” It’s all naked & exposed now, & by acting like it’s not the AGW acolytes appear dangerously silly.
December 26th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Global warming from carbon dioxide emissions is an example of a theory. A posting from a climatologist establishes that it is not a scientific theory, however.
Belief in global warming from carbon dioxide emissions rests upon the computer models that are referenced by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its 2007 report. According to the climatologist Kevin Trenberth, who is an author of the report, the IPCC models do not make predictions. It follows that: a) the IPCC models are not falsifiable and b) the IPCC models are not scientific, by the definition of “scientific.” Trenberth’s statement is at: http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/recent_contributors/kevin_trenberth/ .