Scientists Behaving Badly

Scientists Behaving Badly

“Virtually the entire warmist edifice is built around a small, tightly knit coterie of persons … willing to lie in order to push a political agenda.”

“When the models do not show what the warmists want them to show, they simply apply “some tuning.

The release last week of an additional 5,000 or so emails dubbed Climategate2 prompted Jim Lacey, professor of strategic studies at the Marine Corps War College, to write a devastating article for National Review Online entitled “Scientists Behaving Badly”.

Here’s how Lacey’s article begins:

Global-warming skeptics spend much of their time knocking down the fatuous warmist claim that the science is settled. According to the warmists, this singular piece of settled science is attested to by hundreds or thousands of highly credentialed scientists. In truth, virtually the entire warmist edifice is built around a small, tightly knit coterie of persons (one hesitates to refer to folks with so little respect for the scientific method as scientists) willing to falsify data and manipulate findings; or, to put it bluntly, to lie in order to push a political agenda not supported by empirical evidence.”

Here are a few excerpts:

“Unfortunately, from the very beginning, the core group at the heart of Climategate  (led by Phil Jones at East Anglia and Michael Mann at Penn State) had no interest in “scientific truth.”

“Following in their footsteps are all the other scientists who built their own research on top of the fraudulent data produced by the warmist core.”

At one point, Jones admits that the “basic problem is that all of the models are wrong.” Of course, there is a simple reason for this. When the models do not show what the warmists want them to show, they simply apply “some tuning.” One scientist was worried enough about this “tuning” to write that he “doubt[ed] the modeling world will be able to get away with this much longer.” In this case, “tuning” means changing the model until it tells you what you want it to. When it became impossible to torture the models any further without making their uselessness apparent to all, the warmists resorted to changing the data.

The most efficient method of corrupting the models was to use data only from time periods when there was warming and discard others, as Jones admits to doing.

Another complains that no matter how much he fiddles with the data, it is “very difficult to make the Medieval Warming Period go away.” Solving this problem in the modern era was much easier: The warmists merely changed the temperature readings for much of the 20th century and threw away the original data.

Read all of this great article:


15 thoughts on “Scientists Behaving Badly

  1. This is the way we do today: if observations do not fit the theory, observations will be changed, not theory…

    • Yes, true …. But magical thinking won’t stop people from freezing to death even if they are told it’s “Global Warming.” Heck, even “The Emperor” knew at heart that he wasn’t REALLY wearing any clothes…

      In other words, these so called scientists can change what they say, and how they say it … But it won’t change the Forces of Nature as people experience them.

  2. And the “agenda” that is behind the scam is obvious, once you stop thinking about pocketbook. The truth is, if you set people up in a world expecting heat and take away the energy sources needed for heating – don’t need them in a warming world, when you KNOW the world is entering a cooling phase, you are setting up millions, if not billions of people for death by freezing or starvation. Once you look past the pocketbook, it is so obvious,and these people should be procecuted from attempted murder, not just wrist slapped as if they were “only in it for the money.”

    • Tom, this comment from the joannenova site hits it square on: “Imagine the total civil breakdown that would ensue if the electric grid failed for an extended period in Sydney or London… It’s worth noting that if a major city lost all electric supply in 1950, it wouldn’t have been catastrophic… Then ask yourself — why do we tolerate those in our polity who are working to weaken our already over-extended energy generating and delivery systems?”

    • Correct…. And just perhaps, if enough of us spread the word, we can get the message out in time to save some of us “lesser” people from a very bad end.

  3. All the best lies that money can buy. When corrupt money buys lies and scientists sell their reputations for “research” grants, they will come to any conclusion that the big money wants. If they stop now, it will take a century before the reputation of science is regained.

  4. 7 billion people. the NWO needs a mass cull of human beings, We are using all THERE PRECIOUS RESOURCES. Why create a virus WWW3 or any other method when Mother Nature will do it for them for free. All they have to do is Lie Lie Lie until OOOOOp`s you guessed it to late. IF ONLY WE KNEW
    Not a conspiracy THEORY!!!
    Sleep tight. :O

    • Yes, they do believe that a “… mass cull of human beings …” is in order. But, are there REALLY 7 billion people? If they are willing to lie about everything else, then why not LIE about how many people there are? Psychologically speaking it is much easier for them to carry out the extermination of millions, if most are convinced that the world is “overpopulated.”

      I can’t begin to tell you how many seemingly intelligent people I have come across who are absolutely convinced that …”the world has 7 billion people…” and that is “far, far too many!” These same people all seem to believe that “the world would be better off with fewer people.” However, unanimously none of them wishes to be one of “the people” who must forfeit his or her life to accomplish this goal.

      Thus, it is quite in keeping with the Agenda of “Global Population reduction” to convince people that there are more of us, in fact, “far too many of us,” than there really are. It really boils down to percentages. A few million from seven billion is a far smaller percentage than a few million from one or two billion.

      The old adage is “there is safety in numbers.” If they lull us into believing we are “safe” by intentionally over estimating our numbers, then we are far more vulnerable than we realize. Over estimating ones strength is a key tactical error in battle. And make no mistake, this IS a battle.

      • Now wait a minute, Frank. Are you asserting that the population of the world is closer to one or two billion than seven billion? What evidence do you have to back this up?

    • Please, give it a rest already! This isn’t a Republican vs Democrat issue. Stop with the Republicans “telling lies” garbage. ALL Politicians tell lies. Period.

      Being a successful Politician means being willing to make a deal with anyone in order to obtain what you desire.

      Many of us believe there exists a cadre, comprised of people from all political parties, whose only allegiance is to their cadre. The express aims of this Cadre is a “Global Society” with themselves as the titular heads ruling over a limited, and highly regulated, worker population necessary for the maintenance of said society.

      So please, stop with the Republican vs Democrats “telling lies.” The issue is far greater than that.

  5. They also caught the world with the CFC BS!!
    If they can do something like this in such a magnitude, what else are they capable of doing??

    • …and DDT, and all the Pandemic Illnesses, and the CFL lighting scam, and the “Styrofoam destroys the ozone layer” nonsense that went along with the CFC Scam, and “the world is flat” so you might fall off stupidity, and the “only a Priest can talk to God” nonsense, and the “kill them because… they look different… sound different… worship different…” garbage. The list is exhausting! Yet people keep falling for dumb ideas over and over and over again….

      I guess Ron White is right… “Ya can’t fix stupid!”

Comments are closed.