Slashdot Mirror
Second Inquiry Exonerates Climatic Research Unit
mvdwege writes "After being cleared of charges of misconduct by a parliamentary committee, now the CRU has the results of the inquiry (PDF) by a panel of scientists into their scientific methods. Here is the CRU press release. Criticisms: The statistical methods used, though arriving at correct results, are not optimal, and it is recommended future studies involve professional statisticians if possible; and the CRU scientists are lacking somewhat in organization. A very far cry from the widespread allegations of fraud. It seems 'Climategate' is ending with a whimper."
It's ending with a whimper all right - a whimper is all that will show up on the news media outlets that trumpeted the e-mails to high heaven.
This is what always happens. "Amazing discovery! Free energy within five years!" gets front page headlines, but "Scientists retract bullshit claims that nobody in the field believed in the first place" gets put on page 40, right after the obituaries.
That's okay though, because the e-mails have already served their purpose; I'm sure we'll be hearing that moronic refrain of "hide the decline! Hide the decline!" for the next three or four years, regardless of its basis in reality. All that really matters is that the initial narrative was sufficiently plausible to gain a life of its own.
Making all their data freely available is ludicrous, there is just too much of it. When you have this much data to work on, you only make it available to people who have a chance of understanding it; in this case fellow scientists.
You don't see CERN release all their data either, at least not to the public.
The idea that scientists are bought and paid for by "Big Oil" is total nonsense. Scientists are only bought and paid for by the government.
Surely Thom Sawyer & his friend Huck both had to have had a hand in wielding so large a brush as to try to exonerate the scum of the CRU.
Anyone can play that game:
Everything I've ever said that was not 100% correct, or was hurtful or insensitive, or revelatory of adverse intentions, was a joke. You're stupid for not getting it.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
They are not skeptics. They are deniers/denialists. The creationists of the global warming debate.
Clever signature text goes here.
Are you SERIOUSLY comparing people who make money off of GREEN technologies to those who are on the PAYROLL of POLLUTERS like Big Oil? Wow, you need a nice, hot cup of Get Some Fukin Perspective.
There, fixed that for you. And the answer is yes!
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.