• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Son of Climategate -- University of Arizona Emails to be Released

Jack Hays

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This should be interesting. Having resisted for nearly seven years, the University of Arizona will now have to release emails bearing on the MBH Hockey Stick and other contentious issues.:eek::fueltofir:popcorn:


Climategate continues: Release of University of Arizona Climate Emails Imminent

Press Release Nearly seven years ago, on December 7th, 2011, the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic’s (FME Law) sought public records from the University of Arizona related to the Mann-Bradley-Hughes temperature reconstruction that looks like a hockey stick, and development of an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. They refused much of the request…
Continue reading →

[FONT=&quot]Nearly seven years ago, on December 7th, 2011, the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic’s (FME Law) sought public records from the University of Arizona related to the Mann-Bradley-Hughes temperature reconstruction that looks like a hockey stick, and development of an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. They refused much of the request and FME Law sued. Now (on September 18th, 2018) legal counsel for the University informed FME Law that they were done, that they would be withdrawing their appeal of the trial court’s decision, end the case and disclose the records.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Included in the release will be emails that, for example, provide the full context of the discussions between Michael Mann and colleagues and Chick Keller on whether there was a medieval warm period and a little ice age. Mann, Bradley and Hughes (MBH) were the authors of the “hockey stick” graph that became the icon of climate alarmism. Dr. Keller was, at the time, Director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the Los Alamos National Lab and affiliated with the University of California at San Diego, and wanted to reconcile data which appeared to refute the MBH papers. Also within this collection will be the full discussion on events surrounding an effort to remove editors of journals willing to publish peer-reviewed papers that contradicted the MBH and related papers on which climate alarmism was built. This collection of emails is particularly important in that they will provide the full context of Climategate emails that have been described as “cherry picking.”. . . . [/FONT]

 
Who gives a toss?

The basic hockey stick graph has been repeatedly reproduced by other groups using different data and is as good as proven. Whatever dirt the deniers can manage to dig up for their little circle jerk won't change the science.
 
Surface Detail said:
Who gives a toss?

The basic hockey stick graph has been repeatedly reproduced by other groups using different data and is as good as proven. Whatever dirt the deniers can manage to dig up for their little circle jerk won't change the science.
Click to expand...

The Hockey Stick has been repeated only by replicating MBH's errors.
 
[h=3]PAGES2017: New Cherry Pie[/h]Jul 11, 2017 – 11:31 PM
Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – […]
 
Jack Hays said:
The Hockey Stick has been repeated only by replicating MBH's errors.
Click to expand...

Yes. And if I recall one thread, after dozens of posts, it became apparent that the ‘errors’ you insist are repeated are the simple fact that a dramatic uptick in recent warming was seen.

And you don’t like seeing that.
 
Threegoofs said:
Yes. And if I recall one thread, after dozens of posts, it became apparent that the ‘errors’ you insist are repeated are the simple fact that a dramatic uptick in recent warming was seen.

And you don’t like seeing that.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that's complete fantasy. The errors are in two broad categories: simple incompetence handling statistics, and exclusion of proxy series that go the "wrong" way.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but that's complete fantasy. The errors are in two broad categories: simple incompetence handling statistics, and exclusion of proxy series that go the "wrong" way.
Click to expand...

Yes. That is fantasy.

The entire paleoclimate community has contributed to a worldwide reconstruction.... I’m pretty sure they have a statistician around.

And the exclusion of series is just another way of you complaining that you don’t like the results.

Unless it’s a giant...conspiracy?
 
Threegoofs said:
Yes. That is fantasy.

The entire paleoclimate community has contributed to a worldwide reconstruction.... I’m pretty sure they have a statistician around.

And the exclusion of series is just another way of you complaining that you don’t like the results.

Unless it’s a giant...conspiracy?
Click to expand...

Cherries in, cherries out.

PAGES2017: New Cherry Pie

Jul 11, 2017 – 11:31 PM
Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – […]

And laughable incompetence.

PAGES2K: More Upside Down?

Oct 4, 2014 – 8:04 PM
Does it matter whether proxies are used upside-down or not? Maybe not in Mann-world (where, in response to our criticism at PNAS, Mann claimed that it was impossible for him to use series upside-down). But, unlike Mann, Darrell Kaufman acknowledges responsibility for using proxies upside-up. Unfortunately, he and the PAGES2K authors don’t seem to be […]

 
Jack Hays said:
Cherries in, cherries out.

PAGES2017: New Cherry Pie

Jul 11, 2017 – 11:31 PM
Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – […]

And laughable incompetence.

PAGES2K: More Upside Down?

Oct 4, 2014 – 8:04 PM
Does it matter whether proxies are used upside-down or not? Maybe not in Mann-world (where, in response to our criticism at PNAS, Mann claimed that it was impossible for him to use series upside-down). But, unlike Mann, Darrell Kaufman acknowledges responsibility for using proxies upside-up. Unfortunately, he and the PAGES2K authors don’t seem to be […]
Click to expand...

Yes. The denier blogs don’t like the shape of the hockey stick either.

Real surprise there.
 
Threegoofs said:
Yes. The denier blogs don’t like the shape of the hockey stick either.

Real surprise there.
Click to expand...

“Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won't come in.”
― Isaac Asimov
 
It's ironic that one of deniers' main talking points centers around the warm medieval period and little ice age, while an even bigger talking point consists of outrage over the shape which paleoclimate reconstructions take when they show a warm medieval period cooling into a little ice age.
 
Jack Hays said:
“Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won't come in.”
― Isaac Asimov
Click to expand...

Denier blog posts, science fiction writer quotes...anything but actual critiques of all the paleoclimate reconstructions to date.
 
Surface Detail said:
Who gives a toss?

The basic hockey stick graph has been repeatedly reproduced by other groups using different data and is as good as proven. Whatever dirt the deniers can manage to dig up for their little circle jerk won't change the science.
Click to expand...

Any time you introduce different measurement methods, different patterns from the data can be expected. Releasing the whole parts of the study not published may show some interesting insight to why they left out good data that showed the opposite.
 
Mithrae said:
It's ironic that one of deniers' main talking points centers around the warm medieval period and little ice age, while an even bigger talking point consists of outrage over the shape which paleoclimate reconstructions take when they show a warm medieval period cooling into a little ice age.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that is a post unmoored in reality.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You are silly for thinking that.
Click to expand...

So you think records will be 'conveniently destroyed' and other scientists who are in the field and need the data to better inform their own research will just not notice or care?

Yes, you do.. because functionally, you think there is a giant worldwide conspiracy. You just call it librul groupthink or whatever euphemism you think sounds more reasonable.

But no doubt about it.. you think scientists are deliberately misreporting information and even hiding and destroying it.
 
Threegoofs said:
...you think scientists are deliberately misreporting information and even hiding and destroying it.
Click to expand...

The "Duck Test"

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck.

The duck test isn't always right. Maybe all those patterns from all those data manipulations
are legitimate and what we are observing is simply the way it all shakes out.

All I want from the folks who say that's the way it shakes out is the acknowledgement that
yes all those changes have been made and yes it looks like there's a pattern to it.

I wonder is there an opposite to the Rorschach Test that says something about people
who don't see a pattern when there is one?
 
Relax. The time limit to effect radical change was 2012. That time has come and gone...we are already done. SO pop another cork and enjoy yourself. the wall of water has overwhelmed the coastal states, the UK and US are all but uninhabitable, the arctic is free of sea ice, The polar bears are just a sad distance memory, the Great Lakes are completely dry. We arent even here...we are typing this stuff in from our refugee camps in central America.
 
Steve Case said:
The "Duck Test"

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck.

The duck test isn't always right. Maybe all those patterns from all those data manipulations
are legitimate and what we are observing is simply the way it all shakes out.

All I want from the folks who say that's the way it shakes out is the acknowledgement that
yes all those changes have been made and yes it looks like there's a pattern to it.

I wonder is there an opposite to the Rorschach Test that says something about people
who don't see a pattern when there is one?
Click to expand...

In other words, it’s a giant worldwide conspiracy.

We get it.
 
Jack Hays said:
No. Just petty faculty attempts to assert privilege.
Click to expand...

Holding a principled objection to witch-hunts demanding unrestricted access to paw through researchers' emails is hardly a case of 'asserting privilege.'

We all saw the numerous examples of desperate cherry-picking and out-of-context soundbytes being used in an effort to smear the University of East Anglia scientists immediately preceding the Copenhagen conference, and again preceding the Durban conference. The partial releases of the hacked data at politically-motivated times says enough on its own, even before we start looking into the twisted misperceptions created by popular soundbytes like "hide the decline," or the generally-favourable results of the numerous formal investigations conducted on the victims.

According to your OP it was shortly after that second selective release of hacked UEA emails that this 'Free Market' Environmental Law Clinic sought governmental authority to trawl through the University of Arizona researcher's emails. Quite aside from the irony of what a chilling effect this kind of forcible intervention could have on academic freedom, the fact is that the university had already provided all relevant material, by their scientists' assessment. The contentious point here is simply the witch-hunt side of the request, the vague hope of finding something which - if the UEA example is any indication - might be likewise stripped of all true meaning and whored out as a new slogan for contrarians to chant.

If memory serves the only damning thing about the UEA case (on the scientists' side that is, not the politically-driven hackers' and slogan-chanting parrots' side) is that the subsequent investigations showed there had been some actual, relevant data which Jones had refused to release to hostile critics in response to an FOI request. It can be difficult to balance the importance of academic transparency with academic freedom; for the public (however ill-intentioned some may be) to have access to pertinent information which we've paid for without stifling research under a Big Brother regime. I think that in some regards Jones failed the transparency test, and should have released the relevant data regardless of the hostile intent of those requesting it.

In this University of Arizona case, all indications are that's unlikely to have been the case. But the witch-hunters can always live in hope, I suppose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom