AGW meltdown: UK Met Office needs three years to review East Anglia data
posted at 10:04 am on December 5, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Consider the Brits on the sideline until 2012 on global warming. The Met Office will need three years to rebuild ground-based climate models while recompiling raw data from the past 160 years to replace the data that the University of East Anglia’s CRU destroyed years ago. They want to create an open and transparent full data set, but until then have to back down from any of the conclusions that relied on UEA-CRU’s models (via QandO):
The Met Office plans to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by leaked e-mails.
The new analysis of the data will take three years, meaning that the Met Office will not be able to state with absolute confidence the extent of the warming trend until the end of 2012.
The Met Office database is one of three main sources of temperature data analysis on which the UN’s main climate change science body relies for its assessment that global warming is a serious danger to the world. This assessment is the basis for next week’s climate change talks in Copenhagen aimed at cutting CO2 emissions.
The British government is attempting to silence the Met Office, however:
The Government is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination, arguing that it would be seized upon by climate change sceptics.
But I thought they were interested in science, not political hackery!
The Met Office is taking the correct approach. The data on which they largely relied has not only been shown to have been corrupted by bias and corruption, it’s also been destroyed. Knowing the UEA-CRU’s credibility as a scientific effort has been compromised, real scientists would insist on recreating the data set in a thoroughly testable and transparent process before proceeding to use any of the conclusions reached from the previous work to form any more recommendations for action.
In fact, the UN, the UK, and the rest of the world should be insisting on the same approach — if they were interested in science in the first place. The UK’s efforts to quash the Met Office’s review, which is what scientists would demand in any other context, shows that the politicians aren’t terribly interested in whether AGW is scientifically supportable, or even true at all. They want the power that AGW hysteria gives them to seize control of private-industry production and the choices available to people now.
It’s the ultimate elitist entrée to statism, and they’re not going to let Climategate get in the way of it — even if the scientists themselves start balking at the political hackery surrounding AGW.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
So I guess that means the media is covering it over there./
Must be because it is a hometown story.
Cindy Munford on December 5, 2009 at 10:07 AM
The Government is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination, arguing that it would be seized upon by climate change sceptics.
….
Lolz
We can’t do real science b/c um, then people would use it to question the fake science.
artist on December 5, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Anyone know what the other two “main sources of temperature data analysis” are?
Robert_Paulson on December 5, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Man, those denying denialist deniers are cropping up everywhere.
Drained Brain on December 5, 2009 at 10:10 AM
I am willing to put more faith in the phrase “hide the decline” as to what has happened with temperatures that I am in waiting three years to hear the results of whatever data is compiled by a group of people whose continued livlihood depends on anthropomorphic global warming being a reality.
Kataklysmic on December 5, 2009 at 10:10 AM
The fix is in.
SoulGlo on December 5, 2009 at 10:11 AM
Prediction: These and other “scientists” will take a “second look” at the data — and come to the exact same conclusions, or even scarier ones, that the previous, corrupt “scientists” did. They’ll even thank the skeptics for forcing this second, “scientific” look, because without it “we wouldn’t have known that the situation is far worse than we had predicted before.” And AGW will be written in stone.
Rational Thought on December 5, 2009 at 10:13 AM
It takes a long time to build a house of cards.
blatantblue on December 5, 2009 at 10:14 AM
Al Gore lied/Science died
theTarCzar on December 5, 2009 at 10:15 AM
I agree with Ed: trivial matters — facts first among them — will not stop governments around the world (including ours) from using AGW to advance their totalitarian agenda. Nor, of course, will they stop Al Bore from racking up even more hundreds of millions of dollars from the ultimate Ponzi Scheme of all time.
If we had a President with guts and even the slightest tint of red-blooded patriotism in his blood, the US would bail out of this farce pronto. Instead, we have Osama Obama who is no doubt gleefully anticipating the destruction to be visited on the nation by the thugs of “climate change.”
By rights, all of these people, from the lowliest scientist who ignores real data and falsifies results to come to the PC conclusion to the Traitor-in-Chief and the Euro-weenies who will cash in on this in one way or another — money or power, usually both — should be not only publicly discredited but imprisoned as the scammers they are.
MrScribbler on December 5, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Global warming meltdown!
Now, that’s ironic.
donh525 on December 5, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Got yer data right here. Snowed last night in south Louisiana and all the puddles from the rain before are frozen over 1/8″ inch thick.
You ever see Cajuns trying to drive in the snow? Worse than watching a housecat trying to swim.
cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 10:17 AM
I thought the data had been “mistakenly” destroyed.
What gives?
New warning sign: Slow down – climate thugs at work
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Yep, AGW is too big to fail and the libs won’t let it.
redridinghood on December 5, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Oh, no, in 3 years will all be under glub,glub, glu……
ambuldog on December 5, 2009 at 10:18 AM
It snowed last year on Dec. 11 – the first snow in December in 40 years. Now it snows on Dec. 4 this year. They should dump Al Gore here in his skivvies.
cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Calls to Al Gore at CTU (Climate Thug Unit) were not returned.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:21 AM
This so helps the hacks be seen for what they are.
exdeadhead on December 5, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Indeed it’s true. The Telegraph is raining all over this parade since the fire started. It’s amazing considering it’s perceived as an isolated incident (or non-existent) in the U.S.
The Calibur on December 5, 2009 at 10:21 AM
I believe they are NASA and NOAA. One of those two placed 5 devices around the globe to measure CO2 levels to see if it was increasing. Two of the five are very close and downwind from a currently active volcano (one on a mountain in Hawaii). One of they other three had a fossil fuel powered turbine generator installed just 100 yards upwind from it (South Pole).
Their “temperature collection” stations are now located in areas that have moved from rural/suburban to more urban… that is more pavement and building. No heat gains there…
All stricly scientific and unbiased data collection methods. The dramatic CO2 increases resulted in the EPA categorizing CO2 the way they did.
The ENTIRE bunch are simply LIARS working very hard to make a lie the new truth.
CC
CapedConservative on December 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM
You really have to hand it to some of the common sense Brits that still know BS when they see it. I would wonder how Al Gore is received by these folks. Denying denialist deniers indeed.
Rovin on December 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM
“The government” is blocking efforts because “certain people” in “the government” don’t want egg on their faces.
GarandFan on December 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM
Just think: By 2012 one of the networks might mention the scandal of the century.
JammieWearingFool on December 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM
It will take three years to develop a computer model that no one understands, but comes up with the “right” conclusion.
Actually, a three year “time-out” is a good idea, just not do anything for three years except accurately replace the wrong data.
Then with the new data, the new accurate data, we can make a decision on what is happening and why…or conclude that nothing can be determined because the data is too erratic…
right2bright on December 5, 2009 at 10:24 AM
I don’t look for this statement to be seen anywhere but here, but I would love to see this below the headline on some major newspapers.
Chance? Slim to none.
donh525 on December 5, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Quit bothering the AGW scientists!
Leave them alone so they can concentrate on what is REALLY important – ASV* and ACD*.
I, for one, have grandchildren to worry about!
*ASV – anthropogenic sunspot variance
*ACD – anthropogenic continental drift
fred5678 on December 5, 2009 at 10:24 AM
I believe one is GISS – NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
I think the other is the University of Alabama Hunstville global center.
SteveMG on December 5, 2009 at 10:25 AM
These cultists have little interest in producing good science…it was never about good science. In the end it was all about global power, not global warming.
Proving that global climate was changing in a negative fashion AND was caused exclusively or almost exclusively by humans was a tough case to prove in the first place…especially with the onerous solutions deemed necessary to “fix” the problem.
Now with the highest level of AGW ‘scientists’ having been outed as mere propagandists and BS artists, the global warming crowd has an impossible task ahead of them.
It’s over…the politics are settled even if the science isn’t.
Asher on December 5, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Asked about Climategate, a World Government spokesman replied: “Yes, we know it’s all a scam and that the cat’s out of the bag … but so what? We’ll just use force now to get what we want instead of trickery”.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:29 AM
CO2 is essential to life as we know it.
Want less CO2? Plant trees instead of windmills.
donh525 on December 5, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Not if they’re owned by the government JW. By then they’ll call it a man-caused disaster. Oh wait, it that one taken?
Rovin on December 5, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Here is one source…
right2bright on December 5, 2009 at 10:32 AM
artist on December 5, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Goes to show that big government can’t do anything right. The more spent, the more wasted on corruption. Research should learn to fund itself without absconding with tax-dollars; find their own investors who actually believe in the research project. Government endorsement has proven to be the well intended paved road to hell.
This IS the information age.
If any reformation were called for in the application of government, it would begin by rescinding the privileges and responsibilities of citizenship from those unwarranted who are NOT citizens; to present the proposition of bills before a Constitutional judicial board (Supreme Court clerks to oversee, subject to the literal application of the Constitution) to prevent wasted legislative efforts (tax dollars) on unconstitutional measures; to produce online the legislative bills as they are being written, exposed for all citizens and think tanks to read and analyze; and to conduct local ballots from the constituent citizenry to which their elected officials are obligated to honor in Congress prior to any vote on bills.
It’s my wish to Father Christmas.
maverick muse on December 5, 2009 at 10:34 AM
The increase isn’t really that dramatic, and there’s some question if there’s really been that much of an increase. Seems the climate thugs took an average of the lowest historical CO2 readings they could find … ignoring the higher ones … to come up with their past CO2 levels.
In addition, many of the CO2 recording stations are near natural CO2 producers … like ummm, volcanoes.
Climate thugs … the new SS.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Is Gore speaking in Houston this weekend?
It’s snowing there…as it so rarely does.
BuckeyeSam on December 5, 2009 at 10:35 AM
I bet that is funny to watch, from a safe location.
conservnut on December 5, 2009 at 10:36 AM
They don’t need THREE years.
But, three years of money to ‘do the research’ should keep them comfy for a while.
bridgetown on December 5, 2009 at 10:36 AM
With any luck, the Mayans will be right and the world will end in 2012. Then we won’t have to listen to another round of the warmist’s bul1shit.
RadClown on December 5, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Is it about time for an investigation of these two institutions methodology for their “scientific” findings.
Will it happen with this congress? Not very good odds.
donh525 on December 5, 2009 at 10:37 AM
MSM- Shhhhhhhhhhh. Day 14 and Counting.
http://mrc.org/press/releases/2009/20091204124643.aspx
redridinghood on December 5, 2009 at 10:38 AM
you’re being unfair
think of the SS as community organizers
blatantblue on December 5, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Don’t worry, the UK Met Office will be persuaded to finish their review much earlier … with the same results:
We’re all going to die!
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Yes, the Penn State Michael Mann Memorial Ouija Board and the Cock & Bull Pub Dart Board.
johnsteele on December 5, 2009 at 10:39 AM
The horror. The science is settled!
the_nile on December 5, 2009 at 10:39 AM
And money feathering their pockets. We should always follow the money.
yoda on December 5, 2009 at 10:39 AM
This Al-Gore quote is the first thing that came to mind when I read this:
Princeton Physicist Calls Global Warming Science “Mistaken”Scientist fired by Al Gore was told, “science will not intrude on public policy”.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=13773
The eco-fundamentalist stoped using and caring about science decades ago when they saw the money and power they could acquire with their “chicken little” environmental scam.
Even a 5th grader knows you have to show your research.
Baxter Greene on December 5, 2009 at 10:41 AM
I was reading the comments from the TOL, Someone came up with the phrase “Hopenhagen“. I like it!
rob verdi on December 5, 2009 at 10:41 AM
A path to communism, with the least resistance.
Johan Klaus on December 5, 2009 at 10:41 AM
right2bright on December 5, 2009 at 10:32 AM
dude – Content Warning! But very funny!
Fishoutofwater on December 5, 2009 at 10:41 AM
When Herr Gore, head of CTU (Climate Thug Unit) cancelled his speech there someone renamed it “Nopenhagen”.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:43 AM
++
the_nile on December 5, 2009 at 10:44 AM
It’s not over: The incentive to sustain the fallacious theory of “catastrophic man-made global warming” is tremendous. A lot of people make a lot of money directly off of this nonsense.
The problem is, no one gets directly paid if catastrophic AGW is wholly debunked.
July 10 on December 5, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Its the MONEY stupid!. It is ALWAYS about the money, nothing else. GE money, Gore Money, Soros money, etc, etc. It is very easy to discover the culprits…follow the MONEY trail…period.
royzer on December 5, 2009 at 10:45 AM
There’s also the question of causality. Does increased CO2 create higher temperatures or do higher temperatures (caused by something else) increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere?
This question is never considered.
The Calibur on December 5, 2009 at 10:46 AM
Indeed. None of any of this is about science. However, it is all about politics…….so just make up whatever……..”we’ve got to get those mean Americans to pay the rest of us for destroying the planet….”
Starlink on December 5, 2009 at 10:47 AM
It’s good news for us if there is a delay until 2012. This was always a race against time.
It’s easy to say in 50 years the sea levels will rise and polar bears will drown with some altered data and a megaphone.
It’s less easy 20 years later when no observable changes have yet to happen.
Come 2016, 20 years or so into ‘global warming’ who is going to believe any of this if the polar bears haven’t started drowning yet?
jhffmn on December 5, 2009 at 10:47 AM
There are four major publishers of global temperature anomaly series: NASA GISS, Hadley CRU, RSS and UAH. RSS mostly uses satellite, while UAH uses satellite exclusively. I don’t know why the Met Office said three. To my knowledge, the Met Office’s primary responsibility is to analyze weather in the UK… but their record of prognostication in recent years has grown steadily worse as they’ve become ever more shrill climate alarmists.
theCork on December 5, 2009 at 10:47 AM
“Hopenhagen“ Wetter Kaiser.
Johan Klaus on December 5, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Historical records show that CO2 increases always follow temperature increases. But hey, that’s an inconvenient truth so best just to ignore or a climate thug will come knockin’ at your door.
This comment will self destruct in 3 … 2 … 1 …
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:50 AM
And the power and control.
Johan Klaus on December 5, 2009 at 10:51 AM
I’m pretty sure the goal of the Copenhagen Climate Change treaty is the eventual elimination of about half the world’s population through starvation.
That is the only possible outcome of reducing energy to the levels they want.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 10:53 AM
I like to spell skeptic with a “k”. Sceptic makes me think of septic.
Good sarcasm.
The Copenhagen conference should be canceled and only rescheduled if the review of data reveals there’s a problem that cutting carbon emissions might solve. Right now it appears cutting carbon emissions would only line the pockets of fraudsters.
zmdavid on December 5, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Just trust them.
the_nile on December 5, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Oh, and cripple the economy of the industrialized world.
zmdavid on December 5, 2009 at 10:54 AM
This Global Warming Hype thing is an Anglo – Centric Hoax? The best thing to do is pull the thread, and see what unravels. I suspect it goes back to the UN. Of course they will try and stop the unraveling but it’s a waste of time, if they did anything CRIMINAL they should hire themselves some good lawyers. What do they call them in England? Barristers?
Dr Evil on December 5, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Al Gore’s @$$ and Mr. Ed, who communicated them by hoofbeats. The original films were sadly destroyed in a suspicious fire.
TexasDan on December 5, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Day 15: Climategate held hostage.
Akzed on December 5, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Who votes for repossessing ManBearPig’s Oscar and NPP and giving them to the East Anglia Leaker?
horatio on December 5, 2009 at 11:00 AM
I know I know, they should take a three-year hiatus then quit.
Akzed on December 5, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Me!
Plus, give the hacker Al Gore’s house and big a$$ boat as well.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Question: Who will be compiling the data? Will it be the same bunch of AGW religionists that were caught “red handed” altering the old data? I’d like to see some impartiality in this respect for obvious reasons.
larvcom on December 5, 2009 at 11:12 AM
I’m sure the UN will in turn determine that the Jews did it.
If this had happened in the 80′s, pre-talk radio and pre-Internet, to written correspondence, we would never have heard about it. (I know DARPA brought us the Internet in 1969 but I’m talking about common use here.)
I’m being kind to my AWG lib friends but they are getting the message from me loud and clear that it’s been a hoax the whole time. I TOOOOooooold you.
Mojave Mark on December 5, 2009 at 11:13 AM
If they were interested in science in the first place, why did they keep their data a secret… and then destroy it?
petefrt on December 5, 2009 at 11:16 AM
The Earth is flat! The Earth is flat!
Kill the heretics!
PattyJ on December 5, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Has Climategate changed any of your friends’ minds regarding AGW?
Why would facts make any difference to people who already “believe” in something as preposterous as catastrophic man-made global warming?
July 10 on December 5, 2009 at 11:22 AM
The only up-side to this matter.
Either we’ll be able to ‘peek’ over their shoulders, or we won’t.
If the statement above is a lie, it won’t take long to ferret it out.
CPT. Charles on December 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM
I am not sure that people will ever trust these guys again.
