Posted on 12/05/2009 7:29:19 AM PST by Delacon
Consider the Brits on the sideline until 2012 on global warming. The Met Office will need three years to rebuild ground-based climate models while recompiling raw data from the past 160 years to replace the data that the University of East Anglias CRU destroyed years ago. They want to create an open and transparent full data set, but until then have to back down from any of the conclusions that relied on UEA-CRUs models (via QandO):
The Met Office plans to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by leaked e-mails.
The new analysis of the data will take three years, meaning that the Met Office will not be able to state with absolute confidence the extent of the warming trend until the end of 2012.
The Met Office database is one of three main sources of temperature data analysis on which the UNs main climate change science body relies for its assessment that global warming is a serious danger to the world. This assessment is the basis for next weeks climate change talks in Copenhagen aimed at cutting CO2 emissions.
The British government is attempting to silence the Met Office, however:
The Government is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination, arguing that it would be seized upon by climate change sceptics.
But I thought they were interested in science, not political hackery!
The Met Office is taking the correct approach. The data on which they largely relied has not only been shown to have been corrupted by bias and corruption, its also been destroyed. Knowing the UEA-CRUs credibility as a scientific effort has been compromised, real scientists would insist on recreating the data set in a thoroughly testable and transparent process before proceeding to use any of the conclusions reached from the previous work to form any more recommendations for action.
In fact, the UN, the UK, and the rest of the world should be insisting on the same approach if they were interested in science in the first place. The UKs efforts to quash the Met Offices review, which is what scientists would demand in any other context, shows that the politicians arent terribly interested in whether AGW is scientifically supportable, or even true at all. They want the power that AGW hysteria gives them to seize control of private-industry production and the choices available to people now.
Its the ultimate elitist entrée to statism, and theyre not going to let Climategate get in the way of it even if the scientists themselves start balking at the political hackery surrounding AGW.
The frustrating thing for Statists, is that the meaningless window-dressing is now tripping up all their elaborate plans.
++++++++++++++
This is beautiful, actually, and should be beautiful to watch unfold. anyone want to tak over/under 1 month before the lame stream, dinosaur media decide to begin to discuss this? It’s currently been about 15 days of silence for the alphabet soups, with a few key defectors (BBC, John Stewart (does he qualify??))
He Mannipulated it.
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.