The Radical Right can go bite tacks.
Friday, December 11th, 2009Yes, I know that makes no sense whatsoever.
I went online and looked into Climategate (not really, it was just something that popped up on Youtube). It turns out that of about 13 years of emails, there are exactly two passages that the media honed in on:
“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series to the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”
and
“We can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
So either these are the most noticeable frauds, or these are the only frauds and this entire story is a giant load of bovine feces. As it turns out, both “evidences” can easily be explained as the aforementioned bovine feces.
For the first one, it turns out that the “Nature trick” doesn’t refer to fraud, but to a technique, as in “Substitution is a great trick for solving systems of equations.”
Also, the decline mentioned is actually the apparent decline in temperatures shown by tree rings. The issue that the quote is from is whether or not tree rings should be used as a guide for constructing temperature models from before the industrial evolution, as they are known to vary with temperature but are also unreliable.
The only potential problem here is the word “hide,” which might indicate fudging, but regardless of what it reflects, it will have no effect on the veracity of global warming itself.
The second quote is only talking about the past one or two years, and it is common knowledge among scientists that the Earth has cooled slightly over the past few years due to the influence of an eleven-year cycle, at the nadir of which the Earth’s temperature drops from the factors responsible for El Nino/La Nina. In fact, the given quote actually appears in multiple emails, from different climatologists, who disagree with this claim, made by another climatologist, Tremberth.
In fact, Tremberth wasn’t expressing this privately; he even wrote a paper - and was kind enough to provide a link to it - expressing these same doubts. Additionally, this is his personal opinion, not that of the scientific community.
And let’s face it, this entire story violates common sense. Remember the 9/11 “conspiracy”? The fact was then that for the President, Congress, the military, the firefighters, the state of New York, the police, the construction crew, the salvages, the bloggers, the political hopefuls and all the families to be coerced or convinced into such a conspiracy would be completely ludicrous.
Likewise, which of these three scenarios seems the least likely?
The right-wing news stations are perpetuating a story without fact-checking, as they have been known to do?
The hackers faked a few thousand emails?
The entire scientific community, in unison, faked millions of data points across twenty years, keeping them consistent with each other and cross-referencing them so that they tell a story completely contrary to reality?
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
For an internet blogger, or a layman to spread this story without looking too far into it is understandable thanks to the daily grind, but for a news station? Especially Fox News, one of the largest in America? I wouldn’t say it’s preposterous, but at the very least, it demonstrates horrible reporting, inconsistency, reckless disregard, and pure incompetence. At worst, it is lying, propoganda, and fraud.
Dangit Fox.
-T