November 20, 2009
— Gabriel Malor It was getting a little hot in the other comments (get it? getting hot? thanks, I'm here all week), so I'm putting this here.
TGIF Edition (PDF) spoke with Dr. Phil Jones, the researcher who wrote about attempting to fit data to "hide the decline." Here's his explanation:
“In the sense that they’re talking about two different things here. They’re talking about the instrumental data which is unaltered – but they’re talking about proxy data going further back in time, a thousand years, and it’s just about how you add on the last few years, because when you get proxy data you sample things like tree rings and ice cores, and they don’t always have the last few years. So one way is to add on the instrumental data for the last few years.”Jones told TGIF he had no idea what me meant by using the words “hide the decline”.
“That was an email from ten years ago. Can you remember the exact context of what you wrote ten years ago?”
Uh huh. Speculate, doctor. What do you think you meant when you wrote that you had "just completed MikeÂ’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd [sic] from 1961 for KeithÂ’s to hide the decline." What decline could you possibly be talking about?
Keep in mind that when Jones wrote that in 1999 we hadn't had a decade of global cooling yet. So perhaps he was obscuring a decline in the warming trend?
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
08:43 AM
| Comments (189)
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: t-bird at November 20, 2009 08:47 AM (FcR7P)
A couple of things:
1. When the leaks are validated, they need to be hung like a burning tire around the necks of every dickweed who ever pushed AGW. They deserve merciless teasing and bullying at least until they remove themselves from public life. The best outcome is they each cobain themselves a steaming hot cup of lead shot.
2. The underlying enabler for this level of fraud is that government-funded research long ago turned the corner from being appropriation of scarce resources to address known problems to a guaranteed stream of money in search of problems to address. This is a natural consequence of automatically carrying funding levels from year to year.
Posted by: MikeO at November 20, 2009 08:48 AM (dYNrR)
Posted by: Bat Chain Puller at November 20, 2009 08:50 AM (SCcgT)
Posted by: Jim Treacher at November 20, 2009 08:50 AM (cvmgB)
He is likely talking about the "divergence" problem, where those supposedly accurate temperature proxies like tree-ring-widths suddenly started diverging from the actual temperature later in the 20th century.
Climateaudit has numerous posts on the subject, chronicling a horror show of evasion and obfuscation from these duplicitous lying f*cks.
It's disgusting that these people pretend to be engaged in science.
Posted by: Waterhouse at November 20, 2009 08:51 AM (GEBXA)
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 20, 2009 08:51 AM (5Lv7g)
Posted by: Bat Chain Puller at November 20, 2009 12:50 PM (SCcgT)
DOH!
Posted by: Dr. Phil Jones at November 20, 2009 08:52 AM (OtQXp)
6 Who can tell what the guy meant, using such vague words as "hide" and "trick."
We're still working out what the true meaning of "is" is.
Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at November 20, 2009 08:52 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: itsonlywords at November 20, 2009 08:55 AM (McpP+)
Dr. Phil Jones is the same guy who when asked to get a copy of the raw data he used to show warming, responded with.
We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.
Science.
Posted by: AndrewsDad at November 20, 2009 08:55 AM (C2//T)
Which of you has a Nobel Prize anyway?
Posted by: Gore the Magnificient at November 20, 2009 08:55 AM (xxgag)
hide, hide isn't what it used to be. he musta meant an animal skin, but that wouldn't be PC , call peta now!
Posted by: willow at November 20, 2009 08:56 AM (wgSRa)
Posted by: Richard M Nixon at November 20, 2009 08:58 AM (P/PyQ)
I admit to not being good with numbers, but what does proxy data going back thousands of years have to do with data from 1980 and later? Hmm?
So, an epoch failure?
Posted by: HH at November 20, 2009 09:00 AM (+jvXp)
Re: 'The Decline'
The Mann, Bradley, Hughes 1998 paper purported to reproduce the global temperature curve for the millenium using a number of tree-ring composites as a proxy. They refused to release their data or statistical protocol.
McKitrick and McIntyre(Climate Audit) managed to track down the bulk of the data and deconstruct the statistical procedure(sic). They found the technique produced a hockey stick at the end regardless of the data input, even 'white noise' suffficed.
The data to input, tree-ring widths, effectively ended with some of the series terminating in 1980. After that date, current temperature measurements were intended to be appended in situ.
A telling criticism levelled was that this curve diverged from the temperatures being measured, the reality was in decline in comparison with the 'model'. The reconstruction worked too well, in a manner of speaking.
Posted by: gary gulrud at November 20, 2009 09:01 AM (nf+jy)
So the question becomes....was this late 20th Century 'warming' EVER real?
Posted by: nickless at November 20, 2009 09:01 AM (MMC8r)
It was code. He clearly meant he wanted to play a little "hide-the-weiner". With the concept of Truth. And the gullible public.
Crow-meat futures must be soaring! Mmmmm Mmmmm Mmmmm!
Posted by: sherlock at November 20, 2009 09:02 AM (ZrS0c)
“That was an email from ten years ago. Can you remember the exact context of what you wrote ten years ago?”
I think he meant "content" instead of "context." Otherwise he's a brain dead, drooling fucktard of a hack. Or a liar. Or both.
Posted by: Alex's Cabin at November 20, 2009 09:02 AM (i3IvH)
Gabriel,
You need to include climate audit's post on this. It puts it into context and explains the real issue. Jones is not being accurate. I covered it on my blog
Posted by: Mark at November 20, 2009 09:03 AM (Vvbjc)
Posted by: pajama momma at November 20, 2009 09:03 AM (W2yhR)
"Keep in mind that when Jones wrote that in 1999 we hadn't had a decade of global cooling yet. So perhaps he was obscuring a decline in the warming trend?"
So they've been fudging the data for over ten years. No wonder they wouldn't post the computer models' code or raw data for peer review.
Somebody needs to tally up the total global cost of this hoax.
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 09:03 AM (s2bW4)
That should get your grant revoked--and by revoked, I mean you have to repay every cent or be booked on fraud and theft charges--right there.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 20, 2009 09:04 AM (NtiET)
Posted by: AndrewsDad at November 20, 2009 09:04 AM (C2//T)
Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at November 20, 2009 09:05 AM (30xKW)
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 20, 2009 09:06 AM (xxgag)
Approve: 49%
Disapprove:44%
Posted by: Magnus Pyke via Thomas Dolby at November 20, 2009 09:07 AM (T0NGe)
IOW, "I've been making stuff up for so long, I have no idea which nuance I was perpetuating. Besides, there's context and then there's context-context. All these released files provide is merely context. So let's not speak of this unfortunate episode again and let's do combat the real enemy... hackers and global climate change."
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at November 20, 2009 09:09 AM (3nPNg)
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 09:12 AM (8j/o5)
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at November 20, 2009 09:12 AM (kn+jW)
"Options appear to be:
Send them the data
Send them a subset removing station data from some of the countries who made us pay in the normals papers of Hulme et al. (1990s) and also any number that David can remember. This should also omit some other countries like (Australia, NZ, Canada, Antarctica). Also could extract some of the sources that Anders added in (31-38 source codes in J&M 2003). Also should remove many of the early stations that we coded up in the 1980s.
Send them the raw data as is, by reconstructing it from GHCN. How could this be done? Replace all stations where the WMO ID agrees with what is in GHCN. This would be the raw data, but it would annoy them.
"
Hi, our plan to respond to the FOIA is make sure it is the most irritating fashion possible. The actual response he used is "The data is, sadly, lost to history." Witness your first option you slimy non-scientist!
Posted by: Al at November 20, 2009 09:13 AM (V+rMR)
I want to see these Hadley jagoffs hanged from lightposts as much as (if not more than) the next guy.
The quickest way to make that happen is to accuse anyone who ever spouted AGW nonsense of fraud, and they will throw these charlatans under the bus. Then, these believers can be attacked for gullibility, stupidity, and poor judgment.
Posted by: MikeO at November 20, 2009 09:13 AM (dYNrR)
I refuse to participate.
Posted by: Rimshot at November 20, 2009 09:14 AM (RykTt)
Posted by: wHodat at November 20, 2009 09:14 AM (+sBB4)
We got a thing goin'on
We both know that it's wrong
But it's much too strong
To let it go now
Posted by: wHodat at November 20, 2009 09:15 AM (+sBB4)
Everybody get ready!
The next line of BullShit coming down the Pike is........
Because the Mean Global Temperature is cooling, it proves that Carbon Based Global Climate Change is happending. They are going to try to prove that the Northern Hemisphere had a period of unusual warming, which in turn is causing a phenomenon in the oceans which actually makes the Earth's Surface and Mid-Atmosphere Temperature to Cool. (Refer to the movie "Day after Tomorrow")
Pretty soon they are going to get it figured out so that they can make the same argument without ever having to refer to Temperature data or CO2 data.
