Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Climategate officially gets the gate removed

What if I were to tell you that the whole Climategate controversy and furor that "disproved" "global warming", in fact did no such thing. Sure, most people who take the time to look at these things knew that already. I meant in an official "government inquiry" sense. And not by our shitty government either, but by the UK Parliament where they seem to take things like facts and investigations somewhat more seriously. I know, I know, noted climate scientist Dr. Sarah Palin said Climategate proved that science doesn't exist or something, but she's busy in a Twitter feud with LL Cool J over the dishonesty of her new FOX News TV show.

So I guess that mean we can officially put "Climategate" in sarcastic quotes. Done and done.
The House of Commons' Science and Technology Committee said Wednesday that they'd seen no evidence to support charges that the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit or its director, Phil Jones, had tampered with data or perverted the peer review process to exaggerate the threat of global warming – two of the most serious criticisms levied against the climatologist and his colleagues.

In their report, the committee said that, as far as it was able to ascertain, "the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact," adding that nothing in the more than 1,000 stolen e-mails, or the controversy kicked up by their publication, challenged scientific consensus that "global warming is happening and that it is induced by human activity."
In a briefing to journalists ahead of the report's release, Willis said the controversy would ultimately help buttress the case for global warming by forcing the University of East Anglia – and other research institutions – to stop hoarding their data.

"The winner in the end will be climate science itself," he said.
Sorry Mr. Willis, climate science will never win against skeptics unless climate science invents some sort of laser wielding robot with a chainsaw hand that is able to force people to consider the merits of reason, evidence, and fact. For that is science's inherent contradiction: it cannot teach those who are unwilling to learn... unless giant robots are involved.

Plus how do you combat the immense feelings of pride dumb Americans feel by proclaiming that they know better than scientists with their fancy PhD's and that they're just using "common sense", something that fatty fat fat fat Al Gore oughtta try sometime? You can't, especially when there's an entire political party, media establishment, and industry committed to making people think that they're smart for ignoring smart people.

Sure, smart talking Brits can say stuff like "There was no evidence to challenge the "scientific consensus" that global warming is induced by human activities", "The balance of evidence "patently" failed to support the view that the phrases "trick" and "hide the decline" used by Jones in one email were part of a conspiracy to hide evidence that did not support his view", and "On peer review, "the evidence we have seen does not suggest that Jones was trying to subvert the peer review process"", but who is going to listen? The people who aren't listening to science already?

Sorry science, you lose again. Even when you actually win. Perhaps there's an equation you can work up to explain how that happens. Maybe it'll make you feel better.

No comments: