Some know the inadequacies of the world temperature data. Few know the degree of manipulation and corruption of the data done to prove the 20th Century temperature increase was unnatural. It completely undermines the scientific claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
When scrambling to explain all the cold weather people only expose their ignorance of climate science. Fortunately, they also produce statements that even those who don't understand the science see as illogical.
Climate change research of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is woefully inadequate because of all the factors and mechanisms they ignore.
There are two sides to every story; the Chinese express it as Yin (black) and Yang (white). Many react with cultural bias by assuming white is good and black is bad. The idea of balance is possibly one of the greatest victims of political correctness. It has distorted climate science, because they only considered one side and refused to follow the scientific method.
An acquaintance said I must feel vindicated now that the extent of the corruption in climate science is exposed. The answer is no, because I knew all along there would be no pleasure in “I told you so”. The damage done to climate science, science, and environmentalism is serious.
Traditionally, the older scientists held to the prevailing wisdom and were challenged by the new, skeptical graduates looking for wider answers. In climatology, the opposite has happened. The so-called skeptics challenging the prevailing wisdom are the professors who have researched and taught the subject for 30 years or longer. Their knowledge is much wider than that of the new young scientists because climate science has stagnated for thirty years.
Political whitewash of the corrupted climate science of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) illustrates the completely political nature of the issue. Indeed, the Chairman of the British Parliament investigating Phil Jones and the CRU specifically said they would not look at the science. If they had, they would see the extensive and outrageous scientific errors, manipulations of data, and omissions of large areas.
It is amazing how people have very strong opinions about ideas and terms they don’t understand. The greenhouse effect is one of these and lack of understanding about it is exploited to dictate global energy and economic policies at great and unnecessary expense. The Earth's atmosphere is <em>not</em> like a greenhouse, contrary to IPCC claims.
My long-term career goal changed as progress was better than expected, but the central theme remained. Three events were pivotal.
“It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the slightest doubt that this is so should read the Climategate documents, which lay it bare. I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that word revulsion a definition of the word scientist. So what has the APS, as an organization done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it.”
~Harold Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, in his resignation letter to the American Physical Society (APS)