Climategate, Glaciergate and now Amozongate.

[burk48237]

First we found out from the climate emails that much of the Temp data used IPCC report was cooked. Then we discovered that even using their data many of their results and the published conclusions of the IPCC report were unrepeatable. One scientist even called the data set "garbage". And that Scientists (many of the same scientists who had submitted the now thoroughly discredited "Hockey Stick") had conspired to keep data from any scientist who might not agree with their conclusions.

Within about six weeks it was discovered that the IPCC report had suggested that the Himalayan Glaciers might be melted as soon as 2035 was based on a phone conversation with a scientists who said it "might" happen and an article in a climbing magazine. Are they peer reviewing climbing magazines now? The IPPC leadership has admitted the evidence was "anecdotal".

Now, we find out that the IPPC reports claim that climate change "could endanger up to 40% of the Amazon Rain-Forrest" was based on a WWF pamphlet. The WWF is not a scientific organization, none of their pamphlets are peer reviewed. The author claimed it was based on an article in Nature. But the cited article made no such claims and instead concentrated on the effects of logging on the Rain-Forrest.

It is ironic that so many who claim the standard of scientific judgement as the arbiter of man made global warming apparently have none when preparing a report designed to be the scientific authority on the subject. I've got a great idea that will help save the Rain-Forrest too. Why don't we use our copies of the IPPC report for something they're more suited for, Firewood?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...-failures.html

[hbarcat]

--gate.

[RWP]

More inconvenient truths?

[GregC]

This is an editorial by a writer with his own agenda and a book to sell. Doesn't mean he's wrong, but he's bringing his own biases to the table.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Booker

[burk48237]

Originally Posted by GregC

This is an editorial by a writer with his own agenda and a book to sell. Doesn't mean he's wrong, but he's bringing his own biases to the table.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Booker

Greg, One of the IPCC's own authors has called the work "anecdotal" and the IPCC has admitted the errors. The story only broke Sunday.

Professor Richard Tol, one of the report's authors who is based at the Economic and Social Research Institute in Dublin, Ireland, said: "These are essentially a collection of anecdotes.
"Why did they do this? It is quite astounding. Although there have probably been no policy decisions made on the basis of this, it is illustrative of how sloppy Working Group Two (the panel of experts within the IPCC responsible for drawing up this section of the report) has been.
"There is no way current climbers and mountain guides can give anecdotal evidence back to the 1900s, so what they claim is complete nonsense."
The IPCC report, which is published every six years, is used by government's worldwide to inform policy decisions that affect billions of people.
The claims about disappearing mountain ice were contained within a table entitled "Selected observed effects due to changes in the cryosphere produced by warming".

One other report shows that 20 assertions in the IPPC report were based on WWF pamphlets (some which showed supporting peer reviewed eviednce but many that didn't). In this hunt the WWF isn't exactly an impartial arbiter of science either.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/env...e-article.html

[jmattbassplaya]

My brother mentioned this stuff to me awhile ago.


















I laughed in his face.

[jrthebassguy]

Adding -gate as a suffix has to be on the dumbest things around.

[mike_v_s]

Originally Posted by jrthebassguy

Adding -gate as a suffix has to be on the dumbest things around-gate.

Hypocrite.

Mike

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

Originally Posted by jrthebassguy

Adding -gate as a suffix has to be on the dumbest things around.

It works for Freightcrategate.

[Pilgrim]

So are we convinced that we should continue logging the Amazon and reduce it all to farms and ranches alternating with erosion?

Those forests are SO inconvenient, anyway. They get in the way when you try to drive around in your Jeep.

Let's make sure to fill in those Everglades, too - plenty of room for more rubber-stamp development housing there.

[MakiSupaStar]

Human development has been encrouching on the amazon for years. It's not just the amazon jungle, but I've personally seen slash and burn techniques used to clear jungles in Costa Rica for a golf course of all things. I know that on a much larger scale our demand for beef is resulting in slash and burn clearing to make room for graazing cattle. The diminishing acreage, the pollutants from the fires, and the impact it has on the quality of the air, foliage, and water table are easily measureable. The climate change theory has a much greater scope, with a lot of unknown variables that could span across centuries. There is no comparison between these two areas of concern other than the fact that they relate to the environment, and that the burning rain forests could possibly be one of many contributing factor to global climate change.

Still, with that said, I think were going to see a lot more scrupulous data manipulation in the scientific community before this shakedown of science is done, and I think this will turn out to be a good thing for science as a whole in the long run. But I'm also sensing a conservative, right wing, religious campaign against the validity of science here, and frankly it concerns me. For anyone, with some basic investigative skills can make a mountain out of a molehill when they find some faulty data. All you have
to do is focus and organize your attack to benefit your agenda. It reminds me of a better intelligent design mousetrap.

This dude is selling a book by jumping on the coat tails of the climate change scandal.

[6jase5]

If in any way the talk of global warming to any scale (geographically cyclic or man-made) causes people to step back and think about their ecological footprint and to make even slight changes to their lifestyle, then in some way I'm ok with it. Just me.

I've seen that golf course in Costa Rica. Kind of like a pink toilet on the 50 yard line, it just doesn't fit and it pissed me off-gate.

[MIJ-VI]

As always: follow the money...

[Solarmist]

One things for sure, after climate-gate and these new revelations the IPCC can't be taken seriously. Totally agenda oriented organization.

[MIJ-VI]

'']-; .....''$

[Mark Latimour]

Its good to see the Burkster back on form. If there is one thing that can save the Lobby, its Burkgate 2010.

[PSPookie]

It's unfortunate that this has become such a polarizing issue. The strongly held beliefs on both sides of the issue will only serve to make it more difficult to get an accurate picture of what's going on.

Fact: the climate appears to be changing on a global scale.

We do not know what's causing it. It could be caused or exacerbated by man or it could be part of the Earth's normal temperature cycle. Heck, it could simply be a statistical anomoly. We simply don't know why it's happening and need to study it further.

In the mean time, regardless of the causes, it is still a good idea to practice a bit of stewardship. Is the reduction of dependence on foreign oil a bad thing? Why is finding more efficient ways to use our resources considered a leftist, hippy notion? The most conservative businesses are constantly looking for ways to do exactly that.

Both sides need to get over themselves a bit. The tree huggers need to realize that their contention that this is all due to man-made causes is a bit arrogant and the Hummer-drivers need to realize that making things more efficient will benefit them in the long-run. I prescribe large handfuls of chill pills for both groups.

Edit: and yes, adding "gate" to the end of things is pretty stupid.

[Ziltoid]

Watergate was more interesting. go FROST go ! haha

[DaveDeVille]

Originally Posted by PSPookie

It's unfortunate that this has become such a polarizing issue. The strongly held beliefs on both sides of the issue
will only serve to make it more difficult to get an accurate picture of what's going on.

Fact: the climate appears to be changing on a global scale.

We do not know what's causing it. It could be caused or exacerbated by man or it could be part of the Earth's
normal temperature cycle. Heck, it could simply be a statistical anomoly. We simply don't know why it's happening and need to study it further.

In the mean time, regardless of the causes, it is still a good idea to practice a bit of stewardship.
Is the reduction of dependence on foreign oil a bad thing? Why is finding more efficient ways to use our resources considered a leftist, hippy notion?
The most conservative businesses are constantly looking for ways to do exactly that.

Both sides need to get over themselves a bit. The tree huggers need to realize that their contention that this is
all due to man-made causes is a bit arrogant and the Hummer-drivers need to realize that making things more efficient will benefit them in the long-run.
I prescribe large handfuls of chill pills for both groups.

Edit: and yes, adding "gate" to the end of things is pretty stupid.

+1
well said , well thought out .
thank you for this post .

[Deluge Of Sound]

Originally Posted by Ziltoid

Watergate was more interesting. go Bernstein & Woodward go ! haha

Fixed it for you.