Anyone remember the early 70's when we everybody had a hissy-fit about Nuclear Power. Apparently the Earth judges the USoA, because we ended all of our Nuclear Power ambitions, and the rest of the world expanded theirs, and the LibTards didn't even raise eyebrow about it.
Posted by: Jimi at November 20, 2009 09:16 AM (fqxV7)
Plenty of NGO's used "Save the Planet!", "Stop Global Warming!" and (my favorite) "Save the Polar Bears!!!" to extract private contibutions from lefty dupes*. I wonder what the totals on these are.
It is to laugh.
* and lefty dupe politicians spending our tax money (which is not to laugh)
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 09:16 AM (s2bW4)
Posted by: Global Climate $cience Grad Student at November 20, 2009 09:17 AM (GwPRU)
Yep. "You, madam, are a worthless dimwit retardate. I would like to hit you in the neck with a cactus! Love, your son. P.S. - Can I borrow twenty bucks?" The reply: "I regret every agonizing hour of labor I went through to bring your ungrateful ass into the world, you worthless puke. I'm sending $20 in one envelope and strychnine in the other; that way, Darwin gets a fair shot. Love, Mom."
Posted by: Monty at November 20, 2009 09:17 AM (4Pleu)
Posted by: johnny_p at November 20, 2009 09:18 AM (ldoxy)
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 09:19 AM (s2bW4)
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 09:19 AM (8j/o5)
Considering that trillions have been wasted on the global warming fraud, I wonder when the prosecutions are going to start. And all of the government hacks who conspired with these pseudo-scientists need to be held to account, too.
This world is so ripe for RICO investigations all through the despicable left-o-sphere.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 20, 2009 09:21 AM (5Lv7g)
Posted by: Crimso at November 20, 2009 09:21 AM (Xj3ni)
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 09:23 AM (8j/o5)
Prediction: The Global Warming scam keeps on truckin’, but a whole bunch of lefties suddenly become interested in the “ethics” surrounding the hacking of files.
But of course. It's the same old song we hear over and over again: when leaks that damage conservatives or conservative causes occur, the media attention is focused on whatever is in the content of the leaks. But when leaks damaging to liberals or liberal causes occur, the focus of the story will be on the impropriety or ethics of leaking, or how should leakers by punished.
All leaks are not equal.
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 20, 2009 09:23 AM (hoowK)
Hmm. I think I recall McIntyre saying the AGW folks were doing this sort of thing and the AGW folks retorting that "no one would ever do anything that stupid". But I could be mistaken; wouldn't be the first time.
Posted by: Anachronda at November 20, 2009 09:24 AM (1OYcp)
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 09:25 AM (8j/o5)
Posted by: Bob Kardashian at November 20, 2009 09:25 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: Eric Holder at November 20, 2009 09:26 AM (3nPNg)
Posted by: Sparky at November 20, 2009 09:26 AM (mXY2a)
Posted by: Your Local Drug Dealer at November 20, 2009 09:26 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 01:12 PM (8j/o5)
LOl. That's why I generally don't lie. Not because of any pretensions of nobility but mainly because I have such a piss poor memory.
Posted by: LGoPs at November 20, 2009 09:27 AM (v/rEn)
Posted by: LikeATimeBomb at November 20, 2009 09:27 AM (dwwPD)
Posted by: Al at November 20, 2009 09:27 AM (V+rMR)
@55
Dagny,
Your damn skippy size matters. If I'm throwing a Summer Sausage into the Grand Canyon niether of us is gonna get there.
It is a two way street!
Posted by: Jimi at November 20, 2009 09:28 AM (fqxV7)
Which begs the question, IF you believe in AGW (and I don't) then how can we be sure it is carbon dioxide and not some obscure manufacturing process we could shut down with little change to our lifestyle.
Posted by: Mike H at November 20, 2009 09:30 AM (LdYLm)
We see what you did there and we are not amused.
Posted by: time_t at November 20, 2009 09:30 AM (1OYcp)
Posted by: Flavius Julius at November 20, 2009 09:30 AM (kKP5O)
We see what you did there and we are not amused.
Oh that was a pun? I missed it.
