Dec
Climategate: McIntyre and the ‘Divergence Problem’
It’s been less than a month since the Climategate files were first disclosed, but they’ve already had a dramatic impact on the debate over climate change.
On the one hand is the dominant so-called consensus — that human emission of greenhouse gases has been the primary cause of an unprecedented warming of Earth’s climate. On the other hand, there has been an underground opposition trying to make itself heard. What the disclosure of the files did was demonstrate that these opposition voices had been suppressed unfairly and unscientifically.
As a result, the raw data that had been withheld is becoming available to outside researchers. This new openness is already having results.
Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit has done a careful analysis of the Climategate emails that affect one particular issue — the “tricks” that were applied to the data in composing the various reports. The particular issue McIntyre is considering is called “the divergence problem.” When we measure temperatures now, of course, we use a thermometer. For historical temperatures, however, reliable thermometers weren’t available until about 1724, with Fahrenheit’s mercury thermometer. And regular records of temperature weren’t done until some years later…
Full story: Pajamas Media | Discuss: here
Possibly related posts:
- Portrait of climate skeptic Stephen McIntyre
- Barack Obama’s Copenhagen deal will condemn you to a slow miserable death.
- Has the climategate email leaker been found?
- Climategate Professor perjures himself to Parliamentary Select Committee
- It’s the Paint, Stupid! Bad paint jobs cause growing anomalies in global temperature data
Climategate Professor Phil Jones is very much in the frame to be indicted under US federal laws for conspiracy to defraud US tax funding. The leaked CRU emails include much of his correspondence with American-based climatologists, Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, etc. They are all key contributors to the IPCC policy statements process and influential advisers. Between them they have influenced the spending of over $50 billion spent worldwide by governments seeking to prove a link between co2 and climate.In the leaked email entitled, 1120676865.txt, Jones says:
“Neville,
Mike’s response could do with a little work, but as you say he’s got the tone almost dead on. I hope I don’t get a call from congress ! I’m hoping that no-one there realizes I have a US DoE grant and have had this (with Tom W.) for the last 25 years. I’ll send on one other email received for interest.
Cheers
Phil”
Note the worried tone in his comment? Jones ( or more precisely, his department) has benefited to the tune of almost $20 million in funding from US and UK government sources. Both jurisdictions have similar laws relating to malfeasance of public office as well as safeguards for public interest under their separate freedom of information acts. The UK and US have exemplary extradition treaties under the Hague Convention and Professor Jones has made himself a prime candidate on RICO racketeering charges as well as spoliation (destruction of evidence) being that he admits destroying data. If he is convicted for those offences he may serve a maximum penalty of 20 years in jail and/or a fine of up to $250,000. If I were him I’d be a very worried man. As they say in New York, he’d better get lawyered up damn quick!
Any court action will be preceded by lengthy discovery process. What I noticed last night was that the University of East Anglia, contrary to the public statement 10 days ago, has removed pages from their website that contained portions of the disputed data. This may be indicative of a presumption that litigation (criminal and/or civil) is in the pipeline. This story is going to run and run!
Climategate Forecast…
“• What is the current scientific consensus on the conclusions reached by Drs. Mann, Bradley and Hughes? [Referring to the hockey stick propagated in UN IPCC 2001 by Michael Mann.]
Ans: Based on the literature we have reviewed, there is no overarching consensus on MBH98/99. As analyzed in our social network, there is a tightly knit group of individuals who passionately believe in their thesis. However, our perception is that this group has a self-reinforcing feedback mechanism and, moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that they can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility.”
AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT ON THE ‘HOCKEY STICK’ GLOBAL CLIMATE RECONSTRUCTION, also known as The Wegman report was authored by Edward J. Wegman, George Mason University, David W. Scott, Rice University, and Yasmin H. Said, The Johns Hopkins University with the contributions of John T. Rigsby, III, Naval Surface Warfare Center, and Denise M. Reeves, MITRE Corporation.