Did You Know...

   

Document-dump-a-palooza — plus an Obama/sound science flashback; Update: Official White House position on ClimateGate: So what?

Share
By Michelle Malkin  •  November 30, 2009 02:21 PM

“Document dump” is the operative word of the month, isn’t it?

We had another holiday weekend document dump of visitor logs from the White House, which included these trips:

Former Vice President Al Gore had four White House meetings in April. The records suggest these were not social calls for Gore, who won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work to curb global warming. Two of the meetings were with John Holdren, Obama’s top science and technology adviser.

Holdren, of course, is the population control freak/global warming zealout/science czar — who, as I noted last week, is smack dab in the middle of the ClimateGate scandal.

Speaking of which, the research institution at the center of ClimateGate admitted its own document dump over the weekend:

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”

The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.

Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said.

And to round out document-dump-a-palooza, here’s the latest on the massive ACORN docdump.

Viva transparency!

***

More:

*Paul Mirengoff at Power Line: The Obama-Holder Justice Department turns a blind eye to ACORN . More here.

Well now: ACORN and NBC collaborated together on an undercover sting project.

See my “ACORN Watch: A ‘sting’-ing indictment of media hypocrisy” for more on NBC hypocrisy and the old media protection racket.

*There is now a searchable ClimateGate database here.

*White House press secretary Robert Gibbs — echoing data destruction expert/energy czar Carol Browner — says ClimateGate has no bearing on Obama’s push for massive global warming taxes/intervention. The science is “settled.”

Yeah, who cares about the global warming scandal of the century?

An Obama science policy flashback from March 2009:

But let’s be clear: Promoting science isn’t just about providing resources — it’s also about protecting free and open inquiry. It’s about letting scientists like those who are here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda — and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.

Words, just words.

***

The Atlantic’s Clive Crook blasts ClimateGate corruption:

In my previous post on Climategate I blithely said that nothing in the climate science email dump surprised me much. Having waded more deeply over the weekend I take that back.

The closed-mindedness of these supposed men of science, their willingness to go to any lengths to defend a preconceived message, is surprising even to me. The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering. And, as Christopher Booker argues, this scandal is not at the margins of the politicised IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] process. It is not tangential to the policy prescriptions emanating from what David Henderson called the environmental policy milieu [subscription required]. It goes to the core of that process.

One theme, in addition to those already mentioned about the suppression of dissent, the suppression of data and methods, and the suppression of the unvarnished truth, comes through especially strongly: plain statistical incompetence. This is something that Henderson’s study raised, and it was also emphasised in the Wegman report on the Hockey Stick, and in other independent studies of the Hockey Stick controversy. Of course it is also an ongoing issue in Steve McIntyre’s campaign to get hold of data and methods. Nonetheless I had given it insufficient weight. Climate scientists lean very heavily on statistical methods, but they are not necessarily statisticians. Some of the correspondents in these emails appear to be out of their depth. This would explain their anxiety about having statisticians, rather than their climate-science buddies, crawl over their work.

I’m also surprised by the IPCC’s response. Amid the self-justification, I had hoped for a word of apology, or even of censure. (George Monbiot called for Phil Jones to resign, for crying out loud.) At any rate I had expected no more than ordinary evasion. The declaration from Rajendra Pachauri that the emails confirm all is as it should be is stunning. Science at its best. Science as it should be. Good lord. This is pure George Orwell. And these guys call the other side “deniers”.

blog comments powered by Disqus
~ For the latest breaking news, be sure to join Michelle's Email List:

Standing up against wealth-shaming

January 29, 2014 02:57 AM by Michelle Malkin

Screen shot 2014-01-29 at 2.02.04 AM

What a coincidence: ACORN founder’s organization serving as Obamacare navigators

October 17, 2013 11:35 PM by Doug Powers

acorn-150x150

Old friends

Barack Obama’s “Social Innovation” slush fund

June 14, 2013 10:35 AM by Michelle Malkin

State Department warns Texas AG not to arrest UN-affiliated election observers

October 27, 2012 08:11 AM by Doug Powers

Immunity

Scytl: Voter Fraud Facts and Fiction

May 9, 2012 07:59 AM by Michelle Malkin


Categories: 2012 Campaign, ACORN Watch, Politics, Voter fraud

Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook