Here's some interesting talk about the revelations of utterly criminal malfeasance with climate data over the last many years. If I recall correctly, someone here made some very disparaging remarks about the honest scientists at Doctors for Disaster Preparedness. Now that the truth is starting to come out you may want to rethink your politically correct assumptions.

- NonE

“That’s not what they say at school”.

In the comments. How true.

- NonE

On reading the article one would have to question what is the purpose of 'manipulating the data?

Ah yes, the way the British public has been bombarded with information regarding global warming, it has been intense to say the least. If one was to take it all in one could be forgiven for thinking that we in the UK are solely responsible for global warming. I think I may have mentioned this before in a different post so apologies if I am repeating myself.
We are constantly reminded to save energy by turning down the heating, switching to energy efficient lighting, switching electrical appliances off as opposed to leaving them on standby, and using incredible amounts of loft space insulation coupled with cavity wall insulation. Oh and I nearly forgot 'Double Glazing'.
We are currently being given incentives in the 'scrappage deal' to rid ourselves of environmentally unfriendly cars.
All well and good then. But manufacturing all this new 'Greener' equipment must use a huge amount of energy and one might question the overall expenditure of energy to produce this new equipment in relation to scrapping the outdated.
So could we be correct in considering this a money making exercise? job creation even, a big business which of course is taxable, and let us not forget the 'Green Tax'.
Hmmm, but I have to say that the air seems fresher today without the old leaded petrol we were so used to.

I suggest that it is all about manufacturing an environment of fear for the purpose of creating a malleable public. While people are focused on one thing (AIDS, 'global warming,' cholesterol, H1N1, whatever) it allows the enactment of measures which favor those with either power or connections, like Big Pharma, Lockheed-Martin, General Electric and so on.

Look at 'The Patriot Act' which was passed before ANYone had even read it. And on and on...

- NonE

For certain though, the folk of Cumbria and now Dorset in the UK will take some convincing as they stand in the rising flood waters.
The data supplied is probably insignificant in relation to the time scale in which it has been collected, to the number of years the planet has been in exsistance. A longer study will be needed to confirm the data. Our records will not go back far enough in time to provide an acurate dimension of the problem.
All the mopping up will certainly divert folk's attention away from Government policy making. For a start one would not want to watch TV sitting on a soggy sofa, wearing squelching slippers.

too bad you're not on Facebook, NonE. You could have read an exchange between Danny and me, discussing the e-mails, which may have moderated your views on this topic for a bit.

since you're not on FB let me summarize the discussion: Danny was being all 'Oh, what a scandal, they're all crooks' and I was all like 'Chill the fuck out, Danny, calm the fuck down and just read what is actually said and don't jump to any fucking conclusions', and so I took him by the hand and we went through the e-mails and we concluded (well, I did the reasoning and Danny just listened in awe, agreeing with it all) that although the not releasing the data is problematic and potentially deeply problematic, the other stuff that is often quoted is way overblown.

great synopsis, Conrad! :-)

- NonE

One thing that the emails show, which most critics have overlooked I think, is that the people at CRU really do believe what they're saying. It's not a conspiracy, that is--they do legitimately believe that the Earth is warming, and that it can be correlated to human activity.

Simultaneously, the emails appear to show that these scientists are willing to be douchebags, and muck with data (or just access to data), in order to prove what they are already certain of themselves.

A good friend of mine many years ago was an active member of the Sierra Club and was very political. In a discussion one day she admitted to me that she considered it perfectly fine to lie about facts and data to get what she thought was the correct outcome because, as she put it, people are too stupid to think for themselves and so it is alright to lie to them to achieve the 'proper' outcome.

I think this is a pervasive mindset in many humans.

- NonE

I agree that this ends-justify-the-means approach is quite common. We tend to overestimate the reliability of our own certainty, and therefore underestimate potential for damage in the seemingly-unlikely case that we're mistaken.

Oh yeah, all those "other" people. Not her. Not me, either.

Was that directed at me, Dyl? I said "we!"

This video is must see tee vee. Not very long. Check it out. Sadly they didn't get any government funding to make it much longer, more complex and utterly stupefyingly stupid.

- NonE