Posted on 11/29/2009 6:22:23 AM PST by Askwhy5times
After the leaked email scandal, the University of East Anglia has been forced to admit they threw away the raw temperature data they used to make their predictions of anthropogenic global warming. They claim they only kept the 'adjusted' data. That is one sure-fire way to prevent skeptics from checking your calculations. Based on what programmers have learned from examining the leaked code the University of East Anglia used to calculate the 'Hockey Stick Graph,' their calculations definitely need rechecking.
(Excerpt) Read more at bluegrasspundit.com ...
If the data was digital, ie: in spreadsheet or csv files, then they should have notes and copies of e-mails from whence the source data came.
Release all of the e-mail, source data files and climate modelling routines held locked up at the CRU.
If there was no finaggling of the data, ie: the results are what they are, then there should be no repercussions.
If, on the other hand, there is no "data-dump" then there can be no reproducable results to confirm theirs.
The choice is simple. How's that for a catch 22?
BTTT!
Interesting that they can’t back calculate. It would be good if somebody legitimate would take a look see at the equations used and determine how far off in magnitude the coefficients are???
Thanks for enlightening me.
It makes all their data completely worthless.
Perhaps the ‘hacker’ who got the emails has the technical skill to extract the ‘deleted’ raw data as well. I have been told that nothing is ever REALLY deleted if it is sought by a really experienced technician.
As I recall, a witness in a Congressional hearing some years ago had written and deleted an anti-Clinton email to a friend that was recovered, much to her embarrassment.
Those adjustment equations vary from site to site, but all of them adjust upward; from raw data with a +/-1 degree uncertainty factor at that.
The official data all trend toward the +1 side; if one simply uses the opposite sign there is no warming at all and some cooling.
The entire instrument set is inadequate to establish with certainty the current global average temperature and never has.
The focus of persuasion now is extreme climate events as extemporaneous proxies, such as icebergs off New Zealand; calving in Antarctica; excess Arctic ice loss in summer; forest/brush fires in Australia and the southwest of the U.S.; iconic hurricanes like Andrew and Katrina; shrinking sheep in the southern hemisphere; and successful campaigns on recent near-miss catastrophes like Ozone depletion, and deforestation through slash-and-burn, and acid rain.
None of the above scenarios can be verified to be caused by global warming, not a single one.
So how, given this list of successes by the Panic Pimps, do you think this latest failure in the science is going to matter?
It would be like stopping a stampede with a single red flag placed at the edge of the cliff.
Because they have been exposed as frauds and/or incompetents.
Now we can insist on legitimate peer reviews with the skeptics as key players.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.