Welcome to the Lavoisier Group Website. Warning: include(pagesinc/lavoisier-header.inc.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/lavoisie/public_html/articles/index.php on line 7 Warning: include(pagesinc/lavoisier-header.inc.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/lavoisie/public_html/articles/index.php on line 7 Warning: include(): Failed opening 'pagesinc/lavoisier-header.inc.php' for inclusion (include_path='.
:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/lavoisie/public_html/articles/index.php on line 7. FOIA HARRY_READ_ME.txt. Popular Technology -> Climategate Resource. CRU Email Search (YourVoiceMatters.Org)ClimateGate FOIA Grepper (EcoWho)Climategate 2 FOIA 2011 Searchable Database (FOIA2011.org)Searching the CRU leaked emails (Di2.NU) Climatic Research Unit emails, data, models, 1996-2009 (WikiLeaks)Index of Climategate EmailsFOI2009.ZIP (Google Search) "I think the only thing that counts is numbers.
The media is going to say '1000 scientists signed' or '1500 signed'. No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000 without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a different story. " - Joseph Alcamo, Lead Author, IPCC (2001, 2007) Bishop Hill’s compendium of CRU email issues. For those of you who don’t know of the blog Bishop Hill, let me say that he is a succinct and careful writer who has earned praise from many (including myself and Steve McIntyre) in taking a difficult niche subject such as the Hockey Stick and paleoclimatology and condensed into into a readable form for the layman.
He’s also writing a book about it called: The Hockey Stick Illusion In his latest post, Climate Cuttings 33, he gives a list of interesting issues he’s identified. I’ve reproduced it below for WUWT readers to consider. Be sure to visit his blog and have a look and drop an encouraging word. – Anthony Climate cuttings 33 If you are interested in more on global warming material, check out Caspar and the Jesus Paper and The Yamal Implosion, or check out the forthcoming book. Watts Up With That? United States Senate Report "Consensus" Exposed: The CRU Controversy. Why did Trump say a lot of global warming was a hoax? We follow the biggest science heist in history to find the answer #Climategate. Steven McIntyre It’s is about the Climategate Gang of Four.
Steve McIntyre, Anthony Watts, Steven Mosher, and yours truly. Patrick Courrielche has done a brilliant job of tying the story together. The CRUtape Letters™, an Alternative Explanation. By charles the moderator Rodin’s The Thinker at the Musée Rodin.
Author CJ. Licensed under Creative Commons. I have a theory. American Thinker: Understanding Climategate’s Hidden Decline. Understanding Climategate’s Hidden Decline By Marc Sheppard The American Thinker Close followers of the Climategate controversy know that much of the mêlée surrounds an email in which Climate Research Unit (CRU) chief Phil Jones wrote about using “Mike’s Nature Trick” (MNT) to “hide the decline.”
And yet, 17 days and thousands of almost exclusively on-line op-eds into this scandal, it still seems very few understand exactly which “decline” was being hidden, what “trick” was used to do so, and why Jones’s words have become the slogan for the greatest scientific fraud in history. As the mainstream media move from abject denial to dismissive whitewashing, CRU co-conspirators move to Copenhagen for tomorrow’s UN climate meeting, intent on changing the world as we know it based primarily on their now exposed trickery. So please allow me to explain in what I hope are easily digestible terms. Climategatekeeping « Climate Audit. In the MIT Climategate Forum, Ronald Prinn trotted out what has become one of the standard “move along” memes in the climate science community: that while the “tone” of the Climategate emails was “unprofessional”, they did not succeed in their “endeavour” to prevent publication of articles in journals or mentions in IPCC.
Prinn at around minute 48 says: Number 2. Were the people successful in their endeavour to preventing publication in journals or mentions in IPCC ? This is a very important question. Could one successfully do that? As so often in climate science, Prinn is talking without apparently doing any due diligence. Today, I’ll provide two 2003 and two 2004 examples where, contrary to Prinn’s soporific “move-along”, CRU and their associates successfully prevented publications of four articles (the identity of which is presently unknown.) Hi Keith, Okay, today. Climategatekeeping: Michaels and McKitrick 2004 « Climate Audit. Climategate 'hide the decline' explained by Berkeley professor Richard A. Muller.
Climategate - A 'Hockey-Stick of Errors' 14 Jun 11 - On November 20, 2009, an unnamed climate scientist released more than four thousand private e-mails and climate-related files on the Internet.
Most of these highly embarrassing internal documents came from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, headed by Professor Phil Jones. Those of us who long suspected that the CRU and other anthropogenic global warming (AGW) alarmists had ‘cooked up’ falsified historical climate data to support a predetermined conclusion, were finally able to look at the scientists ‘hidden agenda.’ For many years, AGW scientists had refused to share much of their research data relating to global warming.
The CRU and the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) each did everything possible to deny past periods of global warming and cooling that took place on this planet between 600 B.C. and 1850 A.D. Only a few dozen climate scientists still support the AGW cause. Lord Monckton’s summary of Climategate and its issues. Both Steve McIntyre and I are mentioned in this comprehensive summary.
I’ve posted some excerpts below, with a link to the full report in PDF form. It is well worth a read. – Anthony Cold facts about the hot topic of global temperature change after the Climategate scandal by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley | November 30, 2009. Hide the Decline – Just Facts. NOTE: If you came directly to this page without first reading Just Facts’ research on proxies, we suggest you do so in order to gather vital context about the facts below, such as the definitions of certain terms and acronyms. * On November 16, 1999, Phil Jones, the Director of the CRU, sent an email containing the following statement to the three coauthors of the hockey stick graph (and also copied two of the authors of the chapter about proxies in the 2007 IPCC report):
CRU Emails “may” be open to interpretation, but commented code by the programmer tells the real story. When the CRU emails first made it into news stories, there was immediate reaction from the head of CRU, Dr. Phil Jones over this passage in an email: From a yahoo.com news story: In one leaked e-mail, the research center’s director, Phil Jones, writes to colleagues about graphs showing climate statistics over the last millennium. He alludes to a technique used by a fellow scientist to “hide the decline” in recent global temperatures. Some evidence appears to show a halt in a rise of global temperatures from about 1960, but is contradicted by other evidence which appears to show a rise in temperatures is continuing.Jones wrote that, in compiling new data, he had “just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e., from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline,” according to a leaked e-mail, which the author confirmed was genuine.
Dr. Ok fine, but how Dr. Russian IEA claims CRU tampered with climate data – cherrypicked warmest stations. I wonder if they used this station, which is famous in Russia? See details here Stevenson Screen at Verhojansk Meteo Station looking ENE. The Smoking Gun At Darwin Zero. By Willis Eschenbach People keep saying “Yes, the Climategate scientists behaved badly. But that doesn’t mean the data is bad. Hiding the Decline. By Judith Curry To date, I’ve kept Climate Etc. a “tree ring free zone,” since the issues surrounding the hockey stick are a black hole for conflict and pretty much a tar baby, IMO. Further, paleoproxies are outside the arena of my personal research expertise, and I find my eyes glaze over when I start reading about bristlecones, etc. However, two things this week have changed my mind, and I have decided to take on one aspect of this issue: the infamous “hide the decline.”
The first thing that contributed to my mind change was this post at Bishop Hill entitled “Will Sir John condemn hide the decline?” , related to Sir John Beddington’s statement: It is time the scientific community became proactive in challenging misuse of scientific evidence. The question I am asking myself is what is my role as a scientist in challenging misuses of science (as per Beddington’s challenge)? Explanations, interpretations, and misrepresentations of “hide the decline” Climategate intensifies: Jones and Wang apparently hid Chinese station data issues. Monday Mirthiness – ‘Russia caused Climategate’ Lol, this is hilarious! Asteroid expert and self-appointed super-sleuth Mark Boslough has it all figured out (on Twitter no less). Could this study on honesty and government service explain the EPA climateer fraud and ‘Climategate’ ? Climategate on finnish television 1/3.
Climategate: A Battlefield Perspective. A fascinating new interview with Prof Richard Muller, quote: On Climategate – “What they did was, I think, shameful. And it was scientific malpractice” Guest Post by Barry Woods The Progressive Radio Network website had a fascinating interview with Prof Richard Muller last week following his ‘man of the moment’ opinion piece – “The Conversion of a Climate Change Sceptic” in the New York Times (28th July 2012). When Results Go Bad … Guest post by Willis Eschenbach. #Climategate continues – first look at the Mann-Hughes hockey stick emails. Analysis of Court of Appeals’ Defamation Opinion Holding That Climategate Inquiries Exonerated Michael Mann. Guest post by “JD Ohio”, Attorney* Overview of Important Science and Email IssuesUseful to Analysis of Court of Appeals’ Defamation Opinion Holding That Climategate Inquiries Exonerated Michael Mann.