Oh boy! Mayhem!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,821
Reaction score
3,234
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Beyond pointing out that this could have massive repurcussions, I'll leave the commentary aside and simply point out some of the details:
1) Hackers (Russians, if what I've heard is correct) hacked into the the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU)
2) Hackers swiped 60+ megabytes of emails and data regarding global warming
3) Hackers posted it all online
4) Turns out many of the emails show apparent systemic fraud in the global warming science

Whooops.

http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=4569
 

TinWing

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
896
Reaction score
110
Is it any surprise that academic dishonesty is rife when publicly financed climate research is conducted without any oversight or accountability. Sadly, this sort of apparent misconduct will lead to "hoax" and "conspiracy" claims when the real issue is academic dishonesty. Researchers are rewarded with public funds for offering up hyperbolic testimony on dubious climate models. When our elected leaders create a scenario rewarding misconduct on the part of academics, we can expect revelations of this sort.

The reality is that the man made "climate change" is worthy of debate and there is a valid diversity of opinion among reputable academics.
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
407
What the hell is this politicized rubbish doing on this forum?
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,614
Reaction score
3,538
starviking said:
What the hell is this politicized rubbish doing on this forum?

It's in the bar.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,614
Reaction score
3,538
TinWing said:
Sadly, this sort of apparent misconduct will lead to "hoax" and "conspiracy" claims when the real issue is academic dishonesty.

You make it sound as though even though they made up data you think they're correct. So if I made up data that said my pet tarantula was actually a mutated rock would that also be correct? Bull$hit data would indicate they didn't have REAL data that would support their claims. To then say "it doesn't matter" well, the word "sheep" comes to mind.



TinWing said:
The reality is that the man made "climate change" is worthy of debate and there is a valid diversity of opinion among reputable academics.

Whoa. When did the bait-and-switch happen? I thought it was "Global Warming", now it's "Climate Change"? Wonder why they had to do that? The only "fact" is that global temperatures fluctuate over time and it wouldn't matter if we were still swinging from trees or all driving HUMMERS. If the temperature trend happened to be going down the same group would be moaning about how humans are putting particulates into the atmosphere causing less sunlight though and would then beat that drum for all it's worth. What we REALLY have is a bunch of unscrupulous, opportunistic douchebags playing off the "feel good" liberal left to syphon dollars into their pockets and create political power for themselves. The sooner everybody wakes up to that fact the better off we'll ALL be. Notice how any change is BAD and we have to do something RIGHT NOW. For all we know the raising of temperatures would be a GOOD thing. (Cue the nut jobs who think a bump of a degree or two will initiate a runaway venus-like greenhouse effect.) I don't doubt that humans have an effect on global temperatures. I seriously doubt the temperature wouldn't still be going up right now if we all lived in caves, ate grass, and had never even heard of the concept of fire. Encouraging "scientists" to make up bad data doesn't do anybody any good, something that is so obvious it should cause one to question the ethics and integrity of everybody associated with the "climate change" fiasco.
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
407
sferrin said:
starviking said:
What the hell is this politicized rubbish doing on this forum?

It's in the bar.

Unless the rules have changed stuff of this nature isn't supposed to be posted anywhere on the forum - as it's pretty much political.
 

Umble

Interested party with no direct aviation experiend
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
7
Reaction score
4
It saddens me that my first post has to be a call for moderation. Surely the prime reason for this forum is a mutual interest in planes and stuff. Let's lay off controversies like this one. We won't solve anything but it might well put people off!
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
407
sferrin said:
Whoa. When did the bait-and-switch happen? I thought it was "Global Warming", now it's "Climate Change"? Wonder why they had to do that? The only "fact" is that global temperatures fluctuate over time and it wouldn't matter if we were still swinging from trees or all driving HUMMERS.

First - it's always been 'Climate Change' - that's why we have IPCC reports instead of IPGW reports. Global Warming is a consequence of Climate Change.

As for facts - the laws of thermodynamics, the added atmospheric greenhouse gases, and radiative transfer are all the facts needed to account for Anthropogenic Climate Change.
 

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
5,168
Reaction score
4,340
Website
www.amazon.com
When socialism becomes history, half of the members of parliament throught the planet will be jobless.
Something needs to be invented to prevent them returning to their lawyer activity!
"Climate change" will be good enough to maintain the fiction for some years ... ;D
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,614
Reaction score
3,538
starviking said:
sferrin said:
starviking said:
What the hell is this politicized rubbish doing on this forum?

It's in the bar.

Unless the rules have changed stuff of this nature isn't supposed to be posted anywhere on the forum - as it's pretty much political.

That's fine with me and if that's what Paul wants I'm happy to delete my post above. (Honestly, I'd rather it weren't anywhere on the site either but it is at times tough to resist once it pops up. :-[ )
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,821
Reaction score
3,234
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
starviking said:
What the hell is this politicized rubbish doing on this forum?

Actually, *you* were the first one to bring upm politics. This is a case of two crimes:
1) A major hacking
2) Scientific fraud

Part 2) there also involves such things as money laundering and efforts to destroy data, such as a request to get rid of whole sets of emails. This is *illegal.*

And the fallout of this could very well be major. This should be obvious regardless of ones politics.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,821
Reaction score
3,234
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
starviking said:
Unless the rules have changed stuff of this nature isn't supposed to be posted anywhere on the forum - as it's pretty much political.

What's "political" about scientific fraud or academic dishonesty? The subject of this is no more "political rubbish" than a genuine news story about "[Insert Famed Politician HERE] has been arrested for murder." And given that the consequences of the AGW debate, from massive sealevel rises and famine on one side, to collapsing major economies to pay phantom "bills" on the other, having an *honest* debate on the topic seems to make a whole lot of sense. And if the data used to support one side or another is being systematically corrupted, that's worthy of note.
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
407
Orionblamblam said:
starviking said:
What the hell is this politicized rubbish doing on this forum?

Actually, *you* were the first one to bring upm politics. This is a case of two crimes:
1) A major hacking
2) Scientific fraud

Part 2) there also involves such things as money laundering and efforts to destroy data, such as a request to get rid of whole sets of emails. This is *illegal.*

And the fallout of this could very well be major. This should be obvious regardless of ones politics.

Really Scott?

Unless you've been living on a desert island for the last decade you'd know that Climate Change is a topic prone to highly politicized debate - look at Justo's comment about socialism in his post at 04:32:19 pm.

As for scientific fraud - I've seen nothing in the emails to suggest that - though there's plenty of stuff to suggest, unsurprisingly, that scientists are human too.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,821
Reaction score
3,234
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
starviking said:
Unless you've been living on a desert island for the last decade you'd know that Climate Change is a topic prone to highly politicized debate

As you ably demonstrate.

As for scientific fraud - I've seen nothing in the emails to suggest that

From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: IPCC & FOI
Date: Thu May 29 11:04:11 2008

Mike,

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t
have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!
Cheers
Phil

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK



mk8113.jpg
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,821
Reaction score
3,234
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Scientists should say what *could* be done, what's probably *going* to happen.

Scientists shouldn't say what probably *should* be done. Much as I despise the entire race of politicians, deciding what should be done is *their* job.

Going the route of policy-maker while also playing the part of scientist leads scientists to act unscientifically, and this corrupts not only the science, but the policy.

Me, I'd love to see nuclear powered single stage aerospaceplanes. The current technology does not support it. There are some theoretical technologies that might (Bussards QED fusion, maybe). A scientist working on the program simply to see if such a system might work is one thing. A scientist who is invested in the success of the system is quite another. Even without nefarious motives, this stands a high probability of introducing bias into the data analysis.

This, sadly, was pretty much my introduction to aerospace... I had a "scientist" for a boss who was invested not in detemining what would work, but in proving that his ideas not only would work, but were The Way We Should Go. As a result, I had more than my share of high-velocity shrapnel zip past my head due to failed experiments that never should have even taken place. And failed experiments were hushed-up, somethign that disturbed the hell out of me.

Science learns as much by failures as by success. Coverign up data that does not support your goals is bad.
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
407
Orionblamblam said:
starviking said:
Unless you've been living on a desert island for the last decade you'd know that Climate Change is a topic prone to highly politicized debate

As you ably demonstrate.

Oh right Scott, just ignore the facts and go for the personal attack.

As for scientific fraud - I've seen nothing in the emails to suggest that


From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: IPCC & FOI
Date: Thu May 29 11:04:11 2008

Mike,

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t
have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!
Cheers
Phil

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK



mk8113.jpg

First - that is without context.
Second - who is to say the hacker haven't done more than just hack files?
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
407
Orionblamblam said:
Scientists should say what *could* be done, what's probably *going* to happen.

Scientists shouldn't say what probably *should* be done. Much as I despise the entire race of politicians, deciding what should be done is *their* job.

Well, being experts in their fields they should have an idea of what should be done. Whether politicians follow their advice is another thing altogether: however, as human beings, scientists should be allowed to object when politicians do something they thing is unhelpful (in the context of solving/ameliorating the problem).
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,614
Reaction score
3,538
Anybody who's interested in taking a peek can look right here:

http://www.anelegantchaos.org/cru/


BTW if these have been altered all they'd have to do is produce the originals. Curiously, the relevant parties seem to be resisting that path. What have they got to hide?
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,614
Reaction score
3,538
Interesting thread here:

http://www.tboverse.us/HPCAFORUM/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4396

""1. Think I’ve managed to persuade UEA to ignore all further FOIA
requests if the people have anything to do with Climate Audit.

2. Had an email from David Jones of BMRC, Melbourne. He said
they are ignoring anybody who has dealings with CA, as there are
threads on it about Australian sites.
3. CA is in dispute with IPCC (Susan Solomon and Martin Manning)
about the availability of the responses to reviewer’s at the various
stages of the AR4 drafts. They are most interested here re Ch 6 on
paleo.""
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,821
Reaction score
3,234
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
starviking said:
Orionblamblam said:
starviking said:
Unless you've been living on a desert island for the last decade you'd know that Climate Change is a topic prone to highly politicized debate

As you ably demonstrate.

Oh right Scott, just ignore the facts and go for the personal attack.


Sorry, no. It was *you* who wrote: "What the hell is this politicized rubbish doing on this forum?"

Second - who is to say the hacker haven't done more than just hack files?

The people who wrote the emails and confirmed they're accurate.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,603
Reaction score
7,630
I knew this topic would go to the dogs.

Its an interesting topic and Scott was quite careful to be posting about the scientific aspects only, it was largely other posters who politicised the topic.

Now, I haven't read the original materials and I bet the same is true of others posting here but I'd be careful about leaping to any conclusions regarding the validity or otherwise of the theory of climate change based on quotes selected by pundits who are pre-disposed towards a particular position on the argument.

I can't tell you how often people cherry pick bits and pieces from scientific articles that don't even vaguely support their conclusions and use them totally out of context - this is rife in the "alternative medicines" market and the idiotic conspiracy theory mindset. See the book "1421" for a perfect example of this.

Equally, sometimes scientists we might all admire have turned out to have faked data, inadvertently or not - but because they were right in their ideas, we don't vilify them.

Regrettably, I'm locking this topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Top