The Falsification is Settled on Anthropogenic Global Warming
When we were told that the science is settled, I don't think this is what they had in mind.
Nobel Prize winning Climate Chief caught lying about Himalayan Glacier revelation
Quickly reviewing the chain of events:
Acclaimed scientist Dr. Pacharui (and a team of scientists working for him from many nationalities) puts forth a paper for the IPCC. The paper makes the spectacular claim that man-made global warming will cause the Himalayan glaciers to melt by 2035 causing spectacular damage. Dr. Pacharui wins the Nobel Peace Prize. He gets named to the prestigious leadership position in the IPCC. In the leadup to Copenhagen, the Himalayan Glacier study is the centerpiece of his conversations.
But something unexpected happened along the way to Copenhagen. Several glaciologists questioned Dr. Pacharui's findings and disputed his work. In the end, the honest science won. It has been shown conclusively that Dr. Pacharui's own study included errors that would put back his prediction to no sooner than 2350!!! Of course, we are not completely sure that the glaciers are in peril at all, and hopefully the competent scientists will step forward and figure that one out. If they are not in peril, Dr. Pacharui has not only deceived us, he's wasted a lot of your time and your money! (Remember, this is your money paying these guys. Any grants or research funding they get from the public sector comes out of your pocket. One way or another.)
It gets worse. After Copenhagen, when media pressure finally induced Dr. Pacharui to come clean about his paper's shortcomings, he claimed that he had just learned about the problems. Not true, sir. In fact, Dr. Pacharui was made aware of the problem by several diligent glaciologists at least a couple of months before Copenhagen, yet he never wavered from his alarmist tone.
There are multiple issues that I hope you will consider:
I tried to explain this before, and rival bloggers scoffed at me. If I pay a scientist, oh let's say.... $22.6 million to study global warming, that scientist works for me. He or she is now biased. If Phil Jones or Dr. Pacharui doesn't provide me with what I want, he can look elsewhere for funding. Why is it so difficult to understand that when a private scientist gets millions in research grants from the government (via the IPCC or whatever), that person becomes a government scientist? It seems rather childish to scoff at this notion. This is how the world works. Reducing scientists to the cartoon character vision that you would like to believe in doesn't help us evaluate our world in any way.
So if a scientist in the employ of anyone is going to be biased, it's important to take rival theories and ideas seriously rather than dismissing them with the magic wand of "the science is settled."
The Nobel Peace Prize
Speaking of bias, the Nobel Peace Prize committee has shown its bias. To say they have no agenda is also childish and foolish. They even admit to awarding Obama the prize in hopes that it would spur him to curtail American Imperialism. Fail. As far as Gore and Pacharui are concerned, I suspect the committee is seeking to establish global warming research as a path to global recognition. Anyone who takes up the mantle of saving the Earth just might be rewarded by them with the highest honor, even if they may not be the most brilliant, thorough, or competent among us.
This is a recipe for discrediting yourself.
The CRU emails, poor temperature set quality, unsatisfactory computer model programming, massaged and manipulated data, and outright lying and evading information requests.... all this does not mean that anthropogenic global warming is false.
It simply means that these people can not be trusted. They have wasted our time and money. They should be held accountable. I want the $22.6 million Dr. Phil Jones has received in research grants given back to their rightful owners - the taxpayers and whatever other private institutions chipped in. Same goes for Michael Mann, Dr. Pacharui and the rest of these merry bunglers.
If global warming is truly a threat, and if it is really man--made, we are no closer to finding out the truth than before this band of idiots started flying around the globe taking temperatures.
You should be outraged, especially if you are a supporter of AGW theory and the scientists involved in this effort (which very well may turn out to be a noble one.) Your dreams of saving the Earth (and being on the front row of such a fun bandwagon) have been delayed by decades now. There is not one living, breathing soul on this planet who, after reading about Climategate or Glaciergate, you can sway to your side. You can not grow your movement.
And as they say in business, there are only two directions: growing or dying. AGW science is dying. Thankfully, the planet will get on just fine without them.
David in Qatar