It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Climate scientists cleared of manipulating research

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Climate scientists cleared of manipulating research


www.thisislondon.co.uk

The scientists at the centre of the
“climategate” email scandal were today cleared of malpractice by an independent panel.

The panel, chaired by Lord Oxburgh, was convened to examine the conclusions of research published by the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

It began its review after hacked emails from research unit scientists were published on the web, leading climate sceptics to claim the statistical methods used were inadequate.

The panel said it might be helpful if researchers worked more closely with professional statisticians in the future to avoid
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
news.bbc.co.uk
www.timesonline.co.uk




posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
The independent panel was chaired by Lord Oxburgh, who happens to be..


president of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association and chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables.
from BBC link in the OP



No conflict of interest there.

The report says that the scientists should have used professional statisticians to help them with their data, and there was no intent to deceive.




www.thisislondon.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   
nothing to see here folks, one man has just cleared the name of every scientist who has studied the environment!

....that was easy!

seems like the strategy is to wait a few months (to make it seem like you may have done some reading) and then declare that its allllll goood.

Some people are so stupid



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPACEYstranger
nothing to see here folks, one man has just cleared the name of every scientist who has studied the environment!

....that was easy!

seems like the strategy is to wait a few months (to make it seem like you may have done some reading) and then declare that its allllll goood.

Some people are so stupid


It makes much more sense to condemn thousands of independent scientists based on a few leaked emails. Or better yet, to believe an Exxon shill who got 3,000 dentists to sign a petition and therefore claim that thousands of scientists believe that global climate change is a non-issue.



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Well I'm sold, If Lord Oxburgh say's these guys are OK, then they must be OK.
So Today I'm Going Green...



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by suicydking
 


and then theres all that other stuff



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Wow what a shocker.
When all the email's were brought to the attention of the world of what had been going on, I said to a work colleague that it will all go to an investigation and it will all be dismissed. Global warming / climate change is all big big business and once again money has made the decision here.
Another win for greed and the elite.



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by colec156
Wow what a shocker.
When all the email's were brought to the attention of the world of what had been going on, I said to a work colleague that it will all go to an investigation and it will all be dismissed. Global warming / climate change is all big big business and once again money has made the decision here.
Another win for greed and the elite.


Greed and the elite? Do you have any idea how much money has been pumped into debunking MMGCC for the sake of the fossil fuel industry?

Cap & trade worked well in the 70's and 80's to reduce emissions. Green energy won't go anywhere until it's profitable. If it becomes cheaper for industry to switch to more eco-friendly alternatives, then we'll see a drastic reduction in pollution and a higher level of sustainability.

Someone is always making money off of everything that happens, this is no different. Don't believe for a minute that the debunkers don't have an agenda or profits at stake.



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by JacKatMtn

The independent panel was chaired by Lord Oxburgh, who happens to be..


president of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association and chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables.
from BBC link in the OP

No conflict of interest there.


So you're insinuating that renewable energy companies that produce things like wind turbines, solar panels and who knows.. batteries? are colluding to further their "green agenda" to destroy our one true god - petroleum products? Yeah because our big oil overlords are such a benevolent and mutually beneficial presence in our lives. I knew it all along, they're saying we're destroying the planet so we'll switch to their product line!

I always suspected some people actually thought this but just didn't have the conspiracy balls to outright say it lol
If you believe that "big green" is out to get us, I have a story about a pair of twin towers, projected holographic planes and space based plasma weapons to tell you about.

[edit on 4/14/2010 by ZombieOctopus]



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
WOW... whew, what a relief.

I was really very concerned that the honest, up-standing 'scientists' from the IPCC were going to be thrown in jail after being obviously framed by those ruthless scoundrals at Wikileaks...

NOT!

Christ... does ANYONE, EVER get punished anymore for their crimes (except the poor that is)?

[edit on 14-4-2010 by mecheng]



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Just posting this to show how far this climate debate is likely to go.





The British lawyer who last week called for introducing international laws through the United Nations which would make it a crime against humanity to question the reality of man-made global warming has close ties with the Club of Rome – the ultra elitist organization which openly bragged of how it invented the climate change scare as a means of manipulating the global population to accept world government.

British lawyer-turned-campaigner Polly Higgins recently launched an initiative to have the UN put pressure on national governments to pass laws that would declare the mass destruction of ecosystems a crime against peace, punishable by the International Criminal Court.

Under the guise of going after big corporations and polluters for the war crime of emitting the gas that humans exhale and plants breathe, the proposal would actually target individuals and people who merely express skepticism towards man-made global warming.

“Supporters of a new ecocide law also believe it could be used to prosecute “climate deniers” who distort science and facts to discourage voters and politicians from taking action to tackle global warming and climate change,” reported the London Guardian.

Some respondents to the Guardian article agreed that merely questioning whether man-made climate change was real should be criminalized – literally calling for the establishment of a UN-run thought police that would prosecute anyone who expressed dissent against the AGW belief system.

“Would be nice if corporate-sponsored climate change denial was made an offence,” wrote one.

“Think about that lineage and possible development of a war-crimes-style trial: Come up with an issue that will fit the bill to terrify the public into accepting the strictures and governance that you demand out of fear of overpopulation (and a general control fetish), then follow that up with putting those who challenged you in the dock,” writes Planet Gore.


www.infowars.com...



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by On the Edge

“Would be nice if corporate-sponsored climate change denial was made an offence,” wrote one.


"Would be nice if corporate-sponsered climate change FRAUD was made an offence," wrote mecheng.



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by mecheng
 


"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" (Isaiah 5:20)

"The Lord hates dishonest scales, but he is pleased with honest weights."
(Proverbs 1:11)

That's all I can say!



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ZombieOctopus
 


No, I am merely pointing to the fact that the chair, has something to gain in this investigation, an independent panel, at least for me would be completely unbiased as to the result.

Make no mistake, I see both sides as corrupt in this whole debate.



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by On the Edge
reply to post by mecheng
 


"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" (Isaiah 5:20)

"The Lord hates dishonest scales, but he is pleased with honest weights."
(Proverbs 1:11)

That's all I can say!



You must be referring to the scientists at IPCC, huh?



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mecheng
 


No,it pretty much applies across the board! But especially to people in authority whose lives they can impact in such detrimental ways!



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Yeah whatever - science is just made up junk in order to trick you all - and the sun revolves around the earth which is flat....

Can you guys answer me a question - seriously - I have no idea how you can be so incredibly naive on this issue - the scientists on planet earth are not in a conspiracy together - they work completely independently - tens of thousands of them completely independently - and they ALL agree on this. All of them.

The only ones who do not - are either not scientists, are not in a related field, or have not practiced the science in their field for decades. The odd one scientist - was on the pay role of big tobacco to discredit smoking related illness, and then switched to global warming on behalf of Exxon - he was declared senile by his own staff....

I just don't get it - there are literally thousands, upon thousands of studies which all point to AGW, and not one which undermines it.

The only thing which points against global warming is a poorly referenced citation to glaciers melting (Which was TRUE but poorly referenced) and out of context emails which when read within context are meaningless......

It just boggles the mind how people can be so incredibly feckless.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by suicydking

Originally posted by colec156


Someone is always making money off of everything that happens, this is no different. Don't believe for a minute that the debunkers don't have an agenda or profits at stake.


Don't you worry. I am very aware of the other side of the coin.
At the end of the day it's all about money, greed and control.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   
for those interested in reading the entire report in pdf, it is available online here:

www.uea.ac.uk...

here's a snippet:


1. The Panel was set up by the University in consultation with the Royal Society
to assess the integrity of the research published by the Climatic Research Unit
in the light of various external assertions. The Unit is a very small academic
entity within the School of Environmental Sciences. It has three full time and
one part time academic staff members and about a dozen research associates,
PhD students and support staff. The essence of the criticism that the Panel was
asked to address was that climatic data had been dishonestly selected,
manipulated and/or presented to arrive at pre-determined conclusions that
were not compatible with a fair interpretation of the original data. The
members of the Panel are listed in Appendix A at the end of this report.
2. The Panel was not concerned with the question of whether the conclusions of
the published research were correct. Rather it was asked to come to a view on
the integrity of the Unit’s research and whether as far as could be determined
the conclusions represented an honest and scientifically justified interpretation
of the data. The Panel worked by examining representative publications by
members of the Unit and subsequently by making two visits to the University
and interviewing and questioning members of the Unit. Not all the panel were
present on both occasions but two members were present on both occasions to
maintain continuity. About fifteen person/days were spent at the University
discussing the Unit’s work.
3. The eleven representative publications that the Panel considered in detail are
listed in Appendix B. The papers cover a period of more than twenty years and
were selected on the advice of the Royal Society. All had been published in
international scientific journals and had been through a process of peer review.
CRU agreed that they were a fair sample of the work of the Unit. The Panel
was also free to ask for any other material that it wished and did so.
Individuals on the panel asked for and reviewed other CRU research materials.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   
It appears a good number of the people on this board have never taken an environmental science class in school.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join