3 ms·
I find it incredulous that people seem to believe that the entire global warming case rests on the results of a single research group. They just talked about t
by lutorm 17y ago
I find it incredulous that people seem to believe that the entire global warming case rests on the results of a single research group.
They just talked about this on NPR and other climate researchers interviewed say this is a sad case of selective quotation and distortion of facts on the part of the critics. In addition, it appears the leak happened months ago but nothing was made public until now, coincidentally just before the Copenhagen meeting.
- fnid 17y agoIt doesn't call into question global warming as much as it illustrates the biases and unscrupulous means to which humans will go to propagate a desired opinion of reality. The issue at hand here is one of trust and integrity. If the scientific community has none, then it is degrading itself to other areas of thought that use fabricated realities to push agendas.
- mechanical_fish 17y agotrust and integrity. If the scientific community has none... This is exactly the sort of sweeping statement that the original comment was referring to. This is character assassination on a grand scale: Taking one aspect of one person's work and using that to cast FUD on all of science. The "scientific community" doesn't rise or fall on the skill, actions, or integrity of one or two members, just as I have to accept that the "Ph.D.-holding physicist community" contains many people who are total loons, or even downright evil. We don't issue revokable membership cards. The fact that cold fusion turned out to be a red herring doesn't cast suspicion on all the rest of nuclear physics. There is more than one piece of data in nuclear physics.
- PebblesRox 17y agoWe should take into account the reaction of the community when one or two of its members is found untrustworthy. Does the community condone dishonest behavior or condemn it?
- fauigerzigerk 17y agoIt would be interesting to go read that IPCC report and see what role that group and its data actually play. The reporting is that their role was very important but how do we know? It should be possible to move on from conspiracy theories and questioning of people's intentions to some kind of fact finding mission.
- w00pla 17y ago> entire global warming case rests on the results of a single research group. To me it looks a lot more like the CDO thing with banking. They compare their data with other people's results and throw out what doesn't look correct without giving a good reason (e.g. tree ring reconstruction after 1960). The argument from this selected data is that "we all couldn't be wrong"... Meanwhile the horror videos show of glaciers breaking up (a seasonal process) blaming that on climate change. Yet, no mention is made of the increasing ice in Antarctica since 1980. The few that acknowledges this fact blames it on global warming...
- yummyfajitas 17y agoI would like very much to see a summary of the evidence for global warming made which does not use the results of this group. I'd also like to see such an argument made by a known proponent of the theory, since any such summary made by an opponent or neutral party will be attacked as "denial".
- MaysonL 17y agoHere are a few physical facts off the top of my head which have no connection whatever with the results of this group: Arctic sea ice decrease. Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets speeding up. Permafrost melting. Bristlecone pines at altitude growing faster over the past 50 years. Growing seasons expanding. Birds migrating earlier or overwintering where they previously migrated.