• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • UK Climategate Investigation Conclusion: Hiding the Decline was "Misleading"

    Global Warming hysteria

    Many in the mainstream media are attempting to portray The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review, just released in the UK, as exonerating the researchers. In fact the main conclusion, buried under pages of rhetoric, confirms that data was presented in a misleading way. Here is the actual text of the conclusion regarding the allegation of impropriety in the presentation of tree ring data:

    On the allegation that the references in a specific e-mail to a “trick” and to “hide the decline” in respect of a 1999 WMO report figure show evidence of intent to paint a misleading picture, we find that, given its subsequent iconic significance (not least the use of a similar figure in the IPCC Third Assessment Report), the figure supplied for the WMO Report was Misleading.

    Unfortunately, the media, including many who remain skeptical of climate change, have missed the main scientific point at question in the tree ring data. The researchers were not trying to hide evidence of a decline in global temperatures over the last decade—we have plenty of actual thermometer readings to show temperatures in recent years. What they were trying to hide was the discrepancy between actual temperature readings and the temperatures suggested by tree ring data. They have relied on tree ring data to show that the earth was cooler in the past. If the tree ring data is not reliable (as the discrepancy in recent years would suggest), then maybe the earth was actually hotter in the past than these researchers would have us believe—and perhaps the hot temperatures of recent years do not represent unprecedented global warming but just natural variation in climate.

    The review panel at least acknowledged that the “trick” used to “hide the decline” was misleading. Now let’s see if the media can report the result in a way that is not itself misleading.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    8 Responses to UK Climategate Investigation Conclusion: Hiding the Decline was "Misleading"

    1. Brad Kelley, Marylan says:

      Oops, that lie didn't work. Let's go back to the Chicken Little approach. No one can refute that!

    2. Billie says:

      Nice one, Terry!

      The people demand accountabilities, responsibilities and transparencies whenever FUNDING IS GOVERNMENT FORCED ON THE PEOPLE! everyone has a right to know where their money is going! EVERYONE!

      WHAT A GAME THE PEOPLE ARE FORCED TO PLAY! NO CAP N' TRADE FOR THE HOUDINI'S!

    3. Hal, CA says:

      I find it rather telling that y'all who are making this same argument – i.e. that the investigation conclusion was that hiding the decline was misleading – keep on selectively quoting the paragraph in question. Here's the follow up that puts your prized quote in perspective:

      "We do not find that it is misleading to curtail reconstructions at some point per se, or to splice data, but we believe that both of these procedures should have been made plain – ideally in the figure but certainly clearly described in either the caption or the text."

      Either reading comprehension is negatively selected for by climate skeptics, or dissembling by selective quoting is positively selected.

    4. Pingback: Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Friday Link Wrap-Up

    5. Pingback: Jack's Newswatch » Blog Archive » Climate science’s watery reprieve (3)

    6. Greg, Florida says:

      And what YOU fail to understand "Ha! in CA." is the fact that splicing together two different data sources IS misleading. The reason they so diligently tried to hide the fact that they had done this is that it completely invalidates all the conclusions they published. And further, if you had bothered to read many of the rest of the emails, as I did, you would see there was open discussion, dismay in fact, over the fact that the actual tree ring data DID NOT support their conclusion that the average temperature was rising in modern times. There is actually NO DATA that supports their conclusions. None. Had they published their original findings with full disclosure of the fact that they spliced data from two different, unrelated sources, it would have been dismissed as totally unserious. Elementary school science students know you can't do that.

    7. john says:

      Regardless of which paragraph is read, the truth is the truth. "Global Warming" and any related laws or treaties would simply be one step closer to redistribution of wealth from the rich nations to the poor nations, which will bring economic and social justice across the globe. At that time, the only ones with wealth will be the perpetrators of this fraud.

      Maybe if we change our lifestyles and build more windmills, the polar caps on Mars will stop melting.

    8. Kyle says:

      Maybe you people should try reading the actual report which is linked in this article. Start with the Findings that being on page 11.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×