Funny how we always have to access the overseas media to find out about these scandals, isn't it?:
Or "I think you're gonna need a bigger hockey stick":
A British journalist is questioning the method used to by scientists to calculate Earth's climate change, calling it "one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time."
Christopher Booker writes for Britain's the Telegraph that climate data from stations in South America have been adjusted since the 1950s to give the impression that Earth's temperature is rising more than the original data showed.
Booker cites Paul Homewood's Not A Lot of People Know That blog where Homewood compares raw data with adjusted temperatures to show the graph trend was reversed from a cooling trend to a warming one.
Homewood checked the data on three weather stations in Paraguay and found that all three had their initial raw readings adjusted to show lower temperatures in the 1950s and higher temperatures today.
Following reporting by Booker two weeks ago, Homewood checked more stations in South America and found the same thing had occurred at them.
"Scientists" use these records to estimate temperatures in locations that don't have reporting stations, and the data is used to project changes in overall global climate.
Homewood is now looking at stations in the Arctic between Canada and Siberia, Booker reports.
"Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more, higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded," Booker writes.
And, thus, they are NOT "scientists". "Scientists" are practitioners of "science". "Science" is the ongoing search for knowledge and truth about the world, and the cosmos, around us. "Raw data" is collected and analyzed, and a "theory" is constructed to try and explain it. When additional "raw data" is collected, or subsequent discoveries are made, that conflict with that "theory," it is either updated to conform to the additional "raw data" or subsequent discoveries, or an entirely new theory is promulgated. That's called "the scientific method". It's how our store of knowledge and truth are expanded.
That is not what has taken place with "global warming/"climate change"/"climate disruption". In this case, it is not the "theory" that has been discarded, but any "raw data" that does not support it, because greedy, corrupt "scientists" had a selfish, vested interest in the "theory," as did and do the corrupt, tyrannical, power-mad politicians that subsidize them with funding stolen from Us, The People.
And We, The People are "protected" from this truth by the greedy, corrupt, tyrannical, power-mad Obamedia, and have to access the British press to discover it.
D'ya think that might help explain Barack Obama's drive for "Net Neutrality"? Now you're getting warm.
No comments:
Post a Comment