Terrye on December 5, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Government bureaucrats…”Ah….we’ll need another 3 years of this tax payer gravy train to review the peer reviewed data…”
Caper29 on December 5, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Come on, Ed. You and I and anyone with 2 brain cells knows that AGW was an green based attempt to force the world populance to adopt stringent so-called sustainable practices. This power grab has connections with all the environmental laws and regulations that control what industry can or cannot do.
docdave on December 5, 2009 at 11:28 AM
And to think of all those wasted resources could have been used to produce a higher quality of life. How many of those dollars could have went to cancer research or the other great scam, HIV research. Yes they could have put that money towards cures and reatments for Parkingsons and all the rest of those pesky diseases but that would have pushed the lifespan higher instead of shorter. How much could hve been spent on infrastructure in 3rd turd countries with sub-par water/sewage treatment plants….?
The left put it’s money where they could manipulate pulled and separated it for their favorite cause, communism.
larvcom on December 5, 2009 at 11:31 AM
http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/mr-president-boycott-copenhagen-investigate-your-climate-change-experts/188540473434
the_nile on December 5, 2009 at 11:32 AM
No way will Obowma miss the conference. If he does, he won’t be able to grandstand with his nose in the air and show how ‘wonderful’ he is.
If our MSM ever starts running with this story it’ll only be after the conference and in dribs and drabs, while all the while telling the world how wonderful Obowma is.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Hillbuzz reported yesterday that BHO isn’t going to Copenhagen to speak; then that he date changed, and they speculated that this is the way he sneaks away from not speaking.
With ClimateChange melting, let him speak; and let him say nothing about the scandal; that will actually make him look worse, and accelerate the “theories’” meltdown.
ParisParamus on December 5, 2009 at 11:41 AM
If Obama attends goes to Copenhagen, it will simply confirm to most Americans that he’s deeply involved in the climate change scam.
No one in their right mind would ignore what’s come out recently unless they’re complicit.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Gee, a report in late 2012. Can’t remember- it’s sticking in my head– what else is happening around then?… /sarc
Me smells a carefully planned whitewash.
Scott P on December 5, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Apparently the British government is a denier of true scientific inquiry. They prefer pseudo-science, such as AGW, much more!
MeAlice on December 5, 2009 at 11:47 AM
As UK based climate scientist I am glad to see the Met Office forming an open record, although this of course won’t be enough for those of you convinced that there is a conspiracy (if there is I’d like my official tinfoil hat!).
I am also happy to see that Ed is able to make some distinction between the science and the politics of this issue. It never bothers me when you guys moan about climate change policy or Al Gore, the IPCC, the UN, etc. but when you start equating numerical modelling and atmospheric physics to phrenology you go too far. I guess everyone on the internet thinks he or she is an expert once they read a wikipedia entry or specialist blog, LOL.
The scientific establishment’s reaction to this was distressing to me because it was along the lines of the UK government – don’t respond because you give the sceptics legitimacy. I never agreed with this, and I think the scientific community is beginning to come around to the importance of transparency and engaging with the public. See this editorial in Nature for more information.
zmrzlina on December 5, 2009 at 11:53 AM
ROTFLMAO… Dont fool yourself, this century is still very young, there is plenty of time for many far larger scandals to emerge…
doriangrey on December 5, 2009 at 11:54 AM
NCDC (NOAA)
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html
GISS (NASA)
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/
r keller on December 5, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Some “science” is nothing else than fabricated.
the_nile on December 5, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Me thinks this describes you to a tee…
doriangrey on December 5, 2009 at 12:10 PM
zmrzlina—
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/12/05/climategate-professor-calls-g-warming-skeptic-hole-live-tv
seems you lost the debate
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 12:14 PM
zmrzlina on December 5, 2009 at 11:53 AM
You don’t have to be an expert to recognize a con-artist. An editorial piece that mostly just insults AGW critics isn’t a very good defense.
zmdavid on December 5, 2009 at 12:17 PM
<blockquoteSome “science” is nothing else than fabricated.
the_nile on December 5, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Like evolution, right? Or the scientific research that enabled the moon landing?
Read this wikipedia entry on the primitive equations, which are based on Newton’s laws. You can then claim the title of expert in climate modelling and be able to dismiss 40 years of research into the atmosphere and oceans.
zmrzlina on December 5, 2009 at 12:18 PM
How about you show us some modeling that can actually predict the weather?? Opp’s sorry, your bad…
doriangrey on December 5, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »