Case closed: “Climategate” was manufactured

[nomo]

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badas ... ufactured/

Case closed: “Climategate” was manufactured

It’s not often you can actually say "case closed", but in this case it’s literally true: climatologist Michael Mann has been cleared of all wrongdoing by the Inspector General of the National Science Foundation.

Did I say "has been cleared"? I meant has been cleared once again, since there have been several investigations into his research and Dr. Mann has been cleared of all charges every single time (like here and here). All of this stemmed from the "ClimateGate" nonsense of the past couple of years, where leaked emails were taken hugely out of context by the press and climate change deniers, and used to smear scientists. Dr. Mann was at the center of the whole manufactured controversy, being the biggest target of the people who want to deny the Earth is warming up.

This latest, and hopefully last, investigation into Dr. Mann’s research (PDF) again shows he is not guilty of misconduct. A couple of the report conclusions are worth pointing out:

We found no basis to conclude that the [Climategate] emails were evidence of research misconduct or that they pointed to such evidence.

That’s clear enough, I think. They also said:

There is no specific evidence that [Mann] falsified or fabricated any data and no evidence that his actions amounted to research misconduct.

A big claim by the deniers is that researchers were using "tricks" to falsify conclusions about global warming, but the NSF report is pretty clear that’s not true. The most damning thing the investigators could muster was that there was "some concern" over the statistical methods used, but that’s not scandalous at all; there’s always some argument in science over methodology. The vague language of the report there indicates to me this isn’t a big deal, or else they would’ve been specific. The big point is that the data were not faked.



What does this mean for global warming? A lot of these attacks can be traced back to the famous "hockey stick" diagram, showing how Earth’s temperatures have been increasing rapidly in recent times. This graph is what really clinches the idea of man-made global warming, and so has been the epicenter of the manufactroversy. The fact that Dr. Mann has been cleared again, and that his data are good, shows that this graph is even more solid — or at least is not as weak as so many would lead you to believe.

And what does this mean about "ClimateGate"? That’s clear enough: all the outrage, all the claims of fraud and fakery, were just — haha — hot air.

Not that this will stop or even slow down the denial machine. Politicians from the Virginia State Attorney General to members of the House of Representatives have been on what I would characterize as witch hunts. Dr. Mann has been vocal in his opposition, and I applaud him. Still, needless to say, the attacks will continue.

Here are the facts: the Earth is warming up. The rate of warming has increased in the past century or so. This corresponds to the time of the Industrial Revolution, when we started dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases warm the planet (hence the name) — if they didn’t we’d have an average temperature below the freezing point of water. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is dumped into the atmosphere by humans to the tune of 30 billion tons per year, 100 times the amount from volcanoes. And finally, approximately 97% of climatologists who actually study climate agree that global warming is real, and caused by humans.

Those are simply the facts. It’s not hard to connect them, as long as you stick to reality and don’t let ideology sway you.

Tip o’ the thermometer to DeSmogBlog.



Related posts:

- The global warming emails non-event
- Global warming emails followup
- Exclusive: Michael Mann responds to Rep. Barton
- New study clinches it: the Earth is warming up

[Marie Laveau]

*yawn*

I'm sorry, but to me "climategate," with Al Gore being involved, has always been TPTB distracting one segment of society for just a little longer.

We're goddamned destroying the earth, and it don't matter if it's human-induced climate change or cars or Wal-Mart or cheap Chinese crap- oh, sorry, the last two are the same thing.

The right fighting the left over whether the planet is being destroyed. Absolutely typical.

"I KNOW YOU ARE! BUT WHAT AM I?!"

[Canadian_watcher]

^ yeah, the thing that gets me is this arguing over the whole 'is the earth heating up and if so, why' thing... since it's freaking obvious that our rivers are being poisoned and our forests are being clear-cut. No one talks about that part of it in terms of the environmental debate. It's all warming warming warming! Convenient, really, since the science will never prove its origin sufficiently to convince anyone who doesn't already want to believe it.

I say (and who cares what I say) that we should keep our focus on the toxic sludge dumpers and the by-product hiders and the clear cutters and frackers. There can be no debate about the 'causes' of those things, and no debate about their implications, either.

[Nordic]

*yawn*

I'm sorry, but to me "climategate," with Al Gore being involved, has always been TPTB distracting one segment of society for just a little longer.

We're goddamned destroying the earth, and it don't matter if it's human-induced climate change or cars or Wal-Mart or cheap Chinese crap- oh, sorry, the last two are the same thing.

The right fighting the left over whether the planet is being destroyed. Absolutely typical.

"I KNOW YOU ARE! BUT WHAT AM I?!"

well if it didn't start that way, that's certainly what its turned into.

been hanging around a lot of right wingers lately, and that's their reason now for debunking all things environmental. they don't "believe in" global warming, and trees love co2, and we have more trees on planet earth now than we ever did.

therefore, global warming is a lefty hoax.

(according to them) this provides bait for the "lefties" and they get sucked into another unwinnable argument.

and on it goes again and again.

[StarmanSkye]

How is it the rightwing nutjobs ALWAYS sem to win their propaganda battles, even when they're so full of it and proved wrong they 'win' because their scheming well-funded ruthless PR savvy reinforces their message?

It would almost make sense to coopt their duplicity, as say, claim the rightwing hotair is SO over-the-top that it has displaced CO^2, and is now REVERSING global warming, with the result that their hijinx are ushering in a new-and-improved Iceage. We will need 10,000 additional barrels of oil each year per man, woman and child to survive the next decade without freezing into solid blocks of ice...

[Wombaticus Rex]

How is it the rightwing nutjobs ALWAYS sem to win their propaganda battles, even when they're so full of it and proved wrong they 'win' because their scheming well-funded ruthless PR savvy reinforces their message?

Because they're willing to do whatever it takes. They target and test their messages for maximum effectiveness and they will lie was much as they have to.

I don't like saying this, but I also suspect it's because they see human nature more clearly than their more idealist opposition can.

[StarmanSkye]

"I don't like saying this, but I also suspect it's because they see human nature more clearly than their more idealist opposition can."

I know whatcha mean. Sometimes in my more bleak, despairing moments I consider 'why NOT?' adopt the rightwingnutz' own extremist, winner-take-all NO RULEZ! strategy, beat-them-at-their-own-game so to speak. But then i realize, NO WAY could I compromise my ideals to such an extent, the End Justifies Means ideology just is too corrupting -- that's what the whole slippery-slope about cheating, lying, killing, subverting to 'win!' leads to utter moral decay and hypocrisy of the spirit and falsehood of self. I just can't go there -- tho to be honest I no longer lean towards pacifism. Tho that's about being honest re: self-defense as a duty.

[eyeno]

I don't like saying this, but I also suspect it's because they see human nature more clearly than their more idealist opposition can.

Predatory eye. Its always lookin, at U...

[Marie Laveau]

How is it the rightwing nutjobs ALWAYS sem to win their propaganda battles, even when they're so full of it and proved wrong they 'win' because their scheming well-funded ruthless PR savvy reinforces their message?

Because they're willing to do whatever it takes. They target and test their messages for maximum effectiveness and they will lie was much as they have to.

I don't like saying this, but I also suspect it's because they see human nature more clearly than their more idealist opposition can.

This is the correct answer. They are ruthless, and most leftists are completely oblivious to how things work. And I"m not putting most of the D.C. Democrats in that group. Almost all of them long ago sold out to the other side, and are just playing their parts.


That's why nothing ever "changes."


Al Gore? Absolutely perfect example: we can fix climate change if everyone just BUYS GREEN. Yep, just keep the same old system going, 'cause it's worked so effing well. Retool the whole shebang and it'll be like the 1950s all over again.

Of course, he was the perfect tool for the right: NO! NO! We want to keep everything on track to fracking self-destruct OUR way!

And all the people that still think their votes count line up on their respective sides, and the people that are destroying the planet laughed their asses off.

Oh, well.

[Joe Hillshoist]

I blame that fuckhead Melbourne columnist for all this climategate bullshit.

edit - forgot this bit.

Because they're willing to do whatever it takes. They target and test their messages for maximum effectiveness and they will lie was much as they have to.

I don't like saying this, but I also suspect it's because they see human nature more clearly than their more idealist opposition can.

Right on JB. That second bit especially. They have a much better understanding of collective human nature than most "leftys". I blame that fu...

[JackRiddler]

.

What these conservative trudgers know so well is not "human nature," but what their ilk has made of it, the actual human condition. Human nature, or at least what we believe to understand of what is fundamental and immutable in humans, shows a lot of variation. A given person tends rarely to change, but we do differ from one another in the first place, a great deal. Once we are many, however, we inevitably line up within bell curves. The mass tends to demand conformity, and the mass can be predicted and played. It's easy for the more witting actors among us to "win" most of the time by betting on the idea that humans as masses are limited, childish, bitter, jealous, easily-fooled dumbfucks, and in the process to act accordingly and help make it so. (What does one win? Goods, power, the fathering of descendants, the idea that one has exerted the most influence upon posterity, having one's ideas of how things should be realized in the world and acknowledged as good and right.)

I also wouldn't say idealists necessarily know less about the human tendency to conform and be stupid. They're just not satisfied with it. More of them are willing to ignore it, to play-act, in spite of evidence, as though everyone can change, to try to model such change in their own lives, to say: past results do not determine future outcomes. Also, to sacrifice themselves. The righteous don't need to live forever, or to control everything, or to "win" all cases. In the longest view, idealists who believe in the human capacity for growth and transformation and doing the right thing had at least as much success as conservatives in influencing what happened in history. The human world has changed, a lot, including for the better, and it never stops changing. Often radically, in ways that defy one generation's view of what will be possible in 10 or 50 years.

Or perhaps it's just one big cycle. Which means that sooner or later we will all be proven right, and wrong, and right and wrong again.

.

[Nordic]

I don't see them as winning their propaganda battles, it's just that the brainwashing on their side is very strong, and very pervasive.

These particular people I didn't bother arguing with, because it was just pointless. One was a family situation, the other a work situation. And it's not like I'm gonna change their minds, they are SET in their convictions, however wrong they are.

The trouble with right-wingers for the most part is that they are 100% convinced that their brainwashing is the right brainwashing. They won't even consider another possibility. It just derails their entire brains. I did bring up to the guy yesterday who was talking about how we have more trees than ever before that even if we did, it could be a moot point, because quite possibly 100 man-planted little trees put out a great deal less oxygen than, say, 100 mature rainforest trees. His face just went blank, just "does not compute, does not compute". He stammered and changed the subject. To (get this) how Israel is so GREAT because they plant so many trees. Yes, this guy was telling me that Israel was greening up Israel, while all around them were those savage muslims living in their arid deserts. That was a new one for me.

It was weird. These were all Orange County people, a job that sorta fell into my lap out of right field, and sure enough, they fit the Orange County stereotype, just right wingers everywhere.

[JackRiddler]

...Israel is so GREAT because they plant so many trees. Yes, this guy was telling me that Israel was greening up Israel, while all around them were those savage muslims living in their arid deserts. That was a new one for me.

Really? It's sort of been a standard of the Israeli propaganda. I've been hearing it for decades. Also, the appeal to pay to plant some trees out of your own pocket. Never mind whose land it actually is (and what they might have done with it, if it had not been torn from them), or where the water comes from (and whether the planting is sustainable the way it's being done), or who actually has the material resources and access to the tech and freedom from being bombed (most of the time) to do all this, and why that is, or who gets the annual subsidy and guarantees from the Empire and the Diaspora. Oh, and never mind all the damned trees of the Palestinians, often olive groves grown over centuries, cut down on any pretext by the Israeli security forces, sometimes because a child threw a rock from behind one, or an IDF officer judged that that might one day be the case. Never mind!

Sorry, off-topic now.

.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Human nature does show a lot of variation -- on the individual level. On the aggregate, though, we absolutely do not. This is the real lesson of the Terry Dolans and Lee Atwaters of the world, to me. They understood (maybe...Dolan did at least) that they were engaging with a fundamentally different organism when they broadcast mass messages for the purpose of mass fundraising. This is something we see in physics, too: different levels of scale operate on different design rules and geometries.

"Make them angry and stir up the hostilities. The shriller you are, the easier it is to raise funds. That's the nature of the Beast." -- Terry Dolan

[gnosticheresy_2]

"I don't like saying this, but I also suspect it's because they see human nature more clearly than their more idealist opposition can."

I know whatcha mean. Sometimes in my more bleak, despairing moments I consider 'why NOT?' adopt the rightwingnutz' own extremist, winner-take-all NO RULEZ! strategy, beat-them-at-their-own-game so to speak. But then i realize, NO WAY could I compromise my ideals to such an extent, the End Justifies Means ideology just is too corrupting -- that's what the whole slippery-slope about cheating, lying, killing, subverting to 'win!' leads to utter moral decay and hypocrisy of the spirit and falsehood of self. I just can't go there -- tho to be honest I no longer lean towards pacifism. Tho that's about being honest re: self-defense as a duty.

Don't understand the problem. You don't need to compromise your ideals, I mean think about it, why are you even considering that you should? Ok yes I understand not killing. But you don't need to lie. Or cheat. But you do need to be aggressive. And you also need to know that you can't "persuade" or "reason" most of the time. In my experience right winger types tend to run a fucking mile when you get right in their face about things, mainly because they're fucking cowards unless they're in a group, or have a gun in their hands and they're so brainwashed to think that "lefty" types are all weak and feeble that they get a bit of a shock when you start shouting. But I'm leaving out the most important part. YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE PISS Be aggressive, but be funny. They have no sense of humour (name a funny right wing comedian...) and "they"* hate it.

*yes "they".