'Climategate' review clears scientists of dishonesty

[denem]

Source: CNN

London, England (CNN) -- An independent report released Wednesday into the leaked "Climategate" e-mails found no evidence to question the "rigor and honesty" of scientists involved.

The scandal fueled skepticism about the case for global warming just weeks before world leaders met to agree a global deal on climate change at a United Nations conference in Copenhagen last December.

The seven-month review, led by Muir Russell, found scientists at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) did not unduly influence reports detailing the scale of the threat of global warming produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

"We went through this very carefully and we concluded that these behaviors did not damage our judgment of the integrity, the honesty, the rigor with which they had operated as scientists," Russell said.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/07/07/climategate.email.review/?hpt=T1

---

... not that this nor any other report will calm 'skeptics' sweltering in a 100F heatwave.

Full Report here : http://www.cce-review.org/pdf/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

[Soylent Brice]

1. K&R and bookmarked. n/t

[Uncle Joe]

2. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, denem.

[xchrom]

3. Recommend

[Starckers]

4. Science

As a scientist I cannot recommend any of them for continuing
in their job looking into climate change.  You do not
fudge/hide/ignore evidence. It is what it is.  As the say,
read it and weep.  This should not be political but
investigative.  

[Bragi]

9. What evidence do you have for that assertion?

You say that these scientists should be dismissed because they "fudge/hide/ignore" evidence.

This report, however, and two others now published, dispute your claim.

Have you some evidence you can point us to to back up your claim?

Also, what field of science are you in?

[JBoy]

11. The field of medieval fonts.

[Starckers]

22. Science

They did not report all the data.  They "Cherry
Picked" data and this report was paid for by themselves. 
If Halliburton filed a report that they paid for saying they
were angels you would be screaming.

[jpak]

31. In other news: US climate scientists receive hate mail barrage in wake of UEA scandal

with death threats and one had a dead animal dumped on his doorstep.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/05/hate-mail-climategate

see how this works?

[jpak]

17. They did not "fudge/hide/ignore evidence"

nice try though

:rofl:

[Starckers]

25. Science

From the report:

However, the scientists were criticized for failing to respond
openly to questions about climate data lodged under Britain's
freedom of information laws.

"We found a tendency to answer the wrong question or to
give a partial answer," the report said. Other emails
were deleted in anticipation of requests for their release.

Two of the most contentious parts of the emails were the
phrases "hide the decline" and "trick,"
seen as evidence of an attempt to massage data to support the
scientists' views.

With reference to "hide the decline," the review
said the unit's presentation of data was misleading. It said
the use of the word "trick" may have been shorthand
for a neat mathematical approach to a problem.

That is called fudging, hiding ignoring.  Nice try though.

[jpak]

28. Science

The science is right and has not challenged by their peers.

Those phrases were taken out of context and bandied about by deniers as evidence that climate science is some kind of "conspiracy".

They were cleared of that charge but a bit too late for the Copenhagen summit.

and let's not foget climate deniers fudge, hide and ignore the data all the time.

and use stolen email to bolster their stupid arguments

yup!

[Zoeisright]

20. Hmm, considering the grammatical errors, I have to doubt your claim.

'It is what it is'??? Hardly a scientific phrase.

[Starckers]

21. Science

The data is what it is.  They definitely withheld data that
did not fit their hypothesis. You do not withhold data when it
does not fit the hypothesis you state when doing discovery. 
You learn this in High School. 

[Bragi]

5. The "climategate" PR stunt worked fine

The whole purpose of this PR stunt by carbon-industry shills was to help derail the Copenhagen conference. They succeeded mightily in doing this.

Reports like this one showing that scientists weren't actually dishonest, and that none of the allegations bring into question the basic science of climate change, are nice, but won't have much impact.

[ixion]

6. exactly.

they've gotten the meme into the echo chamber, and that's all they really wanted.

[Dover]

14. Bingo. So how can these kinds of stunts be 'derailed'? It seems to me that the msm is more than

happy to be spoon-fed the 'news' without vetting. Or perhaps it's more sinister than that relative to the corporate interests behind the screen. At any rate, what we call 'news' these days seems to maintain a heightened threshold - a disembodied, sensationalized buzz - rather than being grounded to real events. As a result, it seems we've become a nation of adrenaline, fast food junkies, addicted to the fix.
It's essentially a virtual world crafted to elicit a particular experience, reality and response.

[jakeXT]

7. lol

The independent Climate Change Email Review was announced in December 2009 after emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit were hacked and published online.

The Review was called for and is being funded by the University of East Anglia, but its work and findings are wholly independent.

http://www.cce-review.org/About.php

[Starckers]

8. Science

So the University is investigating itself, or funding to have
itself investigated. It's like BP paying Exxon to investigate
the oil spill.

[Bragi]

15. Wrong again

The Review team
The Independent Climate Change Email Review is being conducted by an expert team, led by Sir Muir Russell KCB DL FRSE. The Review team has more than 100 years’ collective expertise of scientific research methodology and a wide range of scientific backgrounds.

None have any links to the Climatic Research Unit, or the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). More information about each of the review team members can be found in the Biographies section.

http://www.cce-review.org/About.php

[Starckers]

23. Science

Paid for by East Anglia U.

[jpak]

29. climate change denial

paid for by????????

[jpak]

18. Yes - it is a *conspiracy*

Evil scientists covering up their evil communist environazi deeds!

:rofl:

[CreekDog]

19. Cough up every number you ever calculated in the past 30 years

or I'll call you a fraud as you just did to those other scientists.

come on now, all the numbers since the 1980's. we all want to see them.

[Starckers]

24. Science

OK, but you will be bored.  I have all my data since 1977.

[superconnected]

26. So lets see your anti-climate change data that you've kept since '77!

You've got a site claiming that global warming is a hoax, right? Link?

[jpak]

30. LOL!

This should be fun...

:D

[Starckers]

32. Science

Who said anything about climate change?  I was discussing the
East Anglia U's lack of scientific discipline.  What is your
discipline?

[superconnected]

34. Systems Engineer and SQL DBA

[Starckers]

35. Science

So, here is what a Systems Engineer does. (From Penn State.)

"You are frequently asked to solve complex problems that
affect your customers, suppliers, senior management, and the
other members of your engineering team. You meet these
challenges by changing uncertainty into something that can be
understood throughout your organization and in the
marketplace."

Now from the report on East Anglia U.

"We found a tendency to answer the wrong question or to
give a partial answer," the report said. Other emails
were deleted in anticipation of requests for their release.

Two of the most contentious parts of the emails were the
phrases "hide the decline" and "trick,"
seen as evidence of an attempt to massage data to support the
scientists' views."

So you would buy for your company from East Anglia U.?  How
would you justify it?

[superconnected]

36. My credentials aren't in question, YOURS are. I am not claming to be a scientist.

And you have no idea what a systems engineer does. I've only been a certified Systems Engineer for 10 years and consistently employed as one - as I am now.

Your title?

[Starckers]

37. Science

So you do not fit the definition of a systems engineer.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jpak]

40. Too funny

:rofl:

[Starckers]

38. Science

So you do not fit the definition of a systems engineer.

[superconnected]

41. I'm going to guess you are an unemployed ex-college science student.

What else can I guess from your pulling out some random job app - calling that a systems engineer, and not being able to state your title in science. I mean WTF. At least I actually am a systems engineer. You are apparently no scientist.

[Starckers]

42. Science

At least you could defend yourself better.  I am called
"Doctor," : PhD in Organic Chemistry.  The
Scientists at East Anglia U. failed in following the
Scientific Method as described in High School.  

[jpak]

43. Really? None of their proposals or papers were peer reviewed?

Or Is peer review part of the climate conspiracy too?

You know evil climate scientists reviewing other evil climate scientists research...

:D

[Starckers]

Science

From the report:

"We found a tendency to answer the wrong question or to
give a partial answer," the report said. Other emails
were deleted in anticipation of requests for their release.

Two of the most contentious parts of the emails were the
phrases "hide the decline" and "trick,"
seen as evidence of an attempt to massage data to support the
scientists' views.

With reference to "hide the decline," the review
said the unit's presentation of data was misleading. It said
the use of the word "trick" may have been shorthand
for a neat mathematical approach to a problem."

So peer review is not valid if data is hidden, as the case
with a partial answer.

[Starckers]

44. Science

From the report:

"We found a tendency to answer the wrong question or to
give a partial answer," the report said. Other emails
were deleted in anticipation of requests for their release.

Two of the most contentious parts of the emails were the
phrases "hide the decline" and "trick,"
seen as evidence of an attempt to massage data to support the
scientists' views.

With reference to "hide the decline," the review
said the unit's presentation of data was misleading. It said
the use of the word "trick" may have been shorthand
for a neat mathematical approach to a problem."

So peer review is not valid if data is hidden, as the case
with a partial answer.

[jpak]

45. Science Science

They were cleared of fraud - and so were the US scientists investigated.

and deniers keep on denyin'....

yup!

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CreekDog]

46. Joshua what are you doing?

[WinkyDink]

10. Surprise, surprise. Joins "WhiteWatergate" in the ranks of phony "scandals".

[SoapBox]

12. And why isn't ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, PBS, NPR reporting this?

...oh ya...they don't like to correct high drama stories that were lies in the first place.

[denem]

13. It's a CNN report

[Bragi]

16. Actually...

I think the media pretty well knew this whole "scandal" was a dubious distraction from the outset, but it was planted just before the Copenhagen conference, which made the story irresistible.

This follow-up story will be dutifully reported, for the record, and then disappear.

The deniers and their carbon-industry funders will, of course, continue to pretend that climate change science has somehow been been discredited, despite all the facts and all the reports that will demonstrate otherwise.

That's the way issues will continue to play out in the polarized and fact-free world of political debate.

[Blue_Tires]

27. An apology should be coming from the WSJ and other media outlets

getting orgasmic over what they thought was the 'smoking gun'

[freebrew]

33. I'm holding my breath...

in eager anticipation...:sarcasm: (as if that was needed).

[underpants]

47. I LMAO when I read this at work. **POOF** another RW phantom story goes up in smoke

just like that douchebag and the Acorn scam

[underpants]

48. LMFELMFAO

:bounce: