Difference between revisions of "Climategate"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(t) |
m (Text replacement - "|image=File:" to "|image=") |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{concept | {{concept | ||
|wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy | |wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy | ||
| − | |image= | + | |image=Climate_Hoax.jpg |
|image_width=400px | |image_width=400px | ||
|image_caption=What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing? | |image_caption=What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing? | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
* omitting a decent timeline of several thousand years | * omitting a decent timeline of several thousand years | ||
| − | + | A condensed version is found on WS: [https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:Climategate-emails.pdf Climategate E-mails]. | |
In sum [[IPCC]] scientists admit to fraudulent activity, not by outright falsehoods but by distortion, omission and selective attention. Moreover they admit that plenty of money is available for the "easy job" of doing so. | In sum [[IPCC]] scientists admit to fraudulent activity, not by outright falsehoods but by distortion, omission and selective attention. Moreover they admit that plenty of money is available for the "easy job" of doing so. | ||
Latest revision as of 09:57, 17 December 2023
 Climategate  (Climate_change/Preparation, deception)   | |
|---|---|
 What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing? | |
| account of corrupt science practice |
In 2009 Wikileaks published <1000 emails from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientists. Most of these emails are not spectacular, but some mention how easy it is to deceive peer reviewers and the public alike.
Several referenced emails contain joking remarks about how they massaged statistics, i.e.
- truncating the temperature and time axis on diagrams
- omitting data from measurement stations that were "too cold to be included"
- failing to mention contradicting information, i.e.
- polar ice data from Patagonia (the other pole, where ice is increasing)
- failing to report standard deviations or volatility measures
- failing to mention conflicts of interest, explicit joking about easy available grants and salaries
- omitting a decent timeline of several thousand years
A condensed version is found on WS: Climategate E-mails.
In sum IPCC scientists admit to fraudulent activity, not by outright falsehoods but by distortion, omission and selective attention. Moreover they admit that plenty of money is available for the "easy job" of doing so.
Related Documents
| Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document:Climategate its the heat source stupid | Commentary | |||
| Document:People and Data Cherry-Picked For the IPCC Political Agenda | article | 20 April 2014 | Tim Ball | A cogent critique of the UN IPCC personnel and methodology designed to suborn and harness science to a clearly political agenda. Written by a Doyen of climate science and author of the book "The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science". |
| File:Climategate-emails.pdf | article | March 2010 | John Costella |
Many thanks to our Patrons who cover ~2/3 of our hosting bill. Please join them if you can.
