NYTimes: Wojick vs. Schmidt | JunkScience.com
David Wojick offers facts. Gavin Schmidt starts with ad hominem attack.
Ethical considerations regarding Heartland/Gleick | Planet3.0
I see a far greater potential for good to come out of the information Gleick obtained than the information the CRU hacker obtained. History may well judge Gleick in a positive light, but that will only likely happen if the potential for good caused by his action is realized. That has yet to be determined.
I condemn both the CRU hack and Gleick’s actions. In my books both were wrong. It is as simple as that, though it is worth applauding Gleick for publicly admitting his mistake. But this means that I wont begrudge Heartland if they decide to file a suit against Gleick. After all I would be fully supportive of legal action against the CRU hacker.
But this consistency goes deeper. Fundamentally it means that since both ‘sides’ of the climate debate should be judged by the same rules (are you detecting a trend?). Heartland’s actions and those of other think tanks need to be judged the same way scientists like Peter Gleick have been judged. If his reputation takes a hit because he impersonated a Heartland board member then what are we to make of the years of outright dishonesty coming from Heartland? Shouldn’t their reputation be worse than worthless by now?
Yes it should.
The Titanic was warned of 200 icebergs shortly before it sank in 1912.
Inside Hansen’s Deluded Mind | Real Science
Satellite temperatures show the planet 0.8C cooler than the were at the start of 1998. Hansen shows half as much cooling, as his data set has steadily diverged.
His justification is that he fabricates missing Arctic data, whereas satellites actually measure it. What are you going to trust – satellites which cover almost the entire planet at very high resolution, or Hansen’s 2400km wide purple crayon?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment