Slashdot Mirror
Temperature Data Wants To Be Free
An anonymous reader writes "The UK's Met Office Hadley Centre and University of East Anglia have been refusing access to the data used for their global climate averages and scientific studies. A copy of the data has leaked, and attempts continue to accomplish the release of the data by whoever maintains it. Excuses have included confidentiality agreements which cannot be verified because no records were kept, mention of the source has been removed from the Met Office web site, and IPCC records were destroyed."
I said "denialists", not "deniers". If you've never heard the word before, I can tell you've been careful not to hear what the side you accuse of scientific misconduct, grand conspiracy and worse, have to say to their defense.
What would you call someone who persisted in claiming that asbestos or smoking didn't cause cancer, or that evolution wasn't proven, for political reasons, against all evidence? It's just calling a spade a spade in my opinion.
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
It amazes me you think statisticians do not know what to do with the data. If Steve McIntyre or Matt Briggs or lucia or UC or Jean S or jeff id or a host of others had the data, they would be able to analyze it in many different ways. Almost certainly they would find errors in the way the data was massaged or adjusted. Have you ever bothered to read ClimateAudit website by Steve McIntyre? This whole thing reminds me of the testimony Dr. Richard Lindzen gave before Congress. He was decrying the concept of "consensus" in climate science. He pointed out that the better students never went into climate science. They went into mathematics or physics or computer science. The students who could not cut the mustard in the more competitive fields went into climate. This explains why the statisticians and people from other fields are getting involved in climate to fix all of the errors by the climate scientists. As long as data, methods and code are withheld, there will be climate skeptics.
Yes, that's true. But one side has a much greater financial incentive.
You are welcome on my lawn.
He sounds exactly like you...
LOL! Steve McIntyre is that you? You're certainly no scientist, that's for sure. There is absolutely no obligation on scientists to provide raw source data to any random person on request. Not in any field of science. Whilst they'll probably help out any genuine research scientist in the field so long as IPR issues don't prevent it, you as a random blogger (say) should consider yourself lucky to get an email response. Their job is not to spoon feed you.
"The amount spent by Environmental groups on this issue dwarfs that spent by fossil fuel lobbyists." .... .......
Even a cursory search turns up tons of evidence refuting that... claim. That is just a completely false statement.
I don't disagree with you but what are you quoting? The amount spent by "government", specifically the US government, dwarfs spending by oil companies. Nothing said in this thread about spending by environmental groups except by you.