After being called out by WUWT on the fake biotelemtery readings presented as “live” but were actually from March 8th looping repeatedly, Team Catlin had changed the website to say:
“Biometrics – Data for March 8th 2009
Status: Operational”
This is what it originally showed:
I think it is the most honest description yet.
Of course they could just end the farce and remove it. Because, well, who needs demonstrational biotelemetry anyway?
UPDATE: they also posted this at the bottom of the main page:
An apology
We’d like to apologise to anybody who felt misled by our recent biometric data. The data was initially displayed in error in a way that gave the impression that it was live. The intended qualification and explanation that it was, in fact, delayed information, was at first missing. We have subsequently corrected this with specific information concerning the above data. We apologise for the errors and to anyone who may have found the data misleading.
The real question is: how long would they have let that “live” impression go on had WUWT not called them on it? Originally the URL for the “biotelemetry” was
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/live_from_the_ice.aspx
Now that URL if typed in your browser is automatically redirected to:
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/latestfromtheice
So with the words “telemetry” and “live_from_the_ice.aspx” it is clear what the original intent was. The apology is about saving face, nothing else.
Color me unimpressed. They should take down their farcical “biometrics” and call the team home, there’s no science being done here, only public relations, and even that is poorly done.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Perhaps they can label AGW and all Carbon taxes, as simply “demonstration” also!……. Now that would be a damn good idea.
Perhaps we can get a big red rectangular stamp made up that says.
“Demonstrational purposes only – Not for Political use.”
Then whenever a “peer reviewed” AGW Paper comes out. We can prestamp it.
The small print:
“An apology
We’d like to apologise to anybody who felt misled by our recent biometric data. The data was initially displayed in error in a way that gave the impression that it was live. The intended qualification and explanation that it was, in fact, delayed information, was at first missing. We have subsequently corrected this with specific information concerning the above data. We apologise for the errors and to anyone who may have found the data misleading.”
Call me paranoid, but is it possible that the 3 stooges are “useful idiots” ??
As such they are expendable?
Would they have a chance for “independent communication” other than the sponsors?
It would be difficult to establish a communication without the
sponsors “wetting” the line…but IT would be interesting if someone drop a
sat-phone for them.
It’s like a modern-day Jack London story. To Build a Fire is more like operational biotelemetry.
The inconclusiveness of the Poznan talks last weekend signals once again that our leaders are prepared to drink in the last chance saloon – with last orders being called (Global climate change decisions on hold for Obama, 15 December). There is just a year left for our political leaders to put a post-2012 deal in place at Copenhagen next year, if there is to be any hope of preventing global warming from reaching really dangerous levels. But slow progress seems to signal a deal that will fall short of expectations.
Scientists have presented a barrage of evidence for global warming and I have seen with my own eyes the irrevocable changes taking place in the Arctic Ocean. Each year more and more of the fragile multi-year sea ice melts and it could be less than a generation before the ice cap disappears completely. The loss of this astonishingly beautiful place will be a tragedy in itself, but a still greater calamity for us all is its unbalancing of the Earths whole eco-system.
Next year, during the critical few months before Copenhagen, I will be leading a scientific expedition to the north pole to assess the status of the ice. Using a specially designed ice-penetrating radar, the Catlin Arctic Survey team will take millions of readings of the thickness of the floating ice over a 1,200-kilometre route. The data will be analysed by the worlds leading scientists from organisations including Nasa.
I believe I owe it to my children and future generations to carry out this important, if hazardous, survey. Putting our abilities as explorers at the disposal of climate scientists is our teams small contribution to securing a solution. It is to be hoped world leaders recognise early enough they have a still greater role to play in Copenhagen next year.
Pen Hadow
Catlin Arctic Survey
If this doesn’t open people’s eyes to what this expedition is all about then nothing will!
The purpose was, reading between the lines, to try and present data that would be used to drive home the Copenhagen Accord. A propagandist stunt to achieve political goals, more or less.
Google search news articles on Pen Hadow. How can one possibly expect to get credible data from an advocate? Same with Hansen being in change of measuring temperature.
This is almost like the Marlboro Man becoming the surgeon general then proceeding to tell us “Smoke ’em if you got ’em”.
Apologie?
“The data was initially displayed in error in a way that gave the impression that it was live”
Displayed in ERROR, come off it.
I had no impression that it was live, it was live, no two ways about it.
We could record the live data onto their highly professional template.
As I said earlier today 15th April their educational page states live data.
This whole thing is a demonstration, just like the telemetry data. They might as well have turned up outside a coal fired power plant in sunny England in all their Arctic regalia and stuck pictures of fluffy Polar Bears on the chain wire fence.
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/assets/downloads/Ice_Report_14_4_09.pdf
The results collected in the first month of the Catlin survey point to an unexpected lack of multi-year ice…
I thought the machine was bust? And what was ‘unexpected’? They went there to measure the ‘decline’ in the ice.
OT
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13437705
OT you seem to have upset new scientist. Keep up the good work
“For the last two years, the “Best Science Blog” in the Weblogs Awards, which are based on readers’ votes, has gone to blogs by climate change deniers. Such blogs may be having an influence: polls show more and more Americans now think the threat posed by climate change is exaggerated even though denialism has become rarer in the mainstream media, with even Fox News finally embracing the truth.”
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227035.800-review-the-open-laboratory-edited-by-jennifer-rohn.html
Where’s Chad on this one?
Only one “deliberate attempt to deceive” is needed to destroy credibility.
This particular AGW-Team has no credibility with me. I presume that even though their survey instruments have failed (other than a hand tape measure), they will conclude that AGW is destroying the Arctic.
Right or wrong, I will not believe their results.
tallbloke (23:45:06) :
Oh wow, I had assumed that wasn’t in the dictionary.
3: a show of armed force
Just in case a PB attacks the sensors?
More apt?:
There is no difference at all between what the Catlin AGW promoters are doing and any other part of the AGW promotion industry.
Well, you fooled me with the fake bio data. Send real ice data now, and if it appears credible I will forgive you, Catlin.
Love and Kisses,
Mike
PS I’m still pulling for you to do the right thing.
Pen Hadow may well have seen changes in the Arctic, but, as he is only 47, I presume that he is referring to the changes that have taken place over the last 25 years or so, not those that took place in the early part of the last century thro’ to the 1940’s, nor the cooling & presumabley increased sea-ice from the 1940’s to the 1970’s? So he has only witnessed changes occurring over this relatively short period, which we are told by experts that it is far too short a timescale to draw any conlcusions in long-term trends!
PS Me thinks the Met Office have been getting it wrong again IMHO! we’ll see what crops up this afternoon.
Having just written a comment to the BBC re: its reporting on the Caitlin Arctic Survey (http://tinyurl.com/dy95u )- I noted curious search engine results. If one searches Google for BBC Caitlin Arctic Survey – you get only the 21 Feb 2009 … article titled:
“Arctic team targets key ice data”
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News
This is their pre-expedition launch story about the glories of the mission. But there is no result for the later stories about the problems on the ice, equipment failure, etc., e.g. Tuesday, 14 April 2009 14:39 UK:
“Arctic team gives up on ice radar”
By David Shukman
Science and environment correspondent, BBC News
One can only find these stories by going directly to the BBC site and then searching for Caitlin Arctic Survey. Thus, it would appear that BBC is positioning stories in search engines to effectively censor reporting the Survey failures.
No only does the Caitlin Survey site manipulate (falsify) data, BBC, and I’m sure other MSM, sites are burying the bad news bear about global warming – that is not. This should be pointed out in letters to Editors.
http://tinyurl.com/dy95u
Catlin captain on his return from the Arctic, “Ice cores equivocally and demonstrationally show that it is thinner. Drilling in only flat areas to assure variation control of ice compression, we discovered that the ice was the same thickness every time and everywhere we drilled.”
News flash! “WUWT blogg discovers ice core samples were taken from the same flow of ice that the Catlin team walked on, thinking they were actually moving across the ice, when in fact the ice was moving with them. This discovery follows the previous exposure of repeating biometrics. The Catlin team and sponsors stand by their data explaining that equivocal and demonstrational ice cores are more reliable than in-situ measures and should replace the outdated buoy, submarine, and satellite measures, thus confirming the consensus that the Arctic is thinning.”
Wow, that is some “apology” they give. Basically, they lied, and now they are lying further to try to cover up their initial lies. It’s classic CAGW/CC behavior, and a big reason why more and more people are becoming Skeptics or Climate Realists (along with blogs like this one, of course!).
Indiana Bones: If one searches Google for BBC Caitlin Arctic Survey – you get only the 21 Feb 2009 … article
That’s probably because you spelled the name of the expedition incorrectly. Try Catlin with only one i
Is this whole thing just a glorified episode of hazing, with a side order of “reality show” sensationalism?
I keep wondering what the team members were promised if they did indeed meet the desired goal…which apparently is not reaching the north pole…not obtaining scientifically valid data…but rather simply continuing to parrot the party line in the face of extreme adversity. Do they end up sitting at the right hand of the new king of the new world order? Or are they simply disposable stooges?
I’m guessing that they couldn’t pay a camera crew enough to endure what these people have endured.
Indiana Bones (07:03:30) :
“Arctic team targets key ice data”
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News
This is their pre-expedition launch story about the glories of the mission. But there is no result for the later stories about the problems on the ice, equipment failure, etc., e.g. Tuesday, 14 April 2009 14:39 UK:
“Arctic team gives up on ice radar”
By David Shukman
Science and environment correspondent, BBC News
One can only find these stories by going directly to the BBC site and then searching for Caitlin Arctic Survey. Thus, it would appear that BBC is positioning stories in search engines to effectively censor reporting the Survey failures.
No only does the Caitlin Survey site manipulate (falsify) data, BBC, and I’m sure other MSM, sites are burying the bad news bear about global warming – that is not. This should be pointed out in letters to Editors.
——————————-
By fraudulently modifying Obama’s acceptance speech, the BBC have made it pretty clear that fraud is fine with them, as long as you are earning planet-saver dinner party credentials in the process
I keep thinking of that oldie but goodie description of higher education:
BS means what you think it does.
MS means ‘more of the same’.
PhD means ‘piled higher and deeper’.
“I have seen with my own eyes the irrevocable changes taking place in the Arctic Ocean.”
Pen Hadow
Perhaps when Pen gets back someone could ask him how you can visually confirm that a change is “irrevocable”
OK, sure if you’re using explosives …
The good news is that it’s possible some people interested in the Catlin arctic “survey” are now reading WUWT. The bad news is that if you Google “Catlin Arctic” you still get 37 rubbish links before WUWT.