OK, climate sceptics: here's the raw data you wanted

w1z4rd

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
49,747
Anyone can now view for themselves the raw data that was at the centre of last year's "climategate" scandal.

Temperature records going back 150 years from 5113 weather stations around the world were yesterday released to the public by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, UK. The only records missing are from 19 stations in Poland, which refused to allow them to be made public.

"We released [the dataset] to dispel the myths that the data have been inappropriately manipulated, and that we are being secretive," says Trevor Davies, the university's pro-vice-chancellor for research. "Some sceptics argue we must have something to hide, and we've released the data to pull the rug out from those who say there isn't evidence that the global temperature is increasing."

Hand it over

The university were ordered to release data by the UK Information Commissioner's Office, following a freedom-of-information request for the raw data from researchers Jonathan Jones of the University of Oxford and Don Keiller of Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, UK.

Davies says that the university initially refused on the grounds that the data is not owned by the CRU but by the national meteorological organisations that collect the data and share it with the CRU.

When the CRU's refusal was overruled by the information commissioner, the UK Met Office was recruited to act as a go-between and obtain permission to release all the data.

Poland refused, and the information commissioner overruled Trinidad and Tobago's wish for the data it supplied on latitudes between 30 degrees north and 40 degrees south to be withheld, as it had been specifically requested by Jones and Keiller in their FOI request and previously shared with other academics.

The price

The end result is that all the records are there, except for Poland's. Davies's only worry is that the decision to release the Trinidad and Tobago data against its wishes may discourage the open sharing of data in the future. Other research organisations may from now on be reluctant to pool data they wish to be kept private.

Thomas Peterson, chief scientist at the National Climatic Data Center of the US National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and president of the Commission for Climatology at the World Meteorological Organization, agrees there might be a cost to releasing the data.

"I have historic temperature data from automatic weather stations on the Greenland ice sheet that I was able to obtain from Denmark only because I agreed not to release them," he says. "If countries come to expect that sharing of any data with anyone will eventually lead to strong pressure for them to fully release those data, will they be less willing to collaborate in the future?"

Davies is confident that genuine and proper analysis of the raw data will reproduce the same incontrovertible conclusion – that global temperatures are rising. "The conclusion is very robust," he says, explaining that the CRU's dataset of land temperatures tally with those from other independent research groups around the world, including those generated by the NOAA and NASA.

"Should people undertake analyses and come up with different conclusions, the way to present them is through publication in peer-reviewed journals, so we know it's been through scientific quality control," says Davies.

No convincing some people

Other mainstream researchers and defenders of the consensus are not so confident that the release will silence the sceptics. "One can hope this might put an end to the interminable discussion of the CRU temperatures, but the experience of GISTEMP – another database that's been available for years – is that the criticisms will continue because there are some people who are never going to be satisfied," says Gavin Schmidt of Columbia University in New York.

"Sadly, I think this will just lead to a new round of attacks on CRU and the Met Office," says Bob Ward, communications director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics. "Sceptics will pore through the data looking for ways to criticise the processing methodology in an attempt to persuade the public that there's doubt the world has warmed significantly."

The CRU and its leading scientist, Phil Jones, were at the centre of the so-called "climategate" storm in 2009 when the unit was accused of withholding and manipulating data. It was later cleared of the charge.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20739-ok-climate-sceptics-heres-the-raw-data-you-wanted.html

They are right, the evidence will not be enough for the people climate science deniers. No amount of evidence will convince them. Irrational science deniers are so depressing. Wish South Africa spent more on educating people. If we spent as much on producing scientists as we do on Rugby this country would be a great country.
 

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
64,307
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20739-ok-climate-sceptics-heres-the-raw-data-you-wanted.html

They are right, the evidence will not be enough for the people climate science deniers. No amount of evidence will convince them. Irrational science deniers are so depressing. Wish South Africa spent more on educating people. If we spent as much on producing scientists as we do on Rugby this country would be a great country.

Wrong section. This is for News and current affairs. Science section is that way ->
 

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
64,307
I would say this is current affairs... :)

Guess you're right :p

The problem with this topic though is that it's he says she says. Lately everyone is a scientist and you have scientist for and against the global warming theory. Living green I support 100% and I say cut down on out footprint on the planet. But this global warming theory will always be hot debated even amounts scientists.
 

Hard Rain

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
1,471
I'm aware of many people who dissent from the orthodoxy of global warming, but certainly no "deniers"...
 

Hard Rain

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
1,471
The science is pretty settled on the issue, this is now a political issue for redneck conservatives.

Anybody who can argue by slogan like "the science is settled" clearly doesn't appreciate that science, like the market, is a continuous process...
 

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,475
No place for scepticism in science HR. You should know that
 

BigBullBully

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
566
No one is denying that its getting warmer, I do have a problem with the reasons for the warming being us humans who are causing the temp rise. I watch the shows on NatGeo ect and always hear the double speak, "experts" showing evidence of how thousands of years ago the global climate has risen to world wide droughts and at other times been a ice ball in space. Funny though I don't remember hearing about carbon pollution by humans 50 000/1 000 000 years ago causing these events, yet now its convenient for them to blame humans because carbon taxes are a easy way of broadening the rich/poor divide. Remember, don't breathe, save the planet from carbon emissions. Oh and ignore that big glowing thing in the sky, it doesn't affect climate at all.
 

WilD_CaT

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
3,431
Once again... I thought the debate the whole time was climate change policy, not climate change?

PS: Need to find the previous big thread we had on climate change, I found a link to a damn good video series on there regarding all anyone really needs to know on Climate Change science.
 
Last edited:

Bernie

Expert Member
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
2,123
Why would some countries want to keep this data a secret, what could possibly be so valuable about temperatures?
 

WilD_CaT

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
3,431
Why would some countries want to keep this data a secret, what could possibly be so valuable about temperatures?

If you want to do research on it, and the data is secret, you would have to pay me for access. If it is out there, people could be using it without you knowing.

It's about money.
 

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
64,307
If you want to do research on it, and the data is secret, you would have to pay me for access. If it is out there, people could be using it without you knowing.

It's about money.

This word just keeps on coming up in every sentence where Global Warming is being discussed. I wonder why...
 

WilD_CaT

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
3,431
This word just keeps on coming up in every sentence where Global Warming is being discussed. I wonder why...

Its true? Or its a conspiracy? :)

Companys punting green products will make money. Their lobbyists will donate money to politicians, who will make money. Since all policies come in the form of some kind of tax, what will happen is the rich will get richer because they have the knowledge to avoid paying taxes, pass on the costs to the consumer, so the average person will be worse off.

A lot of money is funneled from the state to researchers. So global warming researchers have an interest in politicians promoting climate policy as it it normally results in more money going to climate change researchers...

Climate scientists should stay out of politics, far, far away.
 
Top