PC Pals Forum
General Discussion => Science & Nature => Topic started by: GillE on November 21, 2009, 01:33
-
In these days of 24 hour news stations broadcasting reports of stolen sensitive data (such as today's T-Mobile story), I find it surprising that there have been no reports of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit computer security breach. It has received some low level newspaper coverage (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-hackers-leaked-emails) and it has been commented on by James Delingpole (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/)but it still isn't being regarded as a headline story. Perhaps journalists are still investigating it.
Apparently, a large amount of email correspondence between leading climate change scientists has been stolen, revealing that the data presented to support the notion of man-made climate change has been deliberately manipulated. If this story proves to be true, it will make Watergate look like neighbourhood tittle-tattle.
-
Oops! :o:
-
all of this data is manipulated - that's the process of science... its just depends what they mean by manipulated... for example I "smooth" a lot of my data to remove global trends and thus allows us to get a result - otherwise it would just be noise... :dunno:
-
now I'm a bit up-to-speed - what with observing all night I've only just got to check the web feeds from yesterday, looks like this story has recieved quite a bit of coverage on the web though:
Leading British climate centre hacked - http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=leading-british-climate-centre
and a must read article on RealClimate - The CRU hack - http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/
I just feel that these are people's emails and its private correspondence and totally irresponsible for people to publish them. People write crap in emails and well this is just a bit pointless.
-
People write crap in emails and well this is just a bit pointless.
People also write crap in reports, Sam. :(
-
And it's compulsory in newspapers.
-
Some of us have been wondering for years why the climate change scientists won't publish data which will end the claims of sceptics once and for all. I accept what you're saying, Sam, but this looks very bad for the IPCC and its ancillary bodies.
-
People also write crap in reports, Sam. :(
true, but normally its cause they are misguided etc - the referring processes however is designed to avoid most crap getting through
-
Some of us have been wondering for years why the climate change scientists won't publish data which will end the claims of sceptics once and for all. I accept what you're saying, Sam, but this looks very bad for the IPCC and its ancillary bodies.
indeed.
-
Some further interest post event discussion:
Scientist: Leak of climate e-mails appalling - http://www.physorg.com/news178199129.html
Very interesting stuff:
The CRU hack: Context - http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack-context/
-
Interesting comments, Sam :) . However, you would think the scientists concerned would be prepared to end the speculation by simply publishing their raw data.
-
Well I for one believe that as long as we pay our taxes to support these people in university's and government to do all this investigating it should all be public
after all we pay for it so why shouldn't we be able to judge for ourselves
Why keep it secrete if they are not trying to hide something from us
There is just to much money involved for it to be 100% honest
-
There's probably a lot of truth in that, Dave.
-
Well I for one believe that as long as we pay our taxes to support these people in university's and government to do all this investigating it should all be public
yeah tis kinda odd as all data in astronomy (well data taken by instruments built with public money) has a short proprietary time (give the actual investigators time to publish their results) and then it becomes all free to anyone to access (of course its not entirely accessible but its there). With the age of the virtual observatory it will soon be possible for anyone to do astronomical research... well I guess it is now. That's how science should be, nice and transparent.
-
I didnt mean specifically astronomy sam they are probably the most open about it all
With the exception of any of you finding little green men then I'm sure we wont hear about it soon lol
It's the ones doing genetic reschearch and the like it affects our lives but mos`t of the paper work is not published for us to decide or its published one sided toagree with the personal preferences of the rescearcher themselves
-
I didnt mean specifically astronomy sam they are probably the most open about it all
I know, wasn't meaning to sound defensive, was just giving an example of how public money can be transparent - I just don't understand how other sciences can be so closed.
-
With the exception of any of you finding little green men then I'm sure we wont hear about it soon lol
well I'm at Arecibo at the moment... the home of Serendip... I think I'm staying in the same place as Jodie Foster did in contact...
-
:woot:
-
well I'm at Arecibo at the moment... the home of Serendip... I think I'm staying in the same place as Jodie Foster did in contact...
If you hear any strange sounds comming through the speakers
It's just me playing vdeo games :laugh:
-
This article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1235395/SPECIAL-INVESTIGATION-Climate-change-emails-row-deepens--Russians-admit-DID-send-them.html) (admittedly in the Daily Mail ::) ) makes interesting reading. Far from being the innocent 'adjustments' that UEA has always claimed, inconvenient data appears to have been deliberately ignored and graphics designed to mask inconvenient truths.
-
love the largely exaggeration of the graphs / the lack of error boundings... I don't know how these climate people get away with it, but if we don't have errors...
-
.. I don't know how these climate people get away with it...
They get away with it because nobody else has their resources to carry out research. It is in their own interests to promote the concept of anthropogenic global warming and this is what they do. It is not in their interests to conduct proper research. The government is unable to question their activities because all its experts are committed to the IPCC cause; anyway, it is in the government's interests to promote the concept of anthropogenic global warming too.
-
Thanks for posting that article Gill. I think the tide is now beginning to turn in favour of common sense. Climate change has always been with us and we just have to hope that it stays within the parameters we humans can cope with.
-
I agree, Clive. Mankind's environment is constantly changing; witness coastal erosion which is certainly not attributable to global warming. It would be much wiser to use our resources to accommodate these changes rather than trying to combat them.
-
I agree, Clive. Mankind's environment is constantly changing; witness coastal erosion which is certainly not attributable to global warming. It would be much wiser to use our resources to accommodate these changes rather than trying to combat them.
I kind-of agree - its hard to break the brainwashing of global warming science. I've been subjected to it throughout my whole education. I still personally feel that we have accelerated the change. I also think it is for good of mankind that we change the way we live to be more environmentally aware.. we are running out of resources and the gasses we subjugate ourselves to are not good for us... but it needs to not have the IPCC's stamp on it.
-
These quasi-scientists claim they want to save the planet. How arrogant can they get? Earth has been around for more than 4 billion years and will last another 4 billion years. Anyone who thinks that mankind can somehow alter that is very stupid. On the cosmic timescale we have been around for no more than the blink of an eye. Other species will adapt to take over if we are unable to cope with the climate or atmosphere. The planet will always cope!
-
The planet will always cope!
Depends - if we had a Welsh king we'd all be f***ed... too many sheep etc.. etc...
Oh I'd be concerned about nuclear war. That would be a way to properly f*** it up.
-
Question. Possibly a stupid one, but why are planets always round? :dunno:
-
I still personally feel that we have accelerated the change.
Sam, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is so minute, less than 0.05%, that even if it was doubled could it possibly change anything at all :dunno:
Everything we have heard, seen or read has said that a rise in CO2 follows a period of warming, not the other way round. The IPCC has never denied that as far as I know.
-
Sam, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is so minute, less than 0.05%, that even if it was doubled could it possibly change anything at all :dunno:
I'm not sure... I know more about Venus (96.5% carbon dioxide). I think water vapour is as much an issue.
-
Water vapour is a greater problem as far as greenhouse gasses go but I dont think they can tax us on that. The warmer it gets then the higher the percentage of water that can exist in the atmosphere, up to a maximum of around 4% in the tropics.
-
Water vapour is a greater problem as far as greenhouse gasses go but I dont think they can tax us on that. The warmer it gets then the higher the percentage of water that can exist in the atmosphere, up to a maximum of around 4% in the tropics.
That's not quite true - eventually it leaves the atmosphere.
-
Not all of it, apart from the very arid areas of the planet. Anywhere that there is any humidity at all then there is water vapour.
-
you don't have to tell a physicist that.
I meant eventually as in a few millions years... before I was a radio astronomer I was a planetary atmosphere/solar wind interaction simulator. In the case of Mars for example its lack of magnetic field caused the atmosphere to be blown off much quicker.
-
Sam, you don't need to couch such a personal problem in scientific terms. Just admit that you used to eat baked beans with everything but nobody would let you into such a confined area as an observatory. Since you changed your diet, your career has flourished (although the Brits did banish you to Canada so that you could prove you are a reformed character).
;D
-
:rofl:
I think all of us astronomers get banished at some point to go prove ourselves.. then we are allowed back to work at British Universities.
Most of the observatories I visit are fairly large, though you never wanted to go to the Wast Hills one after you had a curry..... especially with me. I've cleared the place in 10 seconds before.
... little do they still know I eat baked beans, muhahaha.