1
Yes!

2 I was looking for some good Holiday recipes...am I in the wrong place?

3 "eople seem to be missing"

Yeah, missing a P..

4 I had to show my math in geometry, but these guys don't need to show their work and they want to fundamentally change the world.

*facepalm*

5 ...

6 The termites embedded in the timbers of Western Civilization will not be denied the wood they feed upon.  Damn the stupidos, full speed ahead.  Why bother with the scientific method that was part of the founding of Western Civilization?  In fact undo both the Judeo/Christian ethic and the scientific method...this way folks to the new dark ages, much better and much darker than the old dark ages.  Use those research dollars to compete with Islam for the race to the bottom of superstition and worship of tyrannical gods.

7
Rush has been brilliant this week. He exquisitely illustrated an idea of two universes: the universe of lies and the universe of reality.

Today he observed that the global warming "bubble" has burst and wondered how the universe of lies will handle it.

8

Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it. Â… Cheers Phil

***

 

And at this point he's stopped being a scientist and is now just another grubby politico pushing for his pet special interest.

He should be strung up

9 The Scientific Community owes an apology to the Catholic Church.

10 I wonder what the Amazing Randi or Penn Jillette have to say about this.  It's pretty clear that these scientists are more anti-science than, say, Bobby Jindal or Michelle Bachmann.

11
I'm curious to know how many times the word hide is used in these emails.

Could turn out to be quite interesting...

12 I was told there would be sewing tips.

13 The UK tourism industry should know that I would be willing to buy a pint or two in their fair country when I visit Phil in jail.

14 All your data are belong to us!

15 This Gavin dude seems to have much more of a role as gatekeeper than he should. I understand why CRU has the power they do. It's anti-science, but I understand it. I don't understand why RealClimate is the deFacto place for discussion. It's the Internet. Get a server, crank up wordpress and create a competing blog.

16
The AP assigned 11 reporters to 'fact-check' Sarah Palin's book.

Yet they shrug at this bombshell?

17 Read the emailth, knuckleheadth!

Read the emailth!

Emailth!

Oh, who am I kidding? Cock! I want cock!

18 Rodent Liberation Front comment 9

Actually some of the scientific community exactly mirrors the medieval church.  They have priests in robes, they worship relics and old bones, they speak in a language the laymen don't understand, they have their saints (Darwin).  They are intolerant of other views.  They will ex-communicate you if you do not adhere to established doctrine.  They hate women and the peasantry.  They are jealous of each other's status.  They take money in lieu of truth, they burn heretics etc...

19 Phil is a poor scientist.

20 This is unprecedented

21 The Liberal scientists want the world to decline back to the era before the printing press, or the so called dark ages.  They are the modern version of the old Catholic church. Anti science. Probably a little worse in my opinion. Delete or burn all information that goes against global warming! This is the Liberals creed at the moment.

22 esr (Eric Raymond, to you non-programmer folks) put up some thoughts about the poor quality of the source-code.

esr, for those who don't know, is one of the luminaries of the open-source/Linux movement, and is probably one of the top 100 general-purpose programmers at work today. If you use Linux on a regular basis, you're probably using code he wrote every single day. So he's not just some random right-winger taking shots (in fact, he's not a right-winger at all -- he's more of a libertarian).

I've got 20+ years of programming experience behind me (albeit not in FORTRAN), and I can tell you: the source code is really, really bad. Bad data + bad code = complete horse-shit.

23 As I said in the 1st thread on this, Hansen has been hiding his data for years. He's a poor scientist and shouldn't have a job payed for with our tax dollars. Or a science related job at all. I wonder if he'll speak out on this issue or if Bush will silence him once again.

24 I'm not happy with the idea that DARPA and DOD research might be available under FOIA.  And in fact these are exempted.

I can see the point of legitimate researchers that they don't want to disclose means, method and data until they publish. Up until that point, its almost like a trade secret, also exempted from FOIA.  Once published, if we the taxpayers bought and paid for it, we get access. Sounds pretty fair to me.

 

25 All you guys talking about stringing-up these scientists or putting them behind bars need to get real.

Same with such nonsense talk about the AGW profiteers like ManBearPig.

Where's your sense of PROPORTION?


They deserve nothing less than being dragged into the streets and being beaten to death with extension cords and hockey sticks.

26 Invest in livery barns and horses.  Also invest in horse manure removal...huge industry in about ten years.  I think we could pool our resources and buy some acreage by Al Gore's McMansion and raise thousands of horses...all upwind of his mansion of course.

27 Bill Clinton would be ashamed to tell lies like that.  Well, maybe not Bill Clinton.

28
They deserve nothing less than being dragged into the streets and being beaten to death with extension cords and hockey sticks.

That's crazy talk.

Unless of course you mean plugged-in extension cords.

29 2 I was looking for some good Holiday recipes...am I in the wrong place?

Here's my favorite recipe:
* Fill turkey with stuffing
* Place in refrigerator
* (Note: need programming team to do some corrections here to hide coldness, make refrigerator 325 degrees F)
* The turkey is ready when the (adjusted - see above note) internal temperature of the turkey reaches 165  degrees.

Enjoy!

30 Methane is the future.

31 Erg and his ilk tell us "There's no there there," but the people making the assertions of imminent disaster are really determined to not let any supporting data out, even to the point of illegality.

Do people doing nothing wrong need a cover-up?

32 Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.

A. Because that's fundamental science you fucktard and

B. Because refusing a valid FOIA request and then conspiring to delete relevant information is a crime.

33 All this bad news for the true believers will cause poor  Chuckey Johnson to take to his crib and twist his pony tail. No dip shit like an old dip shit.

34 He's a witch!

35
Well O.K. then...time to pivot.
Man caused cooling is killing the camels. Lower temperatures are freezing the water in their humps! Buy your hump credits NOW!

36 All of you guys making allusions to the church in the middle ages (e.g. Galileo et al) need to go back and read some real history and turn off the History channel.

A lot of the people who advanced science in those days WERE the church. For example the guy who actually came up with the model for the solar system was a church official (Copernicus).

As far as the media advancing this story I wouldn't count on it. Even if it did, don;t expect congress to abandon their communist redistribution and take over of the energy sector scheme.

They have already shown that they don't give a damn what the public thinks.

37 The reason they can not show the data is obvious if you review the comments in the software source code.  Nobody has any idea what the data means, where it comes from, if it is valid, etc.  Some of the comments about how bad the data is are beyond stunning.  They simply have no idea how to collect and store data.  I am not talking about doing anything with the data, I am talking about simply collecting and storing it in a way that makes it usable later on.

38 Science:  1940 or so:  There is no big bang!  Everything has always existed the way it is, any apparent expansion of the universe is caused by spontaneous creation of matter in interstellar space, even Einstein fudge his perfect equations to prove this point! 

Science 1964 with Phil Jones in charge:   "Bring me the head of Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson"

39 Is any one else getting a Dan Brown plot vibe off this incredible shit?

40
Would anyone be surprised to see an email like this?

Mike,

Congratulations on your new Escalade. I'm thinking of buying a Hummer when I get more grant money. But don't tell anyone. hee hee

Cheers,
Phil

41 Would anyone be surprised to see an email like this?

Mike,

Congratulations on your new Escalade. I'm thinking of buying a Hummer when I get more grant money. But don't tell anyone. hee hee

Cheers,
Phil

Posted by: a.k.a. at November 25, 2009 04:12 PM (z37MR)

I'd be surprised.  Unless it said "Land Rover" rather than "Hummer" (Phil being in Britain and all).

42 Yeah, it looks like Phil is the official fall guy now. Even Michael Mann has cut him loose.

43 Why should we show these ignorant savages the data?  They still believe in God and hardly believe we evolved into living walking complexity from slime-mold...stupid savages!

44
Not too many complaints from the Warmists about Obama heating a large tent just to throw a party on the south lawn of the White House yesterday, huh?

45 Number 43 is right on and he gets one free login to LGF!

46 They take money in lieu of truth, they burn heretics etc...

Posted by: jehu at November 25, 2009 04:01 PM (DPMaW)

The hell of it is that most people studying science at the time where priests. Galileo got into trouble mostly because he was a dick about it.

47 don;t expect congress to abandon their communist redistribution and take over of the energy sector scheme.

They have already shown that they don't give a damn what the public thinks.

Could be a good platform for Conservative candidates in 2010, though.  It's actually becoming possible to run on a 'Global Warming is Bullshit' plank.

48

The thing is, Michael Crichton did a GREAT job debunking GWT with his novel "State of Fear" years ago. In it there were links to studies which indicated that:

A) U.S. Satellites were demonstrating greenhouse gases WERE DEFINATELY NOT rising measurably in the upper atmosphere.

B) Humans were 3rd in CO2 production behind volcanoes and termites, responsible for somewhere between one half of one percent and one tenth of one percent of all CO2 production worldwide in any given year depending on volcanoe activity.

C) The known temperature measurement indicated there was a .6C degree increase in temperature over the last 100 years also indicated that MOST of that increase was "pre-industrialization", IE: in the early part of the last century comensurate with volcanoe activity NOT undustrial use of the internal combustion engine as green activist theorized.

So why was the world waiting to hear the GWT proponents shoot themselves in the foot with their own stupidity before questioning the alleged "science" they were passing off as truth???

49
The man the GOP needs to target is Stephen Chu, the energy secretary. The man is a moonbat from Berkely and Chu Must Go.

50 There seems to be a lot of glue sniffing involved with climate modeling.

51 A lot of the people who advanced science in those days WERE the church.

In fact, the Church was really the only institution of higher learning extant from the fall of Rome to the Enlightenment (save for some small patronage deals worked out between certain naturalists and their benefactors). People tend to forget that secular universities are a fairly modern invention, at least in the Western world. The Church often got it wrong, but played a key role in preserving and extending what was right. In particular,  the Church was the primary preserver of scientific works from antiquity (though many came back to Europe via the Orient and the Arabs).

It's a fact that modern sciences grew out of pseudo-sciences: astronomy from astrology; chemistry from alchemy; mathematics from numerology and divination. But even most pseudo-scientists were not (deliberately) fraudsters; when more accurate data was available, they availed themselves of it. But the warmists seem to be working backwards -- they use the machinery of modern science to advance a pseudo-scientific theory.

52
If I recall correctly...
In State of Fear, there was some remote island who filed a lawsuit against the Western world for global warming. That is happening right now. There's some nitwit in Africa (?) suing us for the shitty sorry-ass state of affairs in his little country.

And, in the book, the data being used for the lawsuit was fudged, just like now.

53 The man the GOP needs to target is Stephen Chu, the energy secretary. The man is a moonbat from Berkely and Chu Must Go.

Posted by: a.k.a. at November 25, 2009 04:19 PM (z37MR)

Many Man Smoke.  Few Man Chu.

54

24 I'm not happy with the idea that DARPA and DOD research might be available under FOIA.  And in fact these are exempted.

I can see the point of legitimate researchers that they don't want to disclose means, method and data until they publish. Up until that point, its almost like a trade secret, also exempted from FOIA.  Once published, if we the taxpayers bought and paid for it, we get access. Sounds pretty fair to me.

All technology deamed to be advantagous to the DOD and DARPA are protected. Unless of course you include Bill Clinton selling off missel guidance information to the Chinese under his administration in return for Dem election funding.....because I mean they're a minority so disclosing to them would be PC don'tcha think?

55   51 There seems to be a lot of glue sniffing involved with climate modeling.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at November 25, 2009 04:21 PM (muUqs)

So is Dr. Spank really your name?

56

WE need an Oreilly producer or a Hannah Giles type to track this Phil Limey Liar down and give em, the 3rd degree...we can't let this story fade. Mike Mann Job needs to be investigated as well, where are the journos?? Will be interesting to see how many stories have been done on this by CNN MSNBC NYT blah blah blah.

 

57 Rodent Liberation Front # 46.  Yep, the Church was actually just asking him for proof and to walk them through his discovery process, Galileo was an arrogant prick and more or less acted like these CRU pricks.  People do not know or hide the fact that nearly all the great early scientists were believers.  Kepler wrote thousands of hymns, Copernicus was a believer and Newton nearly a fanatic.  Most of his life after doing trivial things like formalizing the laws of gravity and inventing calculus were spent in Biblical Prophecy.

58 Is it just me, or do we have a surplus of government funded incompetence? Where's Hillary's reset button?

59 Gah...Sharmuta is trying to "have sex with me!"

60 I have PhD's in pharmacology and climate science. Trust me, they go hand in hand.

61 Emailth!

Knuckleheadth!

It's thienthe!

Give me cock now!!

62

The only reason Gallileo got hammered was his book of douchbaggery.

Look up: "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" and marvel at his ability to piss off people he didn't need to.

63 WE need ... a Hannah Giles type to track this Phil Limey Liar down and give em, the 3rd degree.

I'd volunteer for her to do that to me.

64 I had a climatology professory tell me in 1991 that the best global weather models would always only be guestimates.  He said that one constant is that mother nature ebbs and flows and pretty much keeps an equilibrium.  Higher temperatures means more more water vapor in air means more heat relfected back to space, means termperatures back to normal. I have carried his advice all the way through this AGW bs.  And I often wonder if that professor turned into a zealot or if his common sense and honesty led to his ostracization.   

65 Silly right-wingers.  The FOIA is only applicable when lefties use it to dig up dirt on conservatives.

66

No mention of story on PMSNBC.

67 I like the widely referenced trick of conflating data from multiple partial temperature data sets.

Imagine if a zoologist did this in a western US state. Step 1: find the ears of a jack rabbit and the carcass of an antelope. Step 2: write up the morphology of the jackalope. No can do? He's a scientist; he can't be wrong.

68 They all fail. They all fail. But they didn't fail-fail.

69

When did a formal education stop being the framework you hang all the rest of life's learning on, and become everything knowable and the reason you are a higher being than the great unwashed?

 

70 There's nothing to thee here. Move along, now.

Everything is just fine.

Mom is giving me a new hockey stick for Christmas.

Knuckleheads are jealous.

^{I want to put your balls in my mouth.}

71 For those who have not had the pleasure of trying to make the government work for them, here is the "trick": You need a lawyer, not an expensive one, but a specialist. These guys, The FOIA Group, do FOIAs -- they clean up the request, file it, and keep track of it for you. It is not expensive - after I clean up my request a little I will be firing in a request for the messages that mention US government organizations. I know they exist, and I want to see the whole chain. http://tinyurl.com/yzmby6y

72

No mention of story on CNN.COM

 

73 If we keep making a big deal out of this, we're going to screw over an entire generation of high school students who will otherwise find it increasingly effective to hang onto their test papers without letting the teacher grade them. "Why should I make my test available to you, Ms. Blubberoll, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?"

74 One thing I love about the warmists is their absolute certainty of the truth of their bullshit data. "It's been warming for the last century!" they cry.* "How do you know?" I respond. "These data are clear!" they respond, voices quivering with righteous umbrage.

Their data is mostly shit, and they know it. It's not just that the equipment itself, and the procedures used to monitor and collect the data, are flawed. The problem is that the baseline is far too short, and they cannot reliably extrapolate into the past based on current weather trends. Even if we accept that temperature records for the past century are reliable (which I don't, at least globally), there is no way of extending the baseline much further into the past. We can *guess*, we can *suppose*, but we don't really know. What little hard data we do have, is contradictory. (Some theories I've read posit that if the earth is warming, it's probably just reverting to "normal" -- that we have, in effect, been living on the tail end of an ice-age.)

*Apparently, Queen Victoria's 1880's-era weather satellites and polar weather-monitoring stations were more reliable than our modern stuff. They just managed to keep all that high-tech stuff secret.

75 Yep, the Church was actually just asking him for proof and to walk them through his discovery process, Galileo was an arrogant prick and more or less acted like these CRU pricks.  People do not know or hide the fact that nearly all the great early scientists were believers.  Kepler wrote thousands of hymns, Copernicus was a believer and Newton nearly a fanatic.  Most of his life after doing trivial things like formalizing the laws of gravity and inventing calculus were spent in Biblical Prophecy.

But that was all for the sweet digs, the endless supply if vino, and the chicks man.  The Red Light District of the Vatican was something else.

76 Posted by: jehu at November 25, 2009 03:55 For you .

77

No mention of this story on ABC.COM

...charlie never heard of it blah blah

78 Knuckleheadths!

Read the emailth!

It's thienthe!

Proven fact! Just like eugenicth!

^{(won't someone please dork my squeakhole?)}

79

China's top climate envoy said Wednesday his nation would seek binding pollution targets for developed countries but reject similar requirements for itself at the summit.

Yu Qingtai said it would be unfair for all countries to be required to combat global warming since most of the environmental damage has been caused by developed nations during their industrialization over the past 100 to 200 years.

"Developed countries should also earnestly ask themselves, 'In solving this problem that I have created, am I keeping my promises and honoring my commitments?'" he said.

Later, he asked if Obama would kiss him.

80 This is worth a read. For more than a decade, we've been told that there is a scientific "consensus" that humans are causing global warming, that "the debate is over" and all "legitimate" scientists acknowledge the truth of global warming. Now we know what this "consensus" really means. What it means is: the fix is in. ClimateGate: The Fix is In

81 Sched
NumberSectionClass
Limit
Seats RemainingCross-Listed
CoursesNotesMeeting Days/
TimesClassroomInstructorLocation/
Contact Info4862710011212GEOSC597EW 11:15A - 12:30P218 HOSLERMANN, MICHAEL(814) 865-0478

82 The data may be fake but it is accurate.  Dan Rather just reassured me that was the case.

83 Why won't you knuckleheadth listen?

Read the emailth!

^{(damn, I need an ass pounding real bad!)}

84 What I really wonder is how the SCOTUS (or any court of ours) was able to rule on the validity of global warming (handing untold amounts of power to the Executive branch) without having the data and methods that were used to argue the case made available.

Trillions at risk, along with expansive powers given to the federal government, and all based on black box data - that turns out not to even have been data. Anyone with a brain who heard that most of the global warming predictions (and legislation!) were based on computer models knew that there were huge problems with that. Econometric models have been around a lot longer and have had a sorry record of predicting a much simpler system - not to mention that they all missed the credit crisis.

I am still amazed that anyone ever took this global warming nonsense seriously, especially as the best supporting data that the global warming imbeciles had was the Vostok Ice Core data, which clearly showed that we are at a very high volatility point of climate and that we are most likely headed (in the future) towards a cooling that will be as close to death as one can imagine.

85 Oops, sorry, but I was trying to post Mann's course schedule.

He's "teaching" one course in the spring. It is METEO 597E, Climate Dynamics Seminar. It meets W 11:15A - 12:30P in 218 Hosler at Penn State.  It's only 1 credit and any PSU morons or moron friends of PSU proto-morons should sign up for it.

Attend.  Ask about "Hide the Decline".  Bring a camera.  Maybe even the journalism students would be interested in such a story.

Well, probably not, but it should be fun.

86 #52  Monty  Look up the bio of Roger Bacon who lived from circa 1200 to 1275. Wiki does a good job. Man was a absolute human star of his time.  Few people remember him in the modern times. 

87 Bill D.  at # 78, thanks.

88 Yeah, sure. Pretty calendar, mister?

89

the huffpo angel: & over-all leftist talking pint on this:

From Brenean DeMelle 11/21/09

The scandalistas say little about the fact that this breach of security and publishing of private communications is a crime, content to enjoy the opportunity to cherry-pick a few lines from these internal emails to push the skeptic theory of a sinister master plan by mainstream scientists to warn humanity that man has altered the climate in dangerous ways.

Cuz this cherry picked tid bit is obviouslt taken outta context:

If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think IÂ’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone

90 My Home Town:

Average High = 82 F
Average Low = 16 F
Average Swing = 66 F

Record High =108 F (1936)
Record Low = -24 F (1899)
Record Swing = 132 F

And I am supposed to shiite my pants because it might, somehow, be 2 F hotter in a hundred years from now.

91 Monty  Look up the bio of Roger Bacon who lived from circa 1200 to 1275. Wiki does a good job. Man was a absolute human star of his time.  Few people remember him in the modern times. 

Posted by: mystry at November 25, 2009 04:50 PM (kmgIE)

Roger, Francis, Applewood... everything's better with BACON!

92 My local rag sheet/fish wrap/dead tree press has yet to report on the latest in AGW, other than their orthodoxy/upcoming Bob N Noggin conference..  Maybe I just missed it.  Maybe, they're just protecting me, by not reporting (significant) relevant news that would just confuse me.

93 Roger Bacon

Oh hell yeah. Like another Franciscan (St. Francis, natch), he was essential to the modern understanding of the natural world. And St. Augustine before him created the philosophical underpinnings that both Bacon and Francis built upon.

Ellis Peters wrote a series of wonderful mystery novels set in Dark Ages Europe that feature a crime-solving Benedictine Brother named Cadfael. Cadfael always reminded me very much of Roger Bacon; I always wondered if Peters used Bacon as his model when writing about Cadfael.

94 *Apparently, Queen Victoria's 1880's-era weather satellites and polar weather-monitoring stations were more reliable than our modern stuff. They just managed to keep all that high-tech stuff secret.

Posted by: Monty at November 25, 2009 04:41 PM (4Pleu)

They WERE better than today's!  Didn't you see The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen?

I bet if we catch Captain Nemo, we can make him stop using the Nautilus to warm the Earth!

95 Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it. I'd love to see this watermelon try that approach with the IRS or the district attorney.

96 WE need ... a Hannah Giles type to track this Phil Limey Liar down and give em, the 3rd degree.

I'd volunteer for her to do that to me.

Posted by: nickless at November 25, 2009 04:31 PM (MMC8r)

I've been bad.  She should give me a proper tongue-lashing.

97 I don't understand why RealClimate is the deFacto place for discussion. It's the Internet. Get a server, crank up wordpress and create a competing blog. Whats Up With That? ICECAP Climate Audit These and many others have poked a million holes in the AGW theory. But for some reason they don't get a lot of press. Hmmm...... This site has a more political bent: Climate Depot

98 as his model when writing about Cadfael.

Posted by: Monty at November 25, 2009 04:56 PM (4Pleu)

Good books. Seconded.

99 #95  Cadfael  I remember seeing a series about him on Educational TV. Done of course by the BBC.  Very well done!

100 The EPA is attempting to classify CO2 (Yes, the stuff that you & trees emit) as a pollutant. The deadline is Friday to submit comments to the EPA on this attempt. Below is a link w/ instruction on how you can add to these comments. How To Give Them Hell

101 Non-troversy.  This is distracting us from the far more important issue of those pernicious racist creationist anti-vaccinationists who watch Glenn Beck.

102 Read the emailth! Knuckleheadth!

Why won't anyone listen to me?

_{^{(pssst! want to pack my fudge?)}}

103 From WUWT: A Diagram Of The Scientific Method Please compare & contrast this diagram with the contents of the CRU documents.

104

They deserve nothing less than being dragged into the streets and being beaten to death with extension cords and hockey sticks.

I say they should be strung up with extension cords and beaten with hockey sticks.  Yeah!  Beat'em like pinatas 'til the candy falls out or the globe warms, whichever comes first...

105 Of course the models are miserable failures. There are many reasons: 1. the model physics are a simplification of atmospheric processes 2. the code sucks, and may or may not adequately implement 1. 3. the input data sucks 4. these modellers have apparenly never heard of Ed Lorenz and Chaos theory, or for that matter, L. F. Richardson and why his model failed #1 is the nature of the beast - we are limited by what we understand of the processes and can implement as code. #2 is how we advance the state of the art - do it, fail miserably, try another approach, fail less miserably and so on. #3 - it is what it is, and there isn't a lot that can be done about it now. Of course, it also means that the current surface observational network is suspect. That can be worked on and made better. #4 - that can be cured.

106 ESR's quoted code is full of lol: ; ; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!! ; 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 if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,Â’Oooops!Â’ ; yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey) Looks more like if b_amCaught(me) == true then message, 'oh fuck';

107
In the spirit of Rahmbo, I want to see fat-ass Al Gore frog marched out of his ginormous Mcmansion in handcuffs!

108 One of the most interesting things revealed in the data dump that no one is talking about is that the computer programs they were using were not actually climate "models."  No physical laws were used to calculate anything.  What they did was take proxy data (tree ring data is the most notorious example), manipulate it in whatever unholy fashion suited them and extrapolated that if the trend they just created continued we would be in deep, deep shit. 

An actual model would use the laws of thermodynamics and involve having variables for about a billion different things.  Each of those variables would require a judgment to be made because none of them would be known to any degree of certainty.  But even if they got that far it would avail them nothing because there aren't formulas to plug their data into even if values were known for all of the variables.  The system is too complex and the interactions are all unknown.  In other words... it is not possible to have a true climate model. 

Any first year engineering student can tell you that you can't solve for the temperature of a complex or open system like the planetary climate.  For instance, Engineers use models that break down complex surfaces into tiny little elements and even then being able to come up with anything useful involves controlling the materials being used etc...  if any one thing is not known then the whole thing is an exercise in futility.  This is why AGW belief is next to nonexistent amongst engineers.  When you can control the materials you are using and the energy input and output you have a chance to model how a heatsink might act for instance.  When you can't control those things you are just pissing up a rope.  And that is for something very simple and well studied.

But even putting all of that aside, the e-mails reveal that the alarmists couldn't even reproduce their own results with their own data!  The guy they had programming the thing literally just threw his hands up in disgust because there was no way he could make the program spit out results that matched what the alarmists had previously published.  Basically they had made so many assumptions and fudged or changed so much data that there was no way to figure out what they had done.  Their "results" were not reproducible.

Even if their record keeping had been better and their approach had been valid their methodology was still for shit.  To describe what they are doing in another way --- it was as if they were using a wind gauge stationed next to a freeway to measure how fast the cars were going.  This is proxy data because they have no way of measuring speed (or in their case temperature for the years in question) directly.  This is fine as long as the wind keeps blowing and your little cars keep moving.  When the temps started falling at the turn of the century they used statistical tricks to make it look like the temperatures were still trending upwards by mixing and matching which proxies they used and by using various statistical tricks.  For instance if one set of data tends to give figures higher than another set then even if both trend the same you can hide a decline by switching from one series to another at the proper spot.

These guys, for all of their accreditations, were just garden variety fools and they were upon a fool's errand.  That is not so bad since science weeds these sorts out.  But this ceased having anything to do with science when they were given millions of dollars without having to show their work and let others verify their findings.

109

I love how this pompous dick Phil Jones says "cheers" at the end of his e-mail, as if he was just knocking off a friendly missive to his ol' pal Jeeves, who used to bugger him when they both attended Newcastle University, rather than, you know, helping perpetrate the hugest fraud the world has ever known.

I got your "cheers" right here, Phil.  It's burned into this ClueBat I'm about to lay upside your limey, lying head.

110 Open science, is the only science.

Why pay more in taxes to the government, so government scientists can pretend to control the weather.

111 Hackers are either white hat or black hat. A white hat hacker writes code, real good code that makes cool software or finds security holes in cool software, usually in a development language like perl, C, C++, C# or Java . A black hat hacker or "cracker", these days anyway, is a script kiddie downloading exploits, keygens and warez to break stuff. They don't have to know programming languages or system architecture. The smart (to a point) black hat outlaw hackers of my youth like Kevin Mitnick are security consultants now.

112 http://minx.cc/?blog=86&post=295147#c7371641 111, That is an interesting point... so these aren't models, but merely regression analyses and stuff? Can you back that up and maybe (hope hope) open blog it?

113

jehu wrote:

<i>Actually some of the scientific community exactly mirrors the medieval church.  </i>

At least the medieval church created some beautiful cathedrals and art and music (well, if you like Gregorian chant). Commercials showing dead polar bears raining from the skies aren't a big improvement over Notre Dame de Paris (soon to become a mosque). .

114 Thank god people are finally pointing out the very simple to prove and obvious fact the the climate models are ALL junk because they can't "predict the past."  I've been pounding on this point on my blog and places like here since 2003 and have been frustrated that so few people have gone after such low-hanging fruit.

115 burberry scarf | CD Keys

116
#115

That is an interesting point... so these aren't models, but merely regression analyses and stuff?

Didn't everyone know that already?

If it was a model all it would need is the initial state and a button to push to run it, you would not need hundreds of years of temp data (and proxies) to run a real model - all you would need is a temp map of today.

117

 Relax R2. They said they wanted to delete AR4, not R2D2!

They better not try any of that BS with me.

118 New Science: "If they cannot be dazzled with briliance, baffle them with bullshit."

119

This is the first turd in the punch bowl that exposed the fraud all the way back to the beginning.

For those that didn't follow this at the start, the IPCC did their "people did it" political executive summary wa-a-a-ay back. It immediately caught flack over the stupid computer models by some of the very scientists and reviewers of the IPCC study precisely because there was no agreement between the models (one predicted warming, half a dozen predicted cooling, the rest of the three dozen models were just confused).

Then, any number of runs since then right on through to today consistently fail to predict the past. So... they adjust the models and rerun until they can predict the past. Then they run the future and it all falls apart on them again - no warming, some warming, some cooling. In other words, totally unreliable.

If predicting the results of such a monstrously large set of imputs to a chaotic system was do-able then we computer scientists would have long ago been able to reliably predict the future price movements of individual stocks over time. In point of fact, a coin toss is generally as good or better as a predicter. And... Wall Street spends literally millions every year on numbers benders trying to do just that.

120 Cool. That's interesting.

<a href="www.fashion-sale1.com" title="polo T-shirts">polo T-shirts</a>