Climategate: Real Scientists Respond to the Accusations of Junk Science Propagandists Before Parliament
"Currently there are deep concerns lest scientific analysis has exaggerated the rise in global temperature. But equally, there are fears that the rise may be underplayed, or dismissed altogether, by powerful commercial or political interests."---The University of East Anglia's submission to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Science and Technology
UPDATE: March 1, 2010 testimony in Parliament on video.
On or about February 25, 2010, the University of East Anglia published its written submission to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Science and Technology. The scientists will give oral evidence to the Parliamentary Committe on March 1, 2010.
In the written submission, also published by the U.K. Parliament, the British climate scientists present their research and clarify for the British Parliament what the global warming denialists deliberately mischaracterise and falsify in their "Climategate" propaganda campaign.
Senator Inhofe should read this memorandum. Hopefully the shameless Senator and his denialist operatives on the blogs and in the media will absorb what the scientists are saying. Senator Inhofe should stop making a fool of himself and embarrassing our whole country by smearing real scientists as criminals. He sounds like a hysterical, hypocritical, antediluvian KGB-sponsored conspiracist stooge when he parades his ignorant junk science before the whole world and claims that global warming is a scientific hoax and a conspiracy to steal our money and seize more power. Really, I think it is the hypocritical Senator "Stooge" Inhofe and his financial sponsors who want more money and more power for themselves.
The denialists' hoax, dubbed "Climategate," reminds me of the KGB-sponsored "AIDS Made in America" hoax. According to the KGB's junk science conspiracy theory, cunning scientists in the U. S. Army made AIDS to kill black people. The KGB also promoted the crackpot "scientific" theory of "sluggish schizophrenia" in order to hospitalize political dissidents on fabricated grounds of mental illness.
The meretricious Senator "Stooge" Inhofe doesn't care one whit about about scientific truth; rather, he is undoubtedly persecuting our great scientists and mischaracterizing their research because he is in the pockets of powerful commercial and political interests.
I posted a bit of the submission below, but these links to read the submission and appendix.
Memorandum submitted by the University of East Anglia
1. Introduction
1.1 This memorandum is submitted by the Vice-Chancellor, Professor Edward Acton, the University’s principal academic and administrative officer, with additional comment provided, where indicated, by the University’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU).
1.2 Freedom and Integrity of scientific researchThe University of East Anglia (UEA) was founded in 1963. For over forty-five years it has sought to identify fruitful fields for research and study, notably in the sciences, and to provide a free environment in which new and challenging research can flourish. It is now recognised as a world leader in several branches of the geophysical sciences, and it is understandably proud of that reputation.
1.3 Like all British universities, it has a set of policies, regulations and codes of good conduct which UEA’s researchers are required to follow. At the heart of these is the requirement to maintain “honesty, openness, accountability and integrity.” Plagiarism, deception or the fabrication or falsification of results are regarded as serious disciplinary offences, and are a betrayal of the life of science.
1.4 When assessing the quality of scientific research work, UEA relies first and foremost on critical evaluation by the international network of specialists working in each field. This “peer review” is the keystone for maintaining the integrity of scientific research: the scrutiny, probing, questioning and evaluation of the work of each scientist by other experts in the field. It is through peer review that scientific reputations and esteem are established, that competition for research funding is determined, and that editors decide which work to publish and which to reject.
1.5 The Climatic Research UnitFour decades ago, UEA identified climate as an important field of study but one in which the data and methods used were primitive. In 1972 the University founded the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) which has played a pioneering role in advancing human ability to understand the world’s changing climate. It is part of a department with an international reputation.
1.6 CRU’s contribution has included the compilation of a global land temperature record and the development of increasingly sophisticated methods by which to represent the average temperature of the globe and changes in that average over time. The evidence has steadily mounted of a marked increase in average global temperatures. This has given CRU’s work momentous political and social significance.
1.7 We are well aware that research addressing issues with such profound implications for the human species is liable to trigger fierce debate. Moreover, we believe that such debate is a crucial and necessary part of the role of science in society. Currently there are deep concerns lest scientific analysis has exaggerated the rise in global temperature. But equally, there are fears that the rise may be underplayed, or dismissed altogether, by powerful commercial or political interests. [Read the CRU's full submission and appendix or the full submission in one document as published by the Parliament.]
UPDATE: March 1, 2010 testimony in Parliament on video.
On or about February 25, 2010, the University of East Anglia published its written submission to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Science and Technology. The scientists will give oral evidence to the Parliamentary Committe on March 1, 2010.
In the written submission, also published by the U.K. Parliament, the British climate scientists present their research and clarify for the British Parliament what the global warming denialists deliberately mischaracterise and falsify in their "Climategate" propaganda campaign.
Senator Inhofe should read this memorandum. Hopefully the shameless Senator and his denialist operatives on the blogs and in the media will absorb what the scientists are saying. Senator Inhofe should stop making a fool of himself and embarrassing our whole country by smearing real scientists as criminals. He sounds like a hysterical, hypocritical, antediluvian KGB-sponsored conspiracist stooge when he parades his ignorant junk science before the whole world and claims that global warming is a scientific hoax and a conspiracy to steal our money and seize more power. Really, I think it is the hypocritical Senator "Stooge" Inhofe and his financial sponsors who want more money and more power for themselves.
The denialists' hoax, dubbed "Climategate," reminds me of the KGB-sponsored "AIDS Made in America" hoax. According to the KGB's junk science conspiracy theory, cunning scientists in the U. S. Army made AIDS to kill black people. The KGB also promoted the crackpot "scientific" theory of "sluggish schizophrenia" in order to hospitalize political dissidents on fabricated grounds of mental illness.
The meretricious Senator "Stooge" Inhofe doesn't care one whit about about scientific truth; rather, he is undoubtedly persecuting our great scientists and mischaracterizing their research because he is in the pockets of powerful commercial and political interests.
I posted a bit of the submission below, but these links to read the submission and appendix.
Memorandum submitted by the University of East Anglia
1. Introduction
1.1 This memorandum is submitted by the Vice-Chancellor, Professor Edward Acton, the University’s principal academic and administrative officer, with additional comment provided, where indicated, by the University’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU).
1.2 Freedom and Integrity of scientific researchThe University of East Anglia (UEA) was founded in 1963. For over forty-five years it has sought to identify fruitful fields for research and study, notably in the sciences, and to provide a free environment in which new and challenging research can flourish. It is now recognised as a world leader in several branches of the geophysical sciences, and it is understandably proud of that reputation.
1.3 Like all British universities, it has a set of policies, regulations and codes of good conduct which UEA’s researchers are required to follow. At the heart of these is the requirement to maintain “honesty, openness, accountability and integrity.” Plagiarism, deception or the fabrication or falsification of results are regarded as serious disciplinary offences, and are a betrayal of the life of science.
1.4 When assessing the quality of scientific research work, UEA relies first and foremost on critical evaluation by the international network of specialists working in each field. This “peer review” is the keystone for maintaining the integrity of scientific research: the scrutiny, probing, questioning and evaluation of the work of each scientist by other experts in the field. It is through peer review that scientific reputations and esteem are established, that competition for research funding is determined, and that editors decide which work to publish and which to reject.
1.5 The Climatic Research UnitFour decades ago, UEA identified climate as an important field of study but one in which the data and methods used were primitive. In 1972 the University founded the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) which has played a pioneering role in advancing human ability to understand the world’s changing climate. It is part of a department with an international reputation.
1.6 CRU’s contribution has included the compilation of a global land temperature record and the development of increasingly sophisticated methods by which to represent the average temperature of the globe and changes in that average over time. The evidence has steadily mounted of a marked increase in average global temperatures. This has given CRU’s work momentous political and social significance.
1.7 We are well aware that research addressing issues with such profound implications for the human species is liable to trigger fierce debate. Moreover, we believe that such debate is a crucial and necessary part of the role of science in society. Currently there are deep concerns lest scientific analysis has exaggerated the rise in global temperature. But equally, there are fears that the rise may be underplayed, or dismissed altogether, by powerful commercial or political interests. [Read the CRU's full submission and appendix or the full submission in one document as published by the Parliament.]
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home