ClimateGate Analysis from SPPI

radioprius1 · Jan 21, 2010

Here is a link to an extremely lengthy, thorough, and damning analysis of the ClimateGate emails:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/climategate_analysis.pdf

Here are some quotes from the introduction:

he most difficult thing for a scientist in the era of Climategate is trying to explain to family and friends why it is so distressing to scientists. Most people donâ€™t know how science really works: there are no popular television shows, movies, or books that really depict the everyday lives of real scientists; it just isnâ€™t exciting enough. Iâ€™m not talking here about the major discoveries of scienceâ€”which are well-described in documentaries, popular science series, and magazinesâ€”but rather how the process of science (often called the â€œscientific methodâ€) actually works.
Click to expand...

and

The Climategate emails show that these self-regulating mechanisms simply failed to work in the case of climate scienceâ€”perhaps because â€œclimate scienceâ€ is itself an aggregation of many different and disparate scientific disciplines. Those component disciplines are extremely challenging. For example, it would be wonderful if NASA were able to invent a time machine, and go back over the past hundred thousand years and set up temperature and carbon dioxide measurement probes across the breadth of the globe. Unfortunately, we donâ€™t have this. Instead, we need to infer these measurements, by counting tree rings, or digging up tubes of ice. The science of each of these disciplines is well-defined and rigorous, and there are many good scientists working in these fields. But the real difficulty is the â€œstitching togetherâ€ of all of these results, in a way that allows answers to the fundamental questions: How much effect has mankind had on the temperature of the planet? And how much difference would it make if we did things differently?

It is at this â€œstitching togetherâ€ layer of scienceâ€”one could call it a â€œmeta-disciplineâ€â€” that the principles of the scientific method have broken down. Reading through the Climate-gate emails, one can see members of that community usually those with slightly different experience and wisdom than the power-brokers questioning (as they should) this â€œstitching togetherâ€ process, particularly with regard to the extremely subtle mathematical methods that need to be used to try to extract answers. Now, these mathematical and statistical methods are completely within my own domain of expertise; and I can testify that the criticisms are sensible, carefully thought-out, and completely valid; these are good scientists, asking the right questions.

So what reception do they get? Instead of embracing this diversity of knowledgeâ€” thanking them for their experience (no one knows everything about everything) and using that knowledge to improve their own calculationsâ€”these power-brokers of climate science instead ignore, fob off, ridicule, threaten, and ultimately black-ball those who dare to question the methods that theyâ€”the power-brokers, the leadersâ€”have used. And do not be confused: I am here talking about those scientists within their own camps, not the â€œskepticsâ€ which they dismiss out of hand.

This is not â€œclimate scienceâ€, it is climate ideology; it is the Church of Climatology.

It is this betrayal of the principles of scienceâ€”in what is arguably the most important public application of science in our lifetimeâ€”that most distresses scientists.
Click to expand...

This is an incredibly thorough review of these emails. This is "print-out and keep forever" quality. If you are remotely interested in climate science then you need to read this. It gives an incredible amount of insight into the context of the emails that were sent.

Enjoy!

ClimateGate Analysis from SPPI

radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

About PriusChat

Quick Navigation

Like us on Facebook

Buy us a beer!

Useful Searches

ClimateGate Analysis from SPPI

radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist