Nov 20

Biting satire straight from Planet Moron:

An ongoing series dedicated to vigorously monitoring emerging threats to The Consensus that global warming is real, caused by humans, and must be addressed at all costs. Because without consensus, scientific conclusions would remain vulnerable to new data.

While we were putting the finishing touches on our piece yesterday regarding Senator John Kerry’s harmless hyperbole overstating increases in US Carbon emissions by a factor of 32, and Al Gore’s innocuous exaggeration of the earth’s interior temperature by a factor of a thousand, news was breaking that a major global warming research center’s database had been hacked revealing that climate scientists had manipulated data in order to support The Consensus.

Naturally, the usual suspects are suggesting that this information demonstrates that The Consensus is a fraud and that scientists are faking data, basing their accusations on little more than the fact that the information demonstrated that scientists are engaged in fraud and are faking data.

This is a woefully inaccurate interpretation of the material.

First, we have already determined that The Consensus is real and that “urgent action is needed by world leaders in order to save our climate.” Given that, it’s not clear why we’re still examining research data.

Second, we have to remember that simply reporting data is easy. However, consensus science demands far more rigor, and requires that we have researchers dedicated enough to do the hard work necessary to apply statistical tricks, hide inconvenient results, and occasionally just make things up. This is largely due to the fact that consensus science requires that research support a pre-determined conclusion, whereas regular science is a more chaotic, sloppy affair, in which no one knows what the data will prove until it’s been produced.

Read the rest on Planet Moron.

4 people like this post.

Possibly Related Posts:


2 Responses to “Consensus Watch – 11/20/2009 (Special Edition)”

  1. Simpleton says:

    “No, the authenticity of these files has not been proven. When I first read them, I was skeptical. But, having examined just a small portion of the hundreds (or thousands) of files, I’ve come to the conclusion that they simply could not be forgeries. If it’s a forgery, it’s one on an epic scale. Time will tell.”

    Hmmm. Sounds a lot like

    “When I first read articles about global warming, I was skeptical. But, having read just a small portion of the thousands (or tens of thousands) of articles, I’ve come to the conclusion that they simply could not be all conspiratorial. If global warming is a conspiracy, it’s one on an epic scale. Time will tell”


  2. Otter says:

    When I first heard about global warming in the early 80s, I believed it. But, having read thousands of articles since then, and having a degree in geology to boot, I’ve come to the conclusion that a hell of a lot of people have been mislead. If global warming is a conspiracy, it is one on a natural, cyclic scale. Time not only will tell, but has been telling us for hundreds of millions of years.


preload preload preload