Wednesday, December 16, 2009
The Russians weigh in on ClimateGate
The Russians have dropped a new accusation that the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University cherry-picked Russian temperature data and thereby overstated Siberian warming. Maybe so, maybe not. Point is, we are forced to choose between believing climate scientists and Russian scientists, and it is not obvious which group is less credible. That says a lot right there.
CWCID: Glenn Reynolds.
6 Comments:
By 
Escort81, at
Thu Dec 17, 01:31:00 AM:
Uh oh, a 6.5 from the Russian judge. No gold medal for CRU this time.
By Ray, at
Thu Dec 17, 05:17:00 AM:
Personally speaking, I find Russian scientists a heckuva lot more credible, as long as they're not claiming an absurdly early priority on current research based on it having been suppressed under the Soviet Union ;-)
Russian politicians, on the other hand ...
By 
, at
Thu Dec 17, 08:04:00 AM:
The only question remaining is, Do the climate religionists have the willingness to climb down off their hobby horses and resume real life?
By Brian, at
Thu Dec 17, 10:11:00 AM:
The Russian analysis actually supports CRU:
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/12/russian_analysis_confirms_20th.php
Once again, the skeptics have nothing.
By Dawnfire82, at
Thu Dec 17, 12:19:00 PM:
The Russians said that the CRU overstated the extent of global warming. The graph you're in a tizzy about supports that.
"The scale of warming in the territory of Russia for 130 years - from 1870 to 2000-ies, obtained by calculating from the data one used the Hadley Center (90 cells, 121 station), is close to 2,0 ° C.
However, the calculation carried out on more complete data base (152 cells, 476 stations), shows that the magnitude of warming during the same period were more modest - about 1,4 ° C." - From the Russian
The guy you linked to is actually saying that LESS global warming than previously believed is actually SUPPORT for AGW.
So, this little exchange looks something like this:
Russians: 'The CRU has misrepresented reality by cherry picking data in order to support their pre-determined conclusion. Russian temperature rises are actually 30% less than claimed. And since Russia is so big, this distorts the global estimates as well.'
AGW Cult: *Hmm... I can't disprove that, but I can spin it* 'Well that's even better proof of AGW!'
Me: 'Less warming is really more warming? Dishonesty is truth? Seriously? That's absurd. Orwellian even.'
"Once again, the skeptics have nothing."
Your little Gaia cult has been preaching death and destruction since before I was born, and every prediction of doom has been wrong. Every single one of them, from the New Ice Age, to Acid Rain, to the Hole in the Ozone Which Will Fry Us All, to the Amazonian Rainforest Apocalypse, has been the product of fevered imagination and hubris. And now it's coming to light that the latest in this line of fantasies has been built upon not merely good intentions and mistakes, but a foundation of deceit. And the true believers can't handle it.
You people could do with a little more skepticism and a little less fanaticism.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Thu Dec 17, 04:33:00 PM:
Meanwhile, from the official Russian news agency RIA Novosti today:
"The head of a Russian energy strategy institute has claimed that fears over planet-warming emissions are exaggerated, and that observed climate change is in fact due to the slowing of the Earth's rotation."
Link:
http://en.rian.ru/Environment/20091217/157277536.html
