Case closed: “Climategate” was manufactured

[Geriatrix]

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/08/24/case-closed-climategate-was-manufactured/

It’s not often you can actually say "case closed", but in this case it’s literally true: climatologist Michael Mann has been cleared of all wrongdoing by the Inspector General of the National Science Foundation.

Did I say "has been cleared"? I meant has been cleared once again, since there have been several investigations into his research and Dr. Mann has been cleared of all charges every single time (like here and here). All of this stemmed from the "ClimateGate" nonsense of the past couple of years, where leaked emails were taken hugely out of context by the press and climate change deniers, and used to smear scientists. Dr. Mann was at the center of the whole manufactured controversy, being the biggest target of the people who want to deny the Earth is warming up.

This latest, and hopefully last, investigation into Dr. Mann’s research (PDF) again shows he is not guilty of misconduct. A couple of the report conclusions are worth pointing out:

We found no basis to conclude that the [Climategate] emails were evidence of research misconduct or that they pointed to such evidence.

That’s clear enough, I think. They also said:

There is no specific evidence that [Mann] falsified or fabricated any data and no evidence that his actions amounted to research misconduct.

A big claim by the deniers is that researchers were using "tricks" to falsify conclusions about global warming, but the NSF report is pretty clear that’s not true. The most damning thing the investigators could muster was that there was "some concern" over the statistical methods used, but that’s not scandalous at all; there’s always some argument in science over methodology. The vague language of the report there indicates to me this isn’t a big deal, or else they would’ve been specific. The big point is that the data were not faked.

What does this mean for global warming? A lot of these attacks can be traced back to the famous "hockey stick" diagram, showing how Earth’s temperatures have been increasing rapidly in recent times. This graph is what really clinches the idea of man-made global warming, and so has been the epicenter of the manufactroversy. The fact that Dr. Mann has been cleared again, and that his data are good, shows that this graph is even more solid — or at least is not as weak as so many would lead you to believe.

And what does this mean about "ClimateGate"? That’s clear enough: all the outrage, all the claims of fraud and fakery, were just — haha — hot air.

Not that this will stop or even slow down the denial machine. Politicians from the Virginia State Attorney General to members of the House of Representatives have been on what I would characterize as witch hunts. Dr. Mann has been vocal in his opposition, and I applaud him. Still, needless to say, the attacks will continue.

Here are the facts: the Earth is warming up. The rate of warming has increased in the past century or so. This corresponds to the time of the Industrial Revolution, when we started dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases warm the planet (hence the name) — if they didn’t we’d have an average temperature below the freezing point of water. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is dumped into the atmosphere by humans to the tune of 30 billion tons per year, 100 times the amount from volcanoes. And finally, approximately 97% of climatologists who actually study climate agree that global warming is real, and caused by humans.

Those are simply the facts. It’s not hard to connect them, as long as you stick to reality and don’t let ideology sway you.

 

[LazyLion]

Meanwhile....
http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/sea-levels-fell-last-year-1915/

 

[w1z4rd]

Yup, totally posted this on my G+: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ist-cleared-in-u-s-data-altering-inquiry.html

Thanks for the link.

 

[BCO]

Meanwhile....
http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/sea-levels-fell-last-year-1915/

Not sure if you're implying that climate change is not a problem or something.... From the article:

this rise hit something of a pothole, with a temporary dip linked to the El Niño-La Niña cycle

Of course, this sea level dip is just a small blip in the overriding trend of sea level rise, Boening said. Water flows downhill, and the extra rain will eventually find its way back to the sea. When it does, global sea level will rise again.

"We're heating up the planet, and in the end that means more sea level rise," Willis said. "But El Niño and La Niña always take us on a rainfall roller coaster, and in years like this they give us sea-level whiplash."

`

 

[Jab]

Not an significant drop really.

 

[porchrat]

Are it time to acknowledge wrongness Gary?

 

[Pitbull]

Why is everyone so fascinated by this Climategate thing?

It has never and will never be the reason so many sceptics question the merits of Global Warming... I couldn't care less if the guy was right or wrong or if info was fabricated or not. Climate change > Global warming. My stance on it anyway, I couldn't careless about this climategate thing tbh.

 

[bubbatentoe]

pay your carbon taxes & ride a bicycle if it'll make you feel better.
Just don't expect it from me.

 

[w1z4rd]

pay your carbon taxes & ride a bicycle if it'll make you feel better.
Just don't expect it from me.

Let me know how that works out for you the next time you buy a car.

Sent from my MB525 using MyBroadband Android App

 

[bubbatentoe]

Following climategate the Co2 issue has moved from “consensus” to “non-settled"
The "planet-is-warmer" was never in question, the "Co2-is-causing-it" was.
Too many scientists disagreed.

After the emails surfaced the issue was blown out of proportion.
hacking/scandal etc means it caught the public's eye. (previously the public simply believed what the IPCC told them)

It doesn't matter if climategate was fake or real, what matters is that the original "facts" have been brought into question.


The following is now in doubt:

a) Does increased Co2 levels cause warming or is it merely the RESULT of warming?
b) If Co2 is the result of a warmer planet, what is causing the warming?
c) Will increased Co2 levels really have a negative affect?
Basic science says increased Co2 (to a point) levels will be food for plants/agriculture/rain forests. (a good thing)
d) Can humans have an affect on sea levels or is it merely a natural (fluctuating) cycles on which humans have no effect (bar the odd planet wide nuclear war & associated nuclear winter).



Moral of the story:

It is (VERY?) possible that the US/UK/EU bodies (might have) lied to the public about Co2 in order to:

a) generate corporate carbon taxation
b) save (for themselves) the declining "easy-to-get-to" oil by motivating "green" transport, living & research. (which sits well with anybody with an environmental conscious)
c) starve developing countries, keep them in a perpetual developing state (AKA: consuming products from the industrialized nations)

It appears that it may all have been about money.
so what else is new?

 

[BCO]

It doesn't matter if climategate was fake or real, what matters is that the original "facts" have been brought into question.

So it doesn't matter that denialists lied in order to manufacture a controversy?

The following is now in doubt:

a) Does increased Co2 levels cause warming or is it merely the RESULT of warming?
b) If Co2 is the result of a warmer planet, what is causing the warming?

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/the-lag-between-temp-and-co2/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/

c) Will increased Co2 levels really have a negative affect?


Basic science says increased Co2 (to a point) levels will be food for plants/agriculture/rain forests. (a good thing)

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/11/co_2-fertilization/

d) Can humans have an affect on sea levels or is it merely a natural (fluctuating) cycles on which humans have no effect (bar the odd planet wide nuclear war & associated nuclear winter)

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/09/how-much-will-sea-level-rise/

http://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...level-rise-more-evidence-from-the-ice-sheets/

 

[SaiyanZ]

Has anyone thought that the sun may also have hot and cold cycles that could last millions of years? The earth gets all it's heat from the sun so it is obvious that any small change in the heat output of the sun would have an affect on our planet's temperature. Nobody will ever really know the truth I think.

 

[BCO]

Has anyone thought that the sun may also have hot and cold cycles that could last millions of years? The earth gets all it's heat from the sun so it is obvious that any small change in the heat output of the sun would have an affect on our planet's temperature. Nobody will ever really know the truth I think.

No. Nobody's ever thought it must be the sun....

 

[porchrat]

No. Nobody's ever thought it must be the sun....

Case closed indeed. All this time we were worrying and here it was just the sun playing silly buggers.