It’s coincidence that Public Relations (PR) and Peer Review (PR) have the same initials, but apparently there’s a connection in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Climatic Research Unit (CRU) science.
Tagged: michael mann
At the recent Heartland Institute on Climate Conference in Washington, I was privileged to make a presentation as part of a panel. It was interesting, because behind the open discussion about global warming and...
The bulwark claim of the anthropogenic global warm (AGW) hypothesis and the objective of the stick are that current global annual average temperatures are the warmest ever. This meant the upturn of the blade in the 20th century was only relevant if it was higher and steeper than any previous record.
Why don't we know who released the emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)? Is it an attempt by the CRU and the University of East Anglia (UEA) to divert even more attention from their involvement in this scandal?
The political whitewash of Michael Mann, Phil Jones, the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), and the IPCC was stunning. They did not listen to anyone who knew what the accused had done, examined only a few papers carefully selected by the Royal Society, only spoke with the defendants, only considered a fraction of the evidence, and the judges were carefully selected for their prejudice. It bypassed every basic element of jurisprudence.
Vladimir Köppen (with Rudolf Geiger) and Charles Thornwaite each developed incredibly useful climate classification systems. These systems, which are rooted in measurements of precipitation effectiveness and vegetation, are still widely used today and contradict "official" IPCC climate science, which perverts science to support a political agenda.
Arctic ice pack is melting at approximately 54,000 square kilometers a day as the world warms. Why haven’t we seen this headline? Possibly because when journalists check, it’s the average rate of summer melt as the ice decreases from winter maximum of 14 million square km2 in April toward a minimum of 4.5 million km2 in September. Few people know this much ice melts every summer, but they don’t know a similar amount of ice forms every winter.
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.
A small group of scientists – mostly associated with the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia – have consciously withheld data and methods to place global progress, development, economies and peoples lives in jeopardy. Lord Monckton calls it a global fraud. It is that, but much more – and raises the question of accountability.
The degree to which those in official climate science are incapable is illustrated by the reaction. The answer is in the reaction the whitewash has triggered; an orchestrated attack on the skeptics, those who dare to perform science by proving the hypothesis wrong, to ask questions or demand debate. Why? The obvious answer is because the public was increasingly skeptical as evidence accumulated that the hypothesis was wrong.