More fallout from Climategate: It turns out that most of the “data” underlying claims that the planet is on the verge of global-warming destruction got tossed with the trash.
That’s what the world’s leading anthropogenic global-warming center is saying.
British scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit now claim that the key data underpinning the man-made-warming theory was . . . thrown out: Original climate data stored on magnetic tape and paper were dumped, supposedly when the CRU moved to new quarters.
At least they didn’t blame the dog.
Their story strains credulity: Who’d toss out data critical to the idea that the earth is rapidly warming as a result of human activity — especially since their prescription is to spend trillions of dollars to avert disaster?
Oh, wait. Maybe that’s the point: If you can’t prove apocalypse is nigh, at least now nobody can prove it isn’t — and perhaps you can still have a big payday.
Plus, the computer program that CRU relied on reportedly lacks internal documentation (meaning it’s difficult to check if it works right) and is full of bugs.
Even if data truly were accidentally dumped, it’s now impossible to check the CRU research. And scientific findings that can’t be replicated aren’t science at all. At best, they’re assertions; at worst, they amount to propaganda.
As Roger Pielke, a professor of environmental studies at Colorado University who sought the records, puts it: “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us.’ So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science.”
So President Obama is headed for a global-warming parley in Copenhagen next week to discuss solutions to a problem that may not in fact exist.
The fact is, even before the recent news about fudged and “discarded” data, there were serious questions about the idea that humans can lower the earth’s temperature in any meaningful way.
Scientists differ not only on whether the earth is warming, but on whether:
* It’s man’s fault.
* It’s historically anomalous.
* Humans can do anything about it.
* What can be done is worth the cost.
Above all else, though: Before the world spends trillions on fighting warming, shouldn’t scientists first at least produce reliable evidence that the “enemy” exists?