PDA

View Full Version : APP - Condemnation from a fellow climate scientist



tinfoil
12-01-2009, 12:39 AM
Maybe you warmers will listen to one of your own?


http://coast.gkss.de/staff/zorita/

Why I think that Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred from the IPCC process
Eduardo Zorita, November 2009

Short answer: because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.
A longer answer: My voice is not very important. I belong to the climate-research infantry, publishing a few papers per year, reviewing a few manuscript per year and participating in a few research projects. I do not form part of important committees, nor do I pursue a public awareness of my activities. My very minor task in the public arena was to participate as a contributing author in the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC.

By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication. My area of research happens to be the climate of the past millennia, where I think I am appreciated by other climate-research 'soldiers'. And it happens that some of my mail exchange with Keith Briffa and Timothy Osborn can be found in the CRU-files made public recently on the internet.

To the question of legality or ethicalness of reading those files I will write a couple of words later.

I may confirm what has been written in other places: research in some areas of climate science has been and is full of machination, conspiracies, and collusion, as any reader can interpret from the CRU-files. They depict a realistic, I would say even harmless, picture of what the real research in the area of the climate of the past millennium has been in the last years. The scientific debate has been in many instances hijacked to advance other agendas.

These words do not mean that I think anthropogenic climate change is a hoax. On the contrary, it is a question which we have to be very well aware of. But I am also aware that in this thick atmosphere -and I am not speaking of greenhouse gases now- editors, reviewers and authors of alternative studies, analysis, interpretations,even based on the same data we have at our disposal, have been bullied and subtly blackmailed. In this atmosphere, Ph D students are often tempted to tweak their data so as to fit the 'politically correct picture'. Some, or many issues, about climate change are still not well known. Policy makers should be aware of the attempts to hide these uncertainties under a unified picture. I had the 'pleasure' to experience all this in my area of research.

I thank explicitly Keith Briffa and Tim Osborn for their work in the formulation of one Chapter of the IPCC report. As can be distilled from these emails, they withstood the evident pressure of other IPCC authors, not experts in this area of research, to convey a distorted picture of our knowledge of the hockey-stick graph.

Is legal or ethical to read the CRU files? I am not a lawyer. It seems that if the files had been hacked this would constitute an illegal act. If they have been leaked it could be a whistle blower action protected by law. I think it is not unethical to read them. Once published, I feel myself entitled to read how some researchers tried to influence reviewers to scupper the publication of our work on the 'hockey stick graph' or to read how some IPCC authors tried to exclude this work from the IPCC Report on very dubious reasons. Also, these mails do not contain any personal information at all. They are an account of many dull daily activities of typical climatologists, together with a realistic account of very troubling professional behavior.

Socrtease
12-01-2009, 12:59 AM
Yes...well...I mean really....this article has not been exposed to peer review. How do we know if this guy REALLY is a climate scientist or just some other person trying to discredit what is obviously mans evil machinations to bring about the end of the only place he has to live. I mean really, we need to worry more about the US giving money to poor countries because we have stolen from them and caused this great horrid carbon foot print. The sky REALLY IS FALLING. I swear it is.

tinfoil
12-01-2009, 01:41 AM
YouTube- ClimateGate Who's Who

FUCK THE POLICE
12-01-2009, 01:49 AM
He needs to be put in prison for misleading the public.

tinfoil
12-01-2009, 02:12 AM
YouTube- Message to the Environmental Movement - Climategate

tinfoil
12-01-2009, 02:14 AM
He needs to be put in prison for misleading the public.

Which one? Mann or Jones? Briffa seems like he was just going along because he had to. I think Gavin probably gives Mann and Hansen rim jobs.

Wait, you're talking about the credible scientist, aren't you?

DamnYankee
12-01-2009, 07:34 AM
Yes...well...I mean really....this article has not been exposed to peer review. How do we know if this guy REALLY is a climate scientist or just some other person trying to discredit what is obviously mans evil machinations to bring about the end of the only place he has to live. I mean really, we need to worry more about the US giving money to poor countries because we have stolen from them and caused this great horrid carbon foot print. The sky REALLY IS FALLING. I swear it is. Lame response, attacking the messenger. :palm:

Socrtease
12-01-2009, 09:47 AM
Lame response, attacking the messenger. :palm:
I was being sarcastic you fucking dolt! Even watermark knew that and neg rep'd me for it. God you really are about as sharp as a bag of wet mice. BUT not 1983 mice.

Hermes Thoth
12-01-2009, 10:02 AM
Watermark must be upset seeing his ideological pretense to implement a genocide regime fade away in the light of truth.

DamnYankee
12-01-2009, 06:59 PM
I was being sarcastic you fucking dolt! Even watermark knew that and neg rep'd me for it. God you really are about as sharp as a bag of wet mice. BUT not 1983 mice. No reason to get all hissy because I can't read you as closely as you'd like, homo. :pke:

Minister of Truth
12-01-2009, 07:12 PM
I was being sarcastic you fucking dolt! Even watermark knew that and neg rep'd me for it. God you really are about as sharp as a bag of wet mice. BUT not 1983 mice.

Watermark, you need to die.

Damocles
12-02-2009, 12:54 PM
Yes...well...I mean really....this article has not been exposed to peer review. How do we know if this guy REALLY is a climate scientist or just some other person trying to discredit what is obviously mans evil machinations to bring about the end of the only place he has to live. I mean really, we need to worry more about the US giving money to poor countries because we have stolen from them and caused this great horrid carbon foot print. The sky REALLY IS FALLING. I swear it is.
Yes. Falling it is. The sky I mean. Doom is on the way, can you feel it in the farce? The farce is strong in Gore, we should call him only he can save us!

FUCK THE POLICE
12-02-2009, 01:19 PM
Watermark, you need to die.

For having more moral integrity than you?

Minister of Truth
12-03-2009, 04:18 PM
For having more moral integrity than you?

Yes.