Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation

Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with a whitewash regarding statistics for global warming, says Christopher Booker

A week after my colleague James Delingpole, on his Telegraph blog, coined the term "Climategate" to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.

The reason why even the Guardian's George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Philip Jones, the CRU's director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports...

Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph which 10 years ago turned climate history on its head...

Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Mediaeval Warm Period when temperatures were higher they are today...

I have been reading through the HARRY_READ_ME file - some gems Here he discovers that the data bases are compromised to the point they have no idea where the stations are located. So the solution is to make up WMO codes, or when there is not a match for a station just turn it into a new station. The result in his words is "In other words, what CRU usually do. It will allow bad databases to pass unnoticed, and good databases to become bad, but I really don't think people care enough to fix 'em, and it's the main reason the project is nearly a year late." You can't imagine what this has cost me - to actually allow the operator to assign false WMO codes!! But what else is there in such situations? Especially when dealing with a 'Master' database of dubious provenance (which, er, they all are and always will be). False codes will be obtained by multiplying the legitimate code (5 digits) by 100, then adding 1 at a time until a number is found with no matches in the database. THIS IS NOT PERFECT but as there is no central repository for WMO codes - especially made-up ones - we'll have to chance duplicating one that's present in one of the other databases. In any case, anyone comparing WMO codes between databases - something I've studiously avoided doing except for tmin/tmax where I had to - will be treating the false codes with suspicion anyway. Hopefully. Of course, option 3 cannot be offered for CLIMAT bulletins, there being no metadata with which to form a new station. This still meant an awful lot of encounters with naughty Master stations, when really I suspect nobody else gives a hoot about. So with a somewhat cynical shrug, I added the nuclear option - to match every WMO possible, and turn the rest into new stations (er, CLIMAT excepted). In other words, what CRU usually do. It will allow bad databases to pass unnoticed, and good databases to become bad, but I really don't think people care enough to fix 'em, and it's the main reason the project is nearly a year late. And there are STILL WMO code problems!!! Let's try again with the issue. Let's look at the first station in most of the databases, JAN MAYEN. Here it is in various recent databases: ----------------------------------------------------------- In comes the updater. WELCOME TO THE DATABASE UPDATER Before we get started, an important question: If you are merging an update - CLIMAT, MCDW, Australian - do you want the quick and dirty approach? This will blindly match on WMO codes alone, ignoring data/metadata checks, and making any unmatched updates into new stations (metadata permitting)? Enter 'B' for blind merging, or : B Please enter the Master Database name: wet.0710041559.dtb Please enter the Update Database name: rdy.0709101706.dtb ---------------------------------------------------------- More data base corruption It looks like a consistent problem: all the decadal VAp and WET files should be discarded, and only the 'full run' 1901-2002 files used. But my theory that the error occurred when the 1901-2002 files were converted to decadal doesn't sound true now, because why would the precision levels change? Surely, if the decadal files are derived from the 1901-2002 files, it's just a case of copying data across? Let's look at *just* 1981, to try and assess this issue: FULL 1901-2002 FILE VAP: 1981 0 322 82 0 324 84 0 320 90 0 335 99 0 352 111 0 356 130 0 349 144 0 344 143 0 360 124 0 323 105 0 320 90 0 321 83 0 360 107 WET: 1981 0 3100 1018 0 2800 919 0 3100 980 0 3000 911 0 3100 945 0 3000 1010 0 3100 1051 0 3100 1040 0 3000 981 0 3100 1017 0 3000 1021 0 3100 1003 0 3100 992 DECADAL 1981-1990 FILE VAP: 1981 0 310 102 0 280 92 0 310 98 0 300 91 0 310 95 0 300 101 0 310 105 0 310 104 0 300 98 0 310 102 0 300 102 0 310 100 0 310 99 WET: 1981 0 3220 819 0 3240 842 0 3200 903 0 3350 992 0 3520 1113 0 3560 1304 0 3490 1440 0 3440 1427 0 3600 1236 0 3230 1048 0 3200 898 0 3210 833 0 3600 1071 It's evident that the data have not only been swapped - they've been scaled too. Aaaarrrgghhhhhh!!!!!

Good article. Climategate is escalating.

UN Blowback: More than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims (FROM: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works) Plain and simple, the global warming--now "climate change," as the globe is actually cooling and makes "global warming" a tougher sell--movement is a farce, a facade for global socialism. To say nothing about possible unintended consequences of wrongheaded human intervention, it's not about the sea levels, it's not about the polar bears (which are doing fine, thank you very much), it's not about any of that -- it's about the transfer of wealth and the destruction of industry. It's the newest avenue for socialism on a global level.

and

Founder of The Weather Channel, John Coleman, concerning Global Warming: It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus. Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild “scientific” scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda. Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, and the Democratic Political Party. . And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam.

Enough for me. .

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.