in scientific research. For example, what is this "hide the decline" all about? Why would scientists want to hide their data? Why wouldn't the CRU (Climate Research Unit at UEA) release their data sets as required by reputable journals such as "Nature." Why would they deny FOIA requests and conspire to find a way around them? Why would they seek to marginalize the "Climate Research" journal because some scientists had a contrary opinion, and why did they describe this as "plugging the gap" (their words)?
Why did a hockey stick emerge from their data no matter what "red noise" was input to the program? (White noise is random; red noise is random from the last iteration, like stock market quotes) And why did a hockey stick emerge only when the data was confined to the results of a single bristlecone pine tree? And why was the fact that contemporary tree-ring data showed a DECLINE in temperature in contrast to very accurate modern thermometers conveniently hidden? Was it because if they don't work accurately now there is no reason to suppose they were accurate thousands of years ago, thus putting the lie to the paleoclimate temperatures?
When you read about these shenanigans it reads like a political backroom dealing attempt to hide shoddy research. I implore you to read "Hiding the Decline; a history of the climategate affair" by A.W. Montford. isbn:978-1475293364, too avail yourselves of the degree of fraud perpetrated by these folks. Read the exposed emails sent back and forth which prove all this. Real the lamentations of the computer programmer assigned to try to make sense of all this as he says the data is a mess. One would think the members of slashdot could relate.
Why hasn't Al Gore been called to task for mixing up cause and effect on his giant graph showing correlation between CO2 and temperature? Turns out CO2 went up historically AFTER the temperature warmed. It's not a cause of warming temperatures, it's a result. But, as you may know, he won't debate anyone on the subject.
The climate may very well be warming. That happens when you are coming off an Ice Age, And it may be caused by us (or maybe not), but the degree to which these scientists sought to cook the data is unprecedented and one has to wonder why they went to such trouble to do it. They have made such a massive attempt to squelch opposing data that one wonders how they can look at themselves in the mirror and call themselves "scientists."
This is fraud on a massive scale, but who cares? The masses of people who aren't "scientists" won't be able to tell the difference anyway and we can just accuse them of being ignorant.