Too funny... Climate change data dumped Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor 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...CONTINUE READING
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? Sounds like when NASA taped over the original moon landing video.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? Hey, how was NASA to know there wouldn't be anything in Al Capone's secret vault?
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? AGW is looking like a fraud. Christmas came early this year.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? And the original source data - the records kept by weather stations across the globe - are presumably still kept by the original owners. But the single file that summarized all the raw data was tossed and the adjusted data summary was kept. In other words - if someone really wants that raw data - they can go back and get it and re-create the summary of raw data. Methinks some folks are grasping at straws.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? The point being that it shows what raw data they originally used. There isn't just one set of temperatures to use. There's various ways of measuring and various criteria to use for what to include and not include. By not keeping the raw data they're ensuring, whether it was by accident or purposely done, that their "experiment" can never be independently reproduced.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? Already a thread on this. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1245809 Though it does not have this update.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? Why can't it be reproduced? Do they own the hundred years of logbooks of temperature from NY's central park or Johanasburg? I bet not. If anyone wanted to reproduce their analysis, they could go back to the original source data around the world, collect it in one database, and do it again. Their statistical meta-analysis ("experiment") can be reproduced. Exxon can spend less than their CEO's bonus to do it if they really wanted to, but the pollution lobby knows doing so won't help them, and their dollars are more effectively spent on campaign contributions and unscientific think tanks.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? No. Follow the comments for the real debate. Gavin Schmidt of NASA explains the issues raised by readers with the patience of a saint CRU hack The CRU hack: context Where's the data? Data Sources
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? I'm not sure how else to explain it. I'm not trying to be snarky but you really need to read a bit on all that's involved in measuring Tempreture. It's not anything like what you're eluding to above.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? Or they can go the the other dozen locations where the data has been stored. People keep referring to EAU's data and models like they're the only ones out there. Yes, they were part of the data and models that were incorporated into major policy decisions, but they're not the repository for all data, studies, and models for this field.
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? I'm glad to see that sense and reason prevails on this board, unlike the hotbed of denialism that is Big Footy
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? Roger Pielke is a scientist quoted in the OP article. I think it is helpful to go to his blog and read both his original blog post he did in August on the subject and his follow up post in November after he talked to the CRU people. http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2009/11/cru-on-global-temperture-data.html
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? The emails are more valuable for their evidence of collusion, tampering, and their efforts to deny any sort of publishable space to a skeptic position.
Climategate: it's all unravelling now Something is indeed rotten in Denmark. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100018556/climategate-its-all-unravelling-now/ This article gives lots of links to updates on the ongoing global warming fraud. A lot of people have a lot of explaining to do. I knew something stunk when the advocates shifted there rhetoric from "global warming" to "climate change", with the subtle implication that the climate should not change. That, and the whole movement took on a tone of religion where one had to discount evidence to the contrary to still believe. If you dig a little deeper this is just another exercise in following the money as global warming became big business.
Re: Climategate: it's all unravelling now How did the global warming big business fake these? (click for full size)
Re: Climategate: it's all unravelling now This unraveling is not too shocking. It had to happen sooner or later. Hopefully, it will kill the Cap & Tax & we can get on with our lives. Also, it would be nice if someone in the media (not likely) will call out the lunatics, who have been proclaiming that we have (insert years) before the we all die because of global warming. I mean, really, it didn't take a Sherlock Holmes to figure out that the global warming, environmentalist whackjobs were a bunch of liars. At the very leat, they have been afraid of debate & criticism.
Re: Climategate: it's all unravelling now right because the GW/CC deniers have been so willing to have an honest and open debate Both fringes of this argument are fricking nuts... but to deny this is also nuts...the opposing sides have made it so you can only win with absolute statements which we are far from having...
Re: Global Warming Raw Data Lost? Destroyed? Actually - after reading more - I'm beginning to question the scientists and their models too. Did you see the ones where scientists admitted to making their 'models' work better by going back to data from >50 years ago and intentionally manipulating the old recorded temperatures downwards? They admitted that if they didn't, their models would actually show temperatures decreasing, not increasing. Have you heard about those? After some digging, you can find it too. It is all in the raw source data.
Re: Climategate: it's all unravelling now I don't think that any serious scientist disagrees that the climate has been warming relatively rapidly over that past few decades. The germane debates are: 1. How much of the warming is attributable to modern society (e.g. greenhouse gas release) ? 2. How much, if any, can altering our release of such gases influence this warming in both the near future and the decades from now ? 3. Even if our society is largely responsible for the relatively rapid warming that has been documented, will other homeostatic mechanisms in the environment counter this effect ?
Re: Climategate: it's all unravelling now Proof? Cuz I call BS. Many scientists don't want to waste their time in debate against people who really don't know what they are talking about - or scientists with blatant conflicts of interest. But that's because they are scientists who want to talk science. I've never seen a lack of scientists afraid to step up and dish out a well-deserved beatdown to a fellow scientist who doesn't have their **** together. Anyone who attends a scientific seminar at a university can back that up. I've seen scientists go to town on the most minor flaws in a colleagues' presentation. Its a great way to get tenure or get the funding of a disgraced colleague. But you don't advance your career by taking on idiots like creationists - which is probably why you don't see many scientific debates about creationism at leading universities. However - this stuff about scientists intentionally manipulating and adjusting raw data from certain parts of the world - especially old data where they changed the temperatures downwards so it would fit their models - that is worrying. Doesn't anyone want to talk about that?