Settled Climate Science Requires Destroying Evidence And Hiding Your Temperature Data

ScreenHunter_193 Mar. 03 07.27

ScreenHunter_192 Mar. 03 07.22

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Settled Climate Science Requires Destroying Evidence And Hiding Your Temperature Data

  1. tom0mason says:

    Something is settled but it’s NOT science!

  2. Ken says:

    The data sets that the models rely on are so precise that we can be confident that the political decisions regarding carbon will be the correct ones. I feel all better now.

  3. mikegeo says:

    What’s also interesting here is that Mann did indeed forward Jone’s email about deleting other emails and Gene Wahl said that he did delete as Jone’s requested. Yet the Penn State inquiry into Mann’s being involved directly or indirectly in deleting mails/files reported that Mann had not been involved. That’s not true. An outrageous whitewash.

  4. Hugh K says:

    A teachable moment — Screw the data, screw science….the important thingy is not to hassle Phil.

  5. wwlee4411 says:

    Reblogged this on wwlee4411 and commented:
    It’s all based on lies, deception, and falsehood.

    • Jimbo says:

      “…lies, deception, and falsehood” –

      Add half truths, ridicule and the politics of personal destruction and you have the “free speech” plank of the democrat party platform…

  6. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    This one’s my favorite:
    “The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.”
    Phil Jones, Head of the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia: 09:41 AM 2/2/2005

    Later (in 2009?) the CRU webpage said this:
    “We are not in a position to supply data for a particular country… We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data.”

    Apparently Phil made good on his word and deleted the original raw temperature data so no one could see the truth.

  7. gator69 says:

    Can’t wait to see how government will improve our health care next. What could possibly go wrong?

  8. carefix says:

    Well yes! You can’t have global warming and temperature data which shows the opposite. Either the data must go or the salary dependent theory must go and in the latter event its proponents must go and get an honest job. The same is true of the atmospheric CO2 record which goes back to 1756. You cannot have instrumental records showing that CO2 levels that were higher than they are today during the 1940s (for example) and a theory that atmospheric CO2 levels today are man made. Something has to go. Either hypothesis or data. In normal science it is the hypothesis that must go. The extreme post normal science of climate change is indeed settled but upon the data being wrong and the hypothesis being right. Data collection and analysis is therefore a spurious activity as is the manipulation of data. There is no need to manipulate data in a scientific paradigm in which data is irrelevent and the hypothesis is always right. Climate science as practiced by the propents of global warming is always right and always settled even if the hypothesis detail itself takes on a myriad of changing positions. It can never be faslsified by data as data is irrelevent.

    • tom0mason says:

      The most obvious problem is –
      The observations must be in error – they don’t match the theory.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s