Posted by: Flavius Julius at November 20, 2009 09:31 AM (kKP5O)
Posted by: Global Climate $cience Grad Student at November 20, 2009 09:32 AM (GwPRU)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 20, 2009 09:33 AM (NtiET)
Posted by: willow at November 20, 2009 09:33 AM (wgSRa)
Posted by: Our friends the Europeans at November 20, 2009 09:33 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: Jessie Jackson at November 20, 2009 09:34 AM (kn+jW)
Posted by: LGoPs at November 20, 2009 01:27 PM (v/rEn)
Yeah, me too except I make an exception for my wife's question about whether a dress makes her look fat. I can remember that shit.
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 20, 2009 09:35 AM (xxgag)
Posted by: Jessie Jackson at November 20, 2009 01:34 PM (kn+jW)
Pure Gold!!!
Posted by: Flavius Julius at November 20, 2009 09:35 AM (kKP5O)
Posted by: Roadking at November 20, 2009 09:35 AM (LDg7g)
Posted by: devilish at November 20, 2009 09:37 AM (vyRPu)
it comes down to whether these e-mails are real, if they are real (it seems at this point they may be) then they will do their damage and we can use them with glee for months and years.
and it won't matter what excuses they make, we are already saying what most ppl believe, human desire to support what they already believe will be an ally as well as these e-mails.
Posted by: shoey at November 20, 2009 09:37 AM (RxUMK)
@77,
WalrusRex,
It is not clear to me why women bother asking questions like that anymore. Is there really a dumbass out there that answers the question......
"Yes Honey.......Your Ass looks like a Race between two VolksWagon bugs racing down a gravel road."
Posted by: Jimi at November 20, 2009 09:38 AM (fqxV7)
Posted by: wHodat at November 20, 2009 01:23 PM (+sBB4)
Considering the money and productivity that this has cost many governments (with the wasted tens of billions in global warming research being the smallest part) this is one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on society. It might even be worse than the CRA-social engineering induced monetary blowout ...
It's amazing that there are any lefties not in jail, frankly. The fact that they have control of the country and are pushing one asinine plan after another ...
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 20, 2009 09:38 AM (5Lv7g)
Yeah, me too except I make an exception for my wife's question about whether a dress makes her look fat. I can remember that shit.
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 20, 2009 01:35 PM (xxgag)
ROTFLMAO. Yeah, me too. I lie like a rug when that question is asked.
Posted by: LGoPs at November 20, 2009 09:39 AM (v/rEn)
Since the emails are real as confirmed by these lying douchebags, I will be the first to officially declare shenanigans.
SHENANIGANS!!!!
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at November 20, 2009 09:40 AM (B+qrE)
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 09:40 AM (RD7QR)
The Supreme Court ruled on April 2, 2007 in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency that the EPA has the authority to regulate the emission of greenhouse gases in automobile emissions, stating that "greenhouse gases fit well within the Clean Air Act capacious definition of air pollutant." The court also stated that the EPA must regulate in this area unless it is able to provide a scientific reason for not doing so.[26]
Jason K. Burnett, former EPA deputy associate administrator, told the United States Congress that an official from Vice President Dick Cheney's office censored congressional testimony by Julie L. Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention[27] Reportedly, the testimony excluded said that "CDC considers climate change a serious public health concern."[27]
Posted by: willow at November 20, 2009 09:40 AM (wgSRa)
79
We had "Bike to Work Day" here in Denver a few months ago, lots in our office were proud that we placed high in our class.
I got a few dirty looks when I joked that I burned a 5-gallon bucket of diesel in that backyard that day to make up for their sins.
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 09:41 AM (s2bW4)
Wheee!!
Posted by: 10 FORMAT( 6hWhee!! ) at November 20, 2009 09:43 AM (1OYcp)
This is the reason that incandescent lightbulbs are being banned in some places.
This is the reason Cap'n'Trade actually got to the legislative point, on the cusp of becoming law and taking over huge portions of our lives and freedoms, not to mention the money.
This is the reason that Al Gore's worthless fat ass is worth a cool billion.
And it's all lies.
Damn right it's fraud, on a global scale. Bigger than Oil for Food.
Now open up ANWR, fuck the windmills, and let's use the greenies for fertilizer.
Posted by: nickless at November 20, 2009 09:43 AM (MMC8r)
Heh heh! I used to work (briefly, very briefly) with a guy whose every unit test was
printf("PASS");
Log files of test output looked really good, though!
