Truth, Justice, Freedom [under fire]

Politics can be mundane, but rarely boring

Purloined Emails Show Trend

with 2 comments

From the purloined emails of ClimateGate come revelations of cracks in the unity of thought of the various AGW (anthropogenic global warming)adherents from various fields of study.

Interesting rifts of concern between members who are attempting to coordinate a response for publication.
It seems some within the scientific community were not entirely convinced of the appropriateness of the findings or the studies truthfulness.

Each of the block quotes taken from the emails will contain a link to the email in question.

Regarding the usefulness of computer modeling to study long-term trends both forward and backward in time.

Nonetheless, the findings should serve as a warning, Barnett says, (email link)that “the current models cannot be used in rigorous tests for anthropogenic signals in the real world”. If they are they “might lead us to believe that an anthropogenic signal had been found when, in fact, that may not be the case.”

Barnett seems to have doubts about using the models being able to pinpoint any variability solely caused by human activity.

The quote below also shows the complicit nature of the New York Times in the methodolgy of how they report what is being “leaked” to them. Despite the warnings regarding the uncertainties of the data, the NYT went with a “We found Proof” lead in their article.

Barnett knows how easily this can happen. He was a lead author for a critical chapter in the last IPCC scientific assessment, which investigated “the detection of climate change and attribution of causes”. It formulated the IPCC case that the evidence points towards a human influence on climate, but it warned repeatedly that great uncertainties remained. “We wrote a long list of caveats in that chapter,” says Barnett. “We got a lot of static from within IPCC, from people who wanted to water down and delete some of those caveats. We had to work very hard to keep them all in.” Even so, when the findings were first leaked to the New York Times, it was under the headline “Scientists finally confirm human role in global warming“.

Variability is more than just year against year, variability appears to be century against century with no discernible human cause to be found, except a few campfires across the planet.

The temperature graphs produced at Tornetrask show “pronounced variability on all timescales, from year-on-year variations right up to century-on-century,” says Briffa. On the longer timescales, for instance, they show 20 major cooling periods during the past two millenia, including long spells between 500 and 850, between 1100 and 1350 and between 1580 and 1750, the little ice age. There were also long warm spells between 900 and 1100, known as the medieval warm period, and 1360 to 1560


It would appear that even before the advent of copius amounts of coal burning industrialization there were significant periods of both cooling and warming which are not being fully taken into account by some in the AGW community.

All of the preceding quotes were taken from an email dated Oct 13 1996


Written by Gar Swaffar

November 26, 2009 at 6:58 am

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. where can I find this in english?

    ernest fimbrez

    November 27, 2009 at 9:45 pm

    • In english? The convoluted phraselology they use is endemic to their profession. But you can try going directly to the email at the link provided and check on some of the othert emails for further explanation of the issue.

      Gar Swaffar

      November 29, 2009 at 4:01 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: