I love how the team does science.
If a surface station is not warming – chuck it from the data set.
If thermometers give you the wrong answer, tamper with the data.
If proxy measurements give you the wrong answer, switch to tampered thermometer data.
It tampered thermometer data gives you the wrong answer, selectively pull in satellite data.
If tide gauges give you wrong answer, selectively pull in satellite data – and don’t discuss the 90% error in the satellite data.
If surface wind speeds give you the wrong answer, use satellite wind speeds which are known to be higher than surface wind speeds.
The most important thing is to have your mind made up about the results – before you choose the best combination of data sources to use.
You forgot to add, if proxy data is cooling instead of warming, flip it upside down and call it warming.
Very important.
If all the tide gauges give you wrong answer, selectively use only those that do.
I charted the T Max for Davis Station in Antarctica from 1958 to 2011, sourced from Australia’s BOM. ZERO warming over that time. If there was ANYWHERE that would show catastrophic warming from CO2 it should be the South Polar region and with accurate temperature measurment at Australia’s premier scientific Antarctic base. Nothing! Nada! If anything, a very slight cooling based on peaks and troughs. And the BOM comes out heavily on the Alarmist side with Press Releases one after the other. Their own data disproves the debunked theory. What a bunch of muppets! Next they’ll conveniently lose or adjust this dataset.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/#tabs=Antarctic-and-island-data
BTW,
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/11/08/antarctic-temperature-trends/
But all ‘Climate Scientists’ know that computer generated interpolated and extrapolated data are always of better quality and value than mere measured quantities.
That’s is because these computer generated data are the product of highly sophisticated algorithms carefully crafted by the worlds best professionals, and not something of dubious unpredictability that nature has thrown together over a particularly cold and wet weekend.
.
You forgot: If another scientist asks to see your data and methods, say you can’t find them, maybe your assistant has them, and that it’s privileged information anyway. And who are you to ask anyway?
Hey, they may be scientific fools and criminals, but they have paychecks to protect and comfy taxpayer funded retirement plans to “earn”
Also:
– Count the money they receive from Big Oil, multiply by 5 and accuse the skeptics of receiving that amount.
– Lie and cheat to receive documents from skeptics, then forge additional documents accusing skeptics of lying and cheating.
Steve,
Off topic, but something that is directly applicable to uncovering and defeating the AGW fraud.
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/13/ruling-aids-challenge-to-gay-parenting-study/
A Florida court ruled that a professor’s emails are public property and must be shared with investigators who question the professor’s research methods and results.
This case is exactly analogous to Mann’s energetic and expensive protection from public review of his emails and work documents during his tenure at the University of Virginia.
“But the Regnerus study was swiftly condemned as “junk science” by gay-rights activists and allies.
“As part of the efforts to get the Regnerus study retracted, Mr. Becker has been seeking Mr. Wright’s “public records” to prove that the study was not properly peer-reviewed and possibly even pre-ordained to find poor outcomes for children raised by gays.
“The case involved the University of Central Florida (UCF) in Orlando because Social Science Research is housed at UCF. Mr. Wright is also a UCF sociology professor.
“UCF officials initially declined to comply with Mr. Becker’s “public records” request, saying these materials were not university business. However, Judge Grincewicz’s decision on Tuesday overruled the university by ordering the release of materials related to the Regnerus study.”
Absent an internal whistleblower, the only way that we will ever know the details of the production of the hockey-stick and other apparently fraudulent uses of government funds for research will be to examine the internal working documents of the team. The effort by the state of Virginia to obtain access to Mann’s emails at U.Va. is exactly parallel to the efforts by investigators in the case in Florida.
Precedent?
I often wonder whether many hundreds of weather stations in the former Soviet Union simply ceased collecting data after the collapse. Given how popular the Soviet Union was I think it highly unlikely people would continue diligently recording data for no remuneration !
I think it is highly likely that these data sets simply stopped in the chaos that ensued.
As they invariably represent some of the coldest places on Earth it is conceivable this alone could cause significant “warming” since 1989 !
In the Soviet Union, aid was distributed more heavily to colder places – so they lowballed the temperatures.