Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 08-16-2010, 07:54 PM
look look is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Science Saturday: Action and Contemplation (Joshua Knobe & Eric Schwitzgebel)

Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
The piece harkin linked to here, in the Journal of the American Enterprise Institute, is pretty dishonest hackwork. For example, the following sentence from the first paragraph significantly misrepresents a crucial detail:

The CRU email theft didn't show "malfeasance" on the part of East Anglia scientists. There have been multiple inquiries into this issue, and only minor problems were found. Among those, some of the scientists were found to be "'unhelpful and defensive' when responding to legitimate requests made under freedom of information (FOI) laws." Here's the nut graf from the Guardian article I linked above regarding the CRU findings:
Following links from your article, I found this:
By 2008, the scientists had become used to dealing with, and usually rebuffing, requests for their data. But this demand for their emails heightened their alarm. Days after receiving the request, Jones sent one of the most damaging emails to emerge from the leak. He asked Mann: "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith [Briffa] re AR4? Keith will do likewise. Can you also email Gene [Eugene Wahl, a paleoclimatologist at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado] and get him to do the same ... We will be getting Caspar [Ammann also from NCAR] to do the same."

This seems to have been the email that persuaded the UK's Information Commissioner's Office – the body that administers the FOI act – its handling of FOI requests was not correct. The deputy information commissioner Graham Smith put out a statement last week which said: "The emails which are now public reveal that Mr Holland's requests under the Freedom of Information Act were not dealt with as they should have been under the legislation. Section 77 of the Freedom of Information Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the disclosure of requested information." He said the ICO could not take action over the apparent breach because it occurred more than six months ago.
Read the whole thing:


The commission of an act that is unequivocally illegal or completely wrongful

What's my point here? The American Enterprise Institute (with CEI, Exxon/Mobil, and others) has been engaged for years in a dishonest, corrupt campaign to discredit and distort the science associated with climate research. (And by corrupt, I mean direct offers of cash and other considerations for scientific papers that support specified conclusions.)

This article is of a piece with that ongoing effort (mentioning by name "activist scientist" James Hansen - who testified before Congress on the topic of warming in 1988), the IPCC, and various other people and organizations directly relevant to the topic of climate change, but almost nobody unrelated to that topic.

I'd say it's a polemic and a hit piece in the overall effort to discredit the science involved in climate research, published by an organization who has demonstrated considerable dishonesty on that topic.
I have two words for you: group selection. What perks do you think the scientists and those benefiting from the Green Revolution receive? Who gets hurt by the over-hype of the global warming story?
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.