From Steve McIntyre’s hometown newspaper:
Academic spats, name-calling, data-massaging and cozy peer review by friends are not exactly rare in the world of science. You’ll find them anywhere that careers, reputations and resources are on the line. The difference is we are not usually asked to wager billions on the findings. Given the stakes, it’s hard not to conclude that climate science is too important to be left to scientists.
This is the concluding paragraph is from the Toronto Globe and Mail.
Here’s the opening and the link to the story:
Steve McIntyre is a mild-mannered Toronto businessman who dabbles in statistics as a hobby. But to some climate scientists, he’s Public Enemy No.1. They mention him often in their e-mails and try to make sure his criticisms of their work aren’t published. “They’re really showing a siege mentality,” he says.
Mr. McIntyre is a bit player in a scandal that has swept the world of climate science like a mighty hurricane. It features leading scientists who, to the conspiratorially minded, seem to be colluding to manipulate data, withhold information, delete records and stifle dissent. “The worst scientific scandal of our generation,” declared one opinion writer in the Telegraph. Not quite. But the so-called “Climategate” affair – thousands of hacked e-mails made public on the eve of the Copenhagen convention – gives a pile of ammunition to those who believe global warming is a giant boondoggle.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
A British voter writes: If I wasn’t already a sceptic, the fact that the likes of Miliband are so gung-ho for AGW would probably have converted me into one (at least it would have got me asking questions). These are the people who took us into Iraq based on a “dodgy dossier” (that they knew was dodgy).
If not King (it’s good to be King), an Order of Canada is more appropriate for Steve.
Following Michael’s invitation I read with interest three pages of
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/12/01/tech-climate-east-anglia.html#socialcomments
I am pleased to know that there are many other Canadians who are as sceptical as I of El Gordo and all the AGW-ness that has been dumped onto us for so long. (And thanks to American and other non-Canadian readers for their patience while we take over WUWT! Isn’t this a great international forum!!!)
The MSM here, including CBC radio, remain in denial mode. An occasional item is forced upon them. CBC radio carried good coverage on newscasts during the wee-smalls of this morning, but nothing during the day. And that was overcome by a couple of promos for Saturday’s Quirks and Quarks (science show) that will feature rising sea levels, melting icecaps, and flooded islands. Nothing much is changing in the CBC fixation.
The G&M, a.k.a. the Mop and Pail, is mostly left-leaning. I subscribe to it in New Brunswick to add coverage to the local newspaper, which has to devote several pages to Hollywood doings and astrology to sell enough papers to stay in business. Although it has good general news coverage, I have been most disappointed by the G&M head-in-the sand attitude toward AGM. The National Post (a.k.a. National Pest) tends to be too right-leaning in its general coverage, but the Financial Post section has had a number of items giving realistic info about global climate. (Often when the main section of the paper was printing yet another AGW scare story.) And it was an FP item back in the 90s that alerted me to the fact that CO2 was not a major player in determining climate. An early heads-up.
Our local paper has had zilch about the CRU scandal, but I had a phone chat with the editorial pages editor Tuesday and he told me that their wire services had not sent anything on the subject. He confessed that he had been too busy recently to do much reading on climate on his own- our provincial government plans to sell our electric utility to Hydro Quebec. We live in interesting times!
Anyway, I had called the editor to ask if he would consider an op-ed article on CRU and climate. I had expected a lot of foot-dragging and a final no (earlier articles had been blocked), so you can imagine my flabbergastation when he enthusiastically gave me the go-ahead and 750 words. Although that is quite a few, I had to cut and rearrange a lot, but I finally got it down to the limit. It is too long to post here (unless A wants it as an item), but anyone interested in reading it can contact me at imcqueen@nbnet.nb.ca
IanM
From the post:
“Academic spats, name-calling, data-massaging and cozy peer review by friends are not exactly rare in the world of science. You’ll find them anywhere that careers, reputations and resources are on the line. The difference is we are not usually asked to wager billions on the findings. Given the stakes, it’s hard not to conclude that climate science is too important to be left to scientists.”
That is the key passage:
The difference is that because of the high stakes involved this has been made public.
But in private, my bet is that many scientists from different disciplines would acknowledge this kind of stuff goes on all the time.
So much so, that many scientists quite possibly are having a hard time appreciating why it’s such a big deal.
Particularly, those on the “conscensus” side of the argument.
The Milibands are perhaps the most evil persons in the UK today, Broon not excepted.
CTV has broken the ice:
“Climate chief: nations must ignore ‘climate saboteurs'” (Thursday Dec. 3, 2009)
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091203/climate_gate_091203/20091203?hub=TopStoriesV2
Note the imperative tone.
Highlights:
1) “[…] those challenging the mainstream scientific view on climate change are irresponsible and dangerous.”
There’s some backward logic.
2) “[…] the science is clear and settled.”
Deception or ignorance?
3) “There are people who […] say this proves climate change isn’t happening”
RIDICULOUS. Of course climate change is happening. I’ve noticed that UK alarmists in particular often make this futile attempt at obfuscation of nonalarmist commentary.
Who is this clown?
Any UK readers who can comment as to whether he ever shoots straight?
So if climategate is NOT ” “The worst scientific scandal of our generation,” then do tell us what is or was; we’d all like to know that.
And no fair; Piltdown man was not of our generation.
RE: radun (13:33:03) :
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/UKgovernment/Honoursawardsandmedals/DG_067917
gives a nomination form for honours and a list of questions that one should ask:
Before you make your nomination, ask yourself the following questions. Has your nominee:
1) made a difference to their community or field of work?
2) brought distinction to British life and enhanced its reputation?
3) exemplified the best sustained and selfless voluntary service?
4) demonstrated innovation and entrepreneurship?
5) carried the respect of their peers?
6) changed things, with an emphasis on achievement?
7) improved the lot of those less able to help themselves?
8) displayed moral courage and vision in making and delivering tough choices?
must admit that number 2 may be a sticky point and well depends on which peers number 5 refers to…;)
But I believe he deserves it – well done steve
Lucy Skywalker (11:37:20) : Smokey (09:08:11) : Bob Ward… welcomed the appointment. But he said: …“The big question is whether so-called ’sceptics’ will complain because the investigation will not be headed by include one of their own…
That flashes a rather red light. Meet Bob Ward
Yes a bit alarming. Bob Ward seems to imply that the investigation will go his way and Sir Muir Russell maybe one of their own.
But this may not necessarilly be so. Sir Muir Russell appears to be a tough guy. Can you dig up something about his past? Anything connected with AGW?
From the article:
“Mr. McIntyre is a bit player in a scandal that has swept the world of climate science like a mighty hurricane.”
Seems to have almost completely missed Australia and New Zealand. We still get Tiger Woods as headline news in our MSM.
From a Canadian media perspective, the two big hold-outs from Climate-Gate coverage perspective have been the Globe and Mail and the CBC (who cares about the Toronto Star who would give Pravda of old a run for its money. This changed last night when the nightly National news on CBC had a fairly in-depth and suprisingly balanced coverage of the the matter albeir a week and half late! The Globe and Mail is hopelessly ensconced in the Alarmist camp often printing several “the-earth-is-doomed” articles a day. Wente’s opinion column was the exception but she tends to run against the general grain of the paper. Rex Murphy who does work for both the G&M and the CBC is one of the few mainstream Canadian journalists who has the integrity and professionalism to tell it like it is on the Global Warming farce. I’m waiting in anticipation for something out of him on this issue via a written piece in the Globe and Mail or his weekly opinion piece on the CBC National (or both!).
‘“The worst scientific scandal of our generation,” declared one opinion writer in the Telegraph. Not quite.’
Not quite? What IS the worst scientific scandal of our generation, then?
Just watched a CTV feature news item on climategate and it was somewhat well balanced. The most encouraging thing was that they said it was expected to be on the Copenhagen agenda. But at the Denmark clave the the foxes are looking after the hen house … and no good can come of discussing climategate with Pachauri as the head fox.
That this is finally in the media here in the cold colony (Canada ☺) is encouraging. (Minus 22°C here last night..I sure hope this GW thing takes hold soon. ☺)
Another case of Globe and Mail stories about climate change, this time an article about birds in England:
“British bird’s rapid evolution signals human impact Warming of British Isles, along with feeding of the blackcap, has led to changes in the warbler’s beak size and wing shape in just a few decades
From Friday’s Globe and Mail Published on Thursday, Dec. 03, 2009 5:59PM EST Last updated on Thursday, Dec. 03, 2009 7:40PM EST”
YET
Activist/reporter Martin Mittelsteadt is caught in disinformation once again:
“Robins: With global warming, robins, the harbinger of spring for many Canadians, have been spotted for the first time in Arctic areas, where the Inuit had no name for the birds.”
Thanks to Dr. Pat Michaels, From World Climate Report:
“The article that caught our eye was titled “The Naming of Birds by Nunamiut Eskimo” by Laurence Irving of the Arctic Health Research Center of the U.S. Public Health Service in Anchorage, Alaska. It appeared in the March 1953 (Vol. 6, pp. 35-43) issue of the aptly-named journal Arctic (…) Irving’s list is the Nunamiut Eskimo word for ‘robin.’ For those interested it is “Koyapigaktoruk”—apparently a derivative of the sound of the robin’s song. Irving designates the robin’s status in the region as “NM” for “nesting” and “migrant.”
AND
“Further, in his article Irving refers to an earlier compilation of Eskimo names for birds, “The most complete list of Eskimo bird names for this part of Alaska so far published” that can be found in the book My Life with the Eskimo by V. Stefansson published in 1913. As it so happens, the contents of this book are accessible through Amazon.com. If you visit the link http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1417923954# , and enter the search term “robin” and read the contents of page 493, you will see a description of where robins have been sighted in the Canadian Arctic prior (obviously) to 1913, including along the far northern coast. Accompanying these location descriptions are the word for ‘robin’ in several other Eskimo tongues, including (phonetically) “Kre-ku-ak’tu-yok” (Mackenzie Eskimo) and “Shab’wak” (Alaskan Eskimo).
So, as it turns out, there are plenty of Eskimo words for robin that have existed for a long time and in languages that are spread among bands of Inuit all across the North American Arctic—and it is all plain to see with only a few clicks of the mouse along the information superhighway of the internet.”
BEWARE “Bruder” Martin Mittelstaedt DISINFORMS. EOM
Here is explained why they hide data: McIntyre and McKitrick “data terrorists”.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427363.200-researchers-must-stay-on-the-moral-high-ground.html
Well I wasn’t disappointed. Rex Murphy did his thing on Climate-Gate on CBC’s The National newscast and it was a blockbuster. No punches pulled whatsoever! Most importantly his piece will likely be seen by millions of mainstream Canadians and to paraphrase a great Who song “They Won’t Be Fooled Again”! Laughably the Liberals here were just starting down the path of using Climate Change is there “big stick” to go after the ruling Conservatives. Great timing there!
Once I find a link to the video either directly from CBC or from a posting on YouTube I will post here! Anthony, I’d make it a front and centre highlight on your site!
Sorry, “is there” is supposed to be “as their”. I always hit the submit button way too fast!
Here’s the link!
http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/rexmurphy/story/2009/12/03/thenational-rexmurphy-091203.html
Sorry, just saw a note that the video won’t be available online until tomorrow morning. For you Canadians you can still see it in the last 15 minutes of tonight’s National newscast.
ed_finnerty (09:18:58) :
that’s trillions not billions
“pretty soon we are talking about real money”
On the other hand, pretty warm november. Hmmmm.
Reply
Maybe, but it will be snowing in Sanford, North Carolina and San Antonio, Texas by this weekend. A twice a decade event.
California’s senator Boxer opines on the issue. But the comments following the article tell the real story: click
I’m in shock having just watched Rex Murphy on CBC explain clearly, intelligently and with his usual passion, his take on the issue of global warming He lays it all out, including an overview of what the released e-mails are all about. He holds back no punches when it comes to the likes of Gore et al.
Rex has a very large following on the CBC and at times, seems to me, to be working in the wrong place, immersed as he is in an atmosphere of left leaning
ideology.
This short rant from him will open many eyes for the first time.
If it wasn’t for a few individuals like Rex and Andrew coin I wouldn’t bother with the C.B.C.
Richard A. (10:17:22) :
This one is a hoot. In the Washington Times article about Horner and NASA GISS you get this: “Mark Hess, public affairs director for the Goddard Space Flight Center which runs the GISS laboratory… said he was unfamiliar with the British controversy and couldn’t say whether NASA was susceptible to the same challenges to its data.”
Why do I think he’s full of it when he says he’s unfamiliar with the Hadley situation?
Because such a ridiculous attempt at ‘see no evil, hear no evil, therefore there can be no evil anywhere near me’ is par for the course our highly paid (by…us?), ‘professional’ establishment classes.
In the real world, with actual journalists qualified to the task and with a commitment to the the truth and not pushing agendas, the reporter’s laughter would be picked up at a seismographic station in Omsk. Still.
If i was directing how my organisation’s affairs were being perceived by the public, it might help a smidge to turn the dial from broadcast only every so often.
As a daily reader of all 3 major Toronto newspapers I believe I have a decent take on their political bias. Up until today, Sat. Dec 5, the Globe has been a strong supporter of the “concensus” take on man caused global warming. The two opinion writers, Margaret Wente and (once weekly) Rex Murphy have been the only writers that would buck the trend. Even today, the main editorial was very supportive of the upcoming procedings in Denmark. However today a writer I have always respected, Doug Saunders, authored a balanced “full size” piece that started on page 1, on the “Climategate” scandal. As I read it, I said ti my wife, finally – the Globe has acknowledged that there may be something to this climategate issue.
The National Post, to give them their due, have published many articles talking about the weaknesses of the “man made warming” issue. The Toronto Star, bless their lefty hearts, have still not seen the light and they likely never will. They are firmly in the “we must comply” camp with as much emotion as possible.