"Misleading" and "Erroneous" -- and Other Words of Praise for Climate Scientists
This week, two reports -- one Dutch, one British -- have been issued regarding Climategate, i.e., climate scientists deliberately ignoring, or actively concealing, contrary evidence.
Both reports confirm that the Nobel-prize-winning scientists of the IPCC often played fast-and-loose with the data, but I'm shocked (shocked!) to find that most media outlets are spinning these reports as a vindication of climate scientists. "Climate-change scientists in e-mail scandal cleared again" says the LA Times, with notable grumpiness (must we go through this again?)
Cleared? The UK Report found that the iconic "hockey stick" graphic used by the IPCC was "misleading" (their word) because it deliberately ignored evidence of the medieval warming period.
Meanwhile, the Dutch report scolded the IPCC for presenting a one-sided report that focused only on the negative aspects of global warming, ignored the positive aspects, and that contained "significant errors," among them, the claim that 55% of the Netherlands is below sea level (it's 26%) and that the Himalyan glaciars would melt by 2035 (some say 2350 - maybe).
So if we know that scientists intentionally produced a misleading chart to sell global warming to the public, and we know that they were so sloppy (or so venal) as to get basic verifiable facts wrong (always -- mysteriously -- in the direction of overstating the effects of global warming), what moves London's Guardian to proclaim Climategate scientists cleared of manipulating data on global warming ? And is it possible for the media to break free from the cult of global warming?
- Comment (3)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments :
May '10
Re: "Misleading" and "Erroneous" -- and Other Words of Praise for Climate Scientists
Um, no. At least not until they find another religion with which to replace it.
Jun '10
Re: "Misleading" and "Erroneous" -- and Other Words of Praise for Climate Scientists
This story is a good example of how progressives assault the second pillar of American culture, Greco-Roman philosophy, by insisting that truth exists only in the eye of the beholder, and he who controls the "narrative" determines the truth. Their methods are as dishonest as they are philosophically weak.
Jul '10
Re: "Misleading" and "Erroneous" -- and Other Words of Praise for Climate Scientists
This is a little like sending foxes into the hen house over rumors of trouble and ignoring feathers in their mouth when they say everything is dandy.