East Anglia CRU threw out their raw data

Ed, you’ll never prove that.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/net_result_sure_beats_nut_revolt_qafIP4m2M9TAty2eLxyz5M

All the kids had been coerced into singing this catchy ditty, which we called “The Warming Song,” at a concert for parents.

The excuse that such a precious resource was dumped because the new digs didn’t have enough closets shows arrogance – they take us to be such fools that they don’t even trouble to come up with a plausable excuse.

The lack of predictive performance by the models over the past decade reduced the global warming (or climate change, if you must) concept from scientific theory to mere hypothesis. Now, it is scandal.

I have worked in environmental protection for a lot of years and I was always worried about the “advocates” with their love of apocalypse and disdain for science. I feared they would take down sound environmental science and leave us all branded as whackos.

Now, it’s happening and there’s nothing I can do about it.

Damn them.

primarily because they did not have a way to store it in the 1980s. Let’s try to be just a little bit objective. Embarrassing.

dakine on November 30, 2009 at 5:33 PM

It isn’t the data from just the 80′s that is missing…from just a few years ago has been deleted.
I know you must be an apologist…but this is like saying Nixon knew nothing about Watergate, after awhile his apologists sounded like fools also. Welcome to the club…

C’mon Ed…pretty shoddy “reporting” even for HA.

Regardless of one’s take on AGW, the raw data was in fact retained, by the NOAA. The CRU deleted less than 5% of their raw data 30 years ago, primarily because they did not have a way to store it in the 1980s. Let’s try to be just a little bit objective. Embarrassing.

dakine on November 30, 2009 at 5:33 PM

Better read again…important data has been deleted…deleted.
However, it is found on other servers and other areas. What will be difficult is piecing all of this together as they scramble to try to cover up their scandal.
This is truly of epic proportions…this was the clearing house for all data. This is so close to the inquisition type stuff of hundreds of years ago…look at the history of these scientists, this is the guy who promoted the ice age…when the stats didn’t support that, he switched to global warming…now his stats won’t support that so it is “climate change”.
This is what Richard Lindzen has been warning about…remember Obama’s climate czar has only a degree in English, there is no climatologist even advising Obama.
No dissenting voice on this can be heard…Richard Lindzen is the leading climatologist in the world, their is none with his credentials, and they do everything to block out his papers…which, btw, are un-disputed by other experts in the field, but they attack him personally, which is difficult seeing he has an unblemished record at MIT.

Regardless of one’s take on AGW, the raw data was in fact retained, by the NOAA. The CRU deleted less than 5% of their raw data 30 years ago, primarily because they did not have a way to store it in the 1980s. Let’s try to be just a little bit objective. Embarrassing.

I meant to get this out on Sunday but the holiday has me a day behind and a dollar short. Coverage of climategate continues to explode across the internet and……

All night email reviews and deletes…..

Nothing like having your reputation ruined in drips…..

In a statement welcomed by climate change sceptics, the university said it would make all the data accessible as soon as possible, once its Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had negotiated its release from a range of non-publication agreements.

The story highlighted one individual, a mechanical engineer named David Holland, who had apparently filed FOI requests over time, and who recently discovered his name and requests mentioned in some of the recently “released” internal e-mails.

So, as you can imagine, this latest data dump Times story provoked a very free-wheeling comment thread indeed!

Sort of a, “We agree to release all the data. And, by the way, there isn’t any!” scenario.

There was one delightfully sardonic comment that really stood out on that Times thread, to wit:

Craig Brannon wrote:

I’m glad they deleted this information and that there is a probe into how the emails were stolen. All scientific data should be secret and mysterious. They will tell us what we need to hear when they are ready.

November 30, 2009 6:05 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk

Priceless!

Ed, I beg of you . . . if this guy should happen to show up during an open registration period at HotAir, please let him in!

I guess I should know or something but what’s the odd things on their heads in that picture?

jeanie on November 29, 2009 at 11:04 PM

C’mon, you have never seen the movie?

Those are bras…