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 20, 2009 09:44 AM (NtiET)
FORTRAN... yeah, I remember that.
Posted by: Kings Basic on a Tandy with cassette drive at November 20, 2009 09:44 AM (s2bW4)
We had "Bike to Work Day" here in Denver a few months ago, lots in our office were proud that we placed high in our class.
I got a few dirty looks when I joked that I burned a 5-gallon bucket of diesel in that backyard that day to make up for their sins.
How did you light diesel?
Posted by: Flavius Julius at November 20, 2009 09:44 AM (kKP5O)
Wheee!!
Posted by: 10 FORMAT( 6hWhee!! ) at November 20, 2009 01:43 PM (1OYcp)
Hi, and welcome to another episode of "Nerds: The Hidden Manace".
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at November 20, 2009 09:44 AM (B+qrE)
Posted by: Thomas Edison at November 20, 2009 09:46 AM (kKP5O)
Posted by: Heorot at November 20, 2009 09:46 AM (Nq/UF)
<blink>*</blink>*
Posted by: CLOAD at November 20, 2009 09:47 AM (1OYcp)
Posted by: Kings Basic on a Tandy with cassette drive at November 20, 2009 09:48 AM (s2bW4)
FIFY
Posted by: Mike H at November 20, 2009 09:50 AM (LdYLm)
I would like to take a moment to thank Dr. John Daly, a true scientist, whose death is applauded in these emails, and Steve McIntyre, of climateaudit.org . These are scientists. They follow in the grand tradition of the finest fictional scientist of all time, Wonko the Sane. Wonko, to remind himself to look at the world with the eyes of a child and to follow the data, wherever it leads, and the Sane, to reassure you that he is not in fact a wack-job.
Posted by: motionview at November 20, 2009 09:50 AM (is1tF)
Posted by: Kings Basic on a Tandy with cassette drive at November 20, 2009 09:53 AM (s2bW4)
Posted by: Berserker at November 20, 2009 09:53 AM (gWHrG)
Posted by: Flavius Julius at November 20, 2009 09:54 AM (kKP5O)
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 09:54 AM (s2bW4)
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 09:54 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Wm T Sherman at November 20, 2009 09:55 AM (w41GQ)
Many of these papers are posted online. When did Al Gore invent the internet?
Posted by: Flavius Julius at November 20, 2009 09:57 AM (kKP5O)
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 09:58 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 09:59 AM (s2bW4)
Posted by: Wm T Sherman at November 20, 2009 01:55 PM (w41GQ)
I would guess Michael Mann (of intentionally fraudulent Hockey Stick infamy). He has about 5 Nature articles listed on his own site, so checking the date might nail it down. Just a guess, though.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 20, 2009 10:00 AM (5Lv7g)
From National Review Online, Sept 23 2009:
So the weather data that go into the historical climate records that are required to verify models of global warming aren’t the original records at all. Jones and Wigley, however, weren’t specific about what was done to which station in order to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming of 0.6° +/– 0.2°C in the 20th century.
Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Oh, that Dr. Phil Jones
Posted by: Wm T Sherman at November 20, 2009 10:06 AM (w41GQ)
Posted by: Dagny at November 20, 2009 10:07 AM (8j/o5)
My university didn't have the glass windows; there was just this big room you couldn't get into.
By the time I started, the punched cards were fading. They were in the process of replacing the big Burroughs with a flock of VAXen.
I did do *cough* I mean a friend of mine did some rummaging around in the wastebaskets in the cardpunch room to collect discarded username/password cards so he could steal time to play games on the Burroughs, though.
Posted by: Anachronda at November 20, 2009 10:13 AM (1OYcp)
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 10:16 AM (s2bW4)
From National Review Online, Sept 23 2009:
So the weather data that go
into the historical climate records that are required to verify models
of global warming arenÂ’t the original records at all. Jones and Wigley,
however, werenÂ’t specific about what was done to which station in order
to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming
of 0.6° +/– 0.2°C in the 20th century.
Now
begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where
that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005,
asking for the original data. JonesÂ’s response to a fellow scientist
attempting to replicate his work was, “We have 25 years or so invested
in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim
is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Oh, that Dr. Phil Jones
I aint no rocket scientist or anything but isn't that the whole point of peer review?
Posted by: Flavius Julius at November 20, 2009 10:17 AM (kKP5O)
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 10:17 AM (RD7QR)
Didn't they later claim that the original data had been lost?
Might be fun to see if any of that old lost data was in the zip file.
Posted by: Cluebat from Exodar at November 20, 2009 10:20 AM (JSetw)
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 10:27 AM (RD7QR)
32 OT but flaming skull worthy in my humble opinion. In an effort to further appease the Iranians on the nuclear issue, Obama has gone to court to prevent the families of the 1983 Lebanon Marine Barracks bombing to execute their $2.65 billion judgment against Iran by seizing Iranian assets.
I can see the lefty response now. Bush did it as well, it says so in the article. The idiots can't seem to understand that there is a difference between disputing how much can actually be seized, and going to court to block payments.
Posted by: Mark at November 20, 2009 10:31 AM (Vvbjc)
At my college we ran FORTRAN on punch cards on an RCA mainframe. No passwords, only a JOB card with a name (could be any name) on it. The operators used to piss us off by waiting (sometimes for hours) until there were a large number of FORTRAN jobs to run while running COBOL jobs on demand for the business pukes. Fortunately we had a plan- the RCA FORTRAN compiler had a bug in the 'ARCCOS' function that would crash the operating system requiring a tedious reload. The computer center walls were covered with warnings to not use the ARCCOS function.
So we wrote a one line program: Y=ARCCOS(0) and submitted it under a JOB card with the innocent pseudonym "Dick Burns"- and waited. Sure enough the operator runs the pile of FORTRAN jobs, the OS halts, the operator- mad as hell- rifles through the stack of JOB cards until he finds the offending one and then turns to the entire computer center and yells:
"ALL RIGHT, WHO'S DICK BURNS!?!?!?"
Fun times...
Posted by: Nighthawk at November 20, 2009 10:31 AM (OtQXp)
Hide the decline?
It was a sexual metaphor.
You know, like hide the sausage.
We in climatology use words such as decline, or isobar, or atmosphere, or algore as metaphors for sexual acts or when we talk about our peenors.
Posted by: Phil Jones at November 20, 2009 10:32 AM (jVldi)
Posted by: Huckleberry at November 20, 2009 10:37 AM (s2bW4)
Posted by: -gavin at November 20, 2009 10:39 AM (NtiET)
I've worked in some truly obscure programming languages over the years. SCHEME (Knights of the Lambda Calculus!), Lisp, Prolog, JOVIAL, Ada, JCL, REXX, CANDU, lots of others. And about a hundred different variants of C and C++. I've never written actual production code in FORTRAN, though, thank God. (Although I did once work on a COBOL program that had been written two months before I was born!)
Posted by: Monty at November 20, 2009 10:39 AM (4Pleu)
I've worked in some truly obscure programming languages over the years. SCHEME (Knights of the Lambda Calculus!), Lisp, Prolog, JOVIAL, Ada, JCL, REXX, CANDU, lots of others.
Are you the one guy, in the history of the universe, who wrote his own JCL? Everyone else always just copied what the one guy wrote and cut out the bits they didn't need.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at November 20, 2009 10:45 AM (ZJ/un)
As a recovering academic this is really just a delightful treasure trove of documents. For years McIntyre has been pushing to see raw data and the modeling software source code from this cabal and they have refused. Now we REALLY know why. These individuals may be mathematical, climatological geniuses, but they do not follow even the most basic software development and database management practices.
For really, really important software we use formal development processes that result in mathematically proven software. For AlGore's anti-scientists, they think they know their software is working correctly if the output looks plausible, and for them plausible is a hockey-stick.
Posted by: motionview at November 20, 2009 10:47 AM (is1tF)
Posted by: Bernie Madoff at November 20, 2009 10:50 AM (s2bW4)
So where do you folks want news items sent?
This isn't an appeal to gain attention--no wait, look at me! look at me dammit! why won't anyone look at me?--I just want to know who fields hot and cooling tips, and how.
No "tip" jokes, please.
Not even that one. You know which one I mean.
Posted by: K~Bob at November 20, 2009 10:54 AM (WtrwW)
Hrm.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 20, 2009 10:54 AM (NtiET)
The article and the person who dropped it both declared 'The science is in, there is no global cooling.'
Of course the idea was to stop the global warming deniers before they got too much info on their side.
So I went to war with a ton of people on the site - through a comments section like this one. I was ridiculed in all kinds of ways - the rage they had for me - unbelievable. How DARE I tell them global warming was a crock - and that it was pseudoscience driven by greed, profit and lust for control.
Fortunately, I had a few supporters. But I got my point out there as they fought over this for a few days in total.
And NOW THIS...
Well, well, well...
Posted by: Def Leppard at November 20, 2009 10:56 AM (hIOnV)
"Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
-Phil Jones, 2005, in response to Warwick Hughes's, an Australian scientist, request for Jones' twenty-five years of climate data.
************************************
Apparently Phil has forgotten the motto of the Royal Society, the UK's oldest scientific orgaization, founded in 1644.
Translated from Latin, it reads: "No one gets the last word".
Someone should also tell that to Algore next time he bleats about "settled science".
Posted by: effinayright at November 20, 2009 10:59 AM (7M8Py)
Posted by: joncelli at November 20, 2009 11:00 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Mark at November 20, 2009 11:04 AM (Vvbjc)
Proxy data is how scientists learned about the ice ages that have occurred over the last million years or so. (I am not using a scientific number here, like Al "millions of degrees" Gore, I'm just using a large number because I know they have traced several ice ages, and each of them are about 100,000 years apart (give or take a few tens of thousands of years). I don't know how many years back the data is useful. It's a lot.
Proxy data is about as universally "agreed on" by climate scientists as it gets in that field, and such things as ice cores, tree rings, layers of certain elements in the soil, transported materials (stuff that glaciers pushed around), etc., all serve as hard data to track ancient climate. In other words, ice ages happened, and no one can say with any certainty that they will not happen again.
This article by David Deming of the U. of Oklahoma shows exactly why AGW is such a tough sell, especially now that its proponents have had their "data" exposed.
Posted by: K~Bob at November 20, 2009 11:13 AM (WtrwW)
Posted by: andycanuck at November 20, 2009 11:18 AM (2qU2d)
Friend of Ace Charles over at LGF has declared this whole AGW email thing to be a "nontroversy" created by write-ring bloggers and AGW deniers cherry picking stolen emails. He also said that these are not the droids you're looking for, so move along.
Posted by: Bru at November 20, 2009 11:27 AM (nUBV4)
This issue is: There's proxy data, and then there's proxy data.
Michael Mann's method is to throw anything that might possibly be a proxy into a pot, and see what lines up with the (fudged!) HADCrut temperature records. And "clipping" sections from lots of potential proxies to essentially improve their rankings. "Oh, well, it sucked in 1960-1980, so we'll crop that part and see if it was a good proxy everywhere but that one part where it sucked hard."
This works fine in one aspect - you will indeed find things that do line up with with current temperature trends. But the fundamental assumption here is that those same proxies actually work when extended into history. And it is basically unreasonable. Trees that are precisely at the treeline do indeed make pretty reasonable short term thermometers.
But treelines freaking move. And so these same trees weren't on a treeline 200 years ago. Or 400. Or whatever.
They can be a decent proxy for -current- temperatures, while simultaneously completely sucking at being a proxy for historical temperatures.
There are emails from other basically highlighting the non-proxy nature littered through this FOIA dump. This is freaking outrageous.
Posted by: Al at November 20, 2009 11:28 AM (V+rMR)
Posted by: California Red at November 20, 2009 11:43 AM (ElDsu)
The libstream media is undoubtedly consulting to find the "proper" spin for this. There was one thing on the BBC not revealing any of the content of the emails or data files but moaning about the illegal hacking into the system.
Posted by: andycanuck at November 20, 2009 11:51 AM (2qU2d)
So all of your 'evidence' consists of one e-mail with the phrase 'hide the decline'.
How CONCLUSIVE.
Posted by: JEA at November 20, 2009 12:07 PM (a+kMW)
How CONCLUSIVE.
For someone who seems willing to take demonstrably weak and faulty data as enough evidence for AGW, what more would you need to prove that they were trying to monkey around with the numbers for their own selfish purposes?
Or do you have another explanation for the "hide the decline" remark, besides the most blindingly obvious one?
Posted by: wiserbud at November 20, 2009 12:14 PM (wWwJR)
One e-mail? Is that going to be the meme of you AGW-cultist shitheads? FYI, dumbass, it's a whole bunch of e-mails revealing all kinds of incriminating unscientific behaviour.
.
Follow the links, you brain-damaged lying sack of crap.
Posted by: Waterhouse at November 20, 2009 12:34 PM (GEBXA)
147 ......? Did anyone besides DoD use Ada?
OK, I admit it: I bent her over a fence quite a few times.
Posted by: Charles Babbage at November 20, 2009 12:48 PM (7M8Py)
Posted by: Veritus at November 22, 2009 04:51 AM (Tano9)
???!!
To those who actually understand the science, Dr Jones was very obviously talking about the tree ring data becoming unreliable after around 1960 - a known problem which CRU scientists THEMSELVES have previously highlighted in their published work (so much for the "conspiracy"!)
The "trick" is to supplement the tree ring data with other, more reliable data from alternative sources to erase ("hide") a well-known margin of ERROR!
To repeat, Dr Jones is emphatically NOT talking about an actual decline in global temperature which he, or anyone else in his field, is trying to cover up. His comments are clearly being taken out of context and deliberately misrepresented to the public. If this is the best you can find out of several thousands emails dating way back to 1996...well...
Independent bodies (i.e. bodies not affiliated with each other, or colluding in any way whatsoever) throughout the world - using very different methods - all confirm the warming trend. There's absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing here, still less outright fraud.
There is, however, plenty of evidence of nefarious private interest groups going to criminal lengths to wilfully distort and undermine scientific findings, as well as smear and vilify honest scientists. Disgusting.
Regards,
P.
Posted by: Manapatra at November 27, 2009 04:25 AM (/8Z0U)
Posted by: Online Printing Design at February 19, 2010 03:02 PM (rqQdc)
<a href="http://www.killerbeeprinting.com/">Online Printing Design</a>
Posted by: Online Printing Design at February 19, 2010 03:04 PM (rqQdc)
<a href="http://www.prizmacelikkapi.com" title="çelik kapý">çelik kapý</a> çelik kapý fiyatlarý
<a href="http://www.asdcelikkapi.com" title="çelik kapý">çelik kapý</a> çelik kapý fiyatlarý
Posted by: celikkapi at April 13, 2010 11:50 AM (pmidT)
I do NOT ordered a and I donÂ’t confirmed anything.I ony generate a kind of a account on your side, because I want to know with option I have by the payments.If I make the decision to order a Alain Silberstein watches.... I am interest in the Baume & Mercier watches. So please give me a special price and inform me I witch way it is possible to pay.
Posted by: A.Lange & Sohne watches at April 14, 2010 04:51 PM (Ry2Y1)
Posted by: deneme at April 16, 2010 04:18 PM (gWx30)
Posted by: prizma at May 15, 2010 02:30 PM (P12vj)
<a href="http://gaylez.org" title="gay chat" target="_blank">gay chat</a
<a href=''http://lez.gen.tr'' title="lez Sohbet" target="_blank">lez Sohbet</a thaks you
Posted by: gay sohbet at August 22, 2010 04:51 PM (E0CGa)
Posted by: çöp konteyner at August 28, 2010 05:31 AM (ZlXtM)
Posted by: dell destek at September 01, 2010 01:23 AM (ZlXtM)
Posted by: Acer Destek at September 03, 2010 12:55 AM (hDvKH)
Posted by: furniture dealers in california at September 18, 2010 04:35 AM (Hv0Ef)
Posted by: Find antique preserve at September 21, 2010 06:38 AM (04mzz)
Posted by: women health at September 23, 2010 05:00 AM (tLyrd)
Posted by: lahmacun firini at October 07, 2010 03:10 AM (16zUO)
All of them are fantastic, and when you have more currency in game that we deliver to you,
you can enjoy the game much more.
Posted by: mabinogi gold at November 17, 2010 02:54 AM (6VzfZ)
Posted by: çelik kapı fiyatları at January 19, 2011 11:58 PM (dc7df)
Posted by: tubeporn at February 01, 2011 06:26 AM (yAca7)
Posted by: youth nfl jerseys at March 10, 2011 08:38 PM (LvTot)
In SAN Antonio spurs went out, Kobe shoes the Los Angeles lakers and became the western conference champions Dallas mavericks big popular,
Posted by: kobe shoes at May 03, 2011 11:45 PM (IfSrv)
For those of you who are purchasing ebridalgowns,we realize that this is one of the most important purchasing decisions you will make.<a href="http://www.faucetso.com">Faucets</a>
Posted by: ebridalgowns at June 14, 2011 07:52 PM (SuY4Y)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.1927 seconds, 317 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Fire that man.
Posted by: Waterhouse at November 20, 2009 08:46 AM (GEBXA)