Her er en ryddig oversikt over de skandaler som har kommet fram i forbindelse med klimaforskning den siste tiden. Det at de setter endelsen "gate" på alt mulig syntes jeg er en unødvendig dramatisering. Klimaforskerene har måtte ta til seg krittikken og de faktiske forholdene er ikke noe å diskutere, dette har skjedd. Mye av det som listes opp er allvorlige tilfeller av elendig kildekritikk og direkte forskningsjuks. Hvor denne listen kommer fra vet jeg ikke, jeg har funnet den på et annet forum jeg er på. Det som er listet opp kjenner jeg til fra andre kilder, så listen er relevant nok. Dette har ingenting med konspirasjonsteori å gjøre. FNs klimapanel har nok et problem med troverdigheten sin.
ClimateGate This scandal began the latest round of revelations when thousands of leaked documents from Britains East Anglia Climate Research Unit showed systematic suppression and discrediting of climate skeptics views and discarding of temperature data, suggesting a bias for making the case for warming. Why do such a thing if, as global warming defenders contend, the science is settled?
FOIGate The British government has since determined someone at East Anglia committed a crime by refusing to release global warming documents sought in 95 Freedom of Information Act requests. The CRU is one of three international agencies compiling global temperature data. If their stuffs so solid, why the secrecy?
ChinaGate An investigation by the U.K.s left-leaning Guardian newspaper found evidence that Chinese weather station measurements not only were seriously flawed, but couldnt be located. Where exactly are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China? the paper asked. The papers investigation also couldnt find corroboration of what Chinese scientists turned over to American scientists, leaving unanswered, how much of the warming seen in recent decades is due to the local effects of spreading cities, rather than global warming? The Guardian contends that researchers covered up the missing data for years.
HimalayaGate An Indian climate official admitted in January that, as lead author of the IPCCs Asian report, he intentionally exaggerated when claiming Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 in order to prod governments into action. This fraudulent claim was not based on scientific research or peer-reviewed. Instead it was originally advanced by a researcher, since hired by a global warming research organization, who later admitted it was speculation lifted from a popular magazine. This political, not scientific, motivation at least got some researcher funded.
PachauriGate Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman who accepted with Al Gore the Nobel Prize for scaring people witless, at first defended the Himalaya melting scenario. Critics, he said, practiced voodoo science. After the melting-scam perpetrator fessed up, Pachauri admitted to making a mistake. But, he insisted, we still should trust him.
PachauriGate II Pachauri also claimed he didnt know before the 192-nation climate summit meeting in Copenhagen in December that the bogus Himalayan glacier claim was sheer speculation. But the London Times reported that a prominent science journalist said he had pointed out those errors in several e-mails and discussions to Pachauri, who decided to overlook it. Stonewalling? Cover up? Pachauri says he was preoccupied. Well, no sense spoiling the Copenhagen party, where countries like Pachauris India hoped to wrench billions from countries like the United States to combat global warmings melting glaciers. Now there are calls for Pachauris resignation.
SternGate One excuse for imposing worldwide climate crackdown has been the U.K.s 2006 Stern Report, an economic doomsday prediction commissioned by the government. Now the U.K. Telegraph reports that quietly after publication some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified. Among original claims now deleted were that northwest Australia has had stronger typhoons in recent decades, and that southern Australia lost rainfall because of rising ocean temperatures. Exaggerated claims get headlines. Later, news reporters disclose the truth. Why is that?
SternGate II A researcher now claims the Stern Report misquoted his work to suggest a firm link between global warming and more-frequent and severe floods and hurricanes. Robert Muir-Wood said his original research showed no such link. He accused Stern of going far beyond what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence. Were shocked.
AmazonGate The London Times exposed another shocker: the IPCC claim that global warming will wipe out rain forests was fraudulent, yet advanced as peer-reveiwed science. The Times said the assertion actually was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise, authored by two green activists and lifted from a report from the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group. The research was based on a popular science magazine report that didnt bother to assess rainfall. Instead, it looked at the impact of logging and burning. The original report suggested up to 40 percent of Brazilian rain forest was extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall, but the IPCC expanded that to cover the entire Amazon, the Times reported.
PeerReviewGate The U.K. Sunday Telegraph has documented at least 16 nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCCs climate change bible, which calls for capping manmade greenhouse gases.
RussiaGate Even when global warming alarmists base claims on scientific measurements, theyve often had their finger on the scale. Russian think tank investigators evaluated thousands of documents and e-mails leaked from the East Anglia research center and concluded readings from the coldest regions of their nation had been omitted, driving average temperatures up about half a degree.
Russia-Gate II Speaking of Russia, a presentation last October to the Geological Society of America showed how tree-ring data from Russia indicated cooling after 1961, but was deceptively truncated and only artfully discussed in IPCC publications. Well, at least the tree-ring data made it into the IPCC report, albeit disguised and misrepresented.
U.S.Gate If Brits cant be trusted, are Yanks more reliable? The U.S. National Climate Data Center has been manipulating weather data too, say computer expert E. Michael Smith and meteorologist Joesph DAleo. Forty years ago there were 6,000 surface-temperature measuring stations, but only 1,500 by 1990, which coincides with what global warming alarmists say was a record temperature increase. Most of the deleted stations were in colder regions, just as in the Russian case, resulting in misleading higher average temperatures.
IceGate Hardly a continent has escaped global warming skewing. The IPCC based its findings of reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and in Africa on a feature story of climbers anecdotes in a popular mountaineering magazine, and a dissertation by a Switzerland university student, quoting mountain guides. Peer-reviewed? Hype? Worse?
ResearchGate The global warming camp is reeling so much lately it must have seemed like a major victory when a Penn State University inquiry into climate scientist Michael Mann found no misconduct regarding three accusations of climate research impropriety. But the university did find further investigation is warranted to determine whether Mann engaged in actions that seriously deviated from accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities. Being investigated for only one fraud is a global warming victory these days.
ReefGate Lets not forget the alleged link between climate change and coral reef degradation. The IPCC cited not peer-reviewed literature, but advocacy articles by Greenpeace, the publicity-hungry advocacy group, as its sole source for this claim.
AfricaGate The IPCC claim that rising temperatures could cut in half agricultural yields in African countries turns out to have come from a 2003 paper published by a Canadian environmental think tank not a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
DutchGate The IPCC also claimed rising sea levels endanger the 55 percent of the Netherlands it says is below sea level. The portion of the Netherlands below sea level actually is 20 percent. The Dutch environment minister said she will no longer tolerate climate researchers errors.
AlaskaGate Geologists for Space Studies in Geophysics and Oceanography and their U.S. and Canadian colleagues say previous studies largely overestimated by 40 percent Alaskan glacier loss for 40 years. This flawed data are fed into those computers to predict future warming.