Climategate scientist admits lack of global warming data

This chapter of Climategate scandal is even bigger yet.  Prof. Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia is the guy whose e-mails were leaked.  Now he admits that he can’t find the data that he used to create the famous “hockey stick” graph and that the earth hasn’t really been warming at all over the last 15 years!

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.

Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.

The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

via Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Mail Online.

Look, I know that this doesn’t disprove global warming. But to think that we were on the verge of passing a cap-and-trade bill that would risk our whole economy based on alleged scientific certainties that turn out to be so questionable is breath-taking. The scientific method requires that evidence be replicable and that experiments be subject to checking. And yet so much of the data that is said to make the case for global warming is in the hands of an absent-minded professor–who can focus well-enough on trying to silence dissenters to his findings–who can’t even find his data!

Yes, there is a difference between weather and climate, and record snowstorms do not necessarily disprove global warming. But as Dana Milibank–a liberal and a believer in global warming–points out, advocates of global warming have been putting forward exactly that same kind of anecdotal evidence (the lack of snow at the Winter Olympics, the increase in the number of tornadoes, changes in animal behavior, much of what was in the Al Gore movie) to persuade people that man-made global warming is real and to scare people into accepting Draconian remedies.

UPDATE: Here is a Washington Post news article detailing even MORE sloppiness–including typographical errors that threw off dating and unsubstantiated claims from environmentalist groups passed off as data–that is discrediting climate research.

HT: DonS

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Joe

    No significant warming for 15 years – wow. That is interesting.

  • Joe

    No significant warming for 15 years – wow. That is interesting.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    No suprise that world leaders would misrepresent “data” in order to manipulate the UN and world events. Anyone remember Powell’s speech?

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    No suprise that world leaders would misrepresent “data” in order to manipulate the UN and world events. Anyone remember Powell’s speech?

  • DonS

    Yes, Dr. Veith, you hit the nail on the head. The issue is not whether AGW theory is true. The issue is that AGW proponents and their allies in the media have never had an interest in proving its truth. For the past 25 years, there has been one hugh propaganda campaign to force society simply to acknowledge its truth, on faith, and to act in extremely radical ways to address the alleged problem, without regard for the cost in economic well being and human lives. More egregious than that has been the presumption that AGW is primarily human-caused, and that there is anything that we can possibly do to significantly arrest it. It’s not just faith they ask for, it’s blind faith.

    Thankfully, this email leak has finally caused a re-evaluation of the issue, and has allowed a large community of legitimate scientists who always knew it was a fraud, but were suppressed in reporting their views and evidence, to at last be heard. This is at least true in the British press, which has led the way. I’m glad to see this report in the Washington Post, and perhaps our own MSM will finally be forced to fairly report this issue. It will take a while to turn the political tide, I’m afraid, as politicians like power and will not give it up easily.

  • DonS

    Yes, Dr. Veith, you hit the nail on the head. The issue is not whether AGW theory is true. The issue is that AGW proponents and their allies in the media have never had an interest in proving its truth. For the past 25 years, there has been one hugh propaganda campaign to force society simply to acknowledge its truth, on faith, and to act in extremely radical ways to address the alleged problem, without regard for the cost in economic well being and human lives. More egregious than that has been the presumption that AGW is primarily human-caused, and that there is anything that we can possibly do to significantly arrest it. It’s not just faith they ask for, it’s blind faith.

    Thankfully, this email leak has finally caused a re-evaluation of the issue, and has allowed a large community of legitimate scientists who always knew it was a fraud, but were suppressed in reporting their views and evidence, to at last be heard. This is at least true in the British press, which has led the way. I’m glad to see this report in the Washington Post, and perhaps our own MSM will finally be forced to fairly report this issue. It will take a while to turn the political tide, I’m afraid, as politicians like power and will not give it up easily.

  • Peter Leavitt

    The trouble has been that the issue of global warming has become so politicized that the climate scientists were not able to engage in the usual healthy and strenuous debate on scientific topics that are not settled. Richard Lindzen, an M.IT. climate scientist has argued for years that climate science is in a stage that so far doesn’t allow it to conclusively claim that any anthropogenic influence on warming outweighs natural fluctuations of climate stage. He, also, views present complex models of climate change to be rather inadequate.

    On the issue of the corruption of science, Lindzen writes in an article Climate of Fear: Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence. as follows:

    But there is a more sinister side to this feeding frenzy. Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.

    Fortunately, the public is catching on to this.

  • Peter Leavitt

    The trouble has been that the issue of global warming has become so politicized that the climate scientists were not able to engage in the usual healthy and strenuous debate on scientific topics that are not settled. Richard Lindzen, an M.IT. climate scientist has argued for years that climate science is in a stage that so far doesn’t allow it to conclusively claim that any anthropogenic influence on warming outweighs natural fluctuations of climate stage. He, also, views present complex models of climate change to be rather inadequate.

    On the issue of the corruption of science, Lindzen writes in an article Climate of Fear: Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence. as follows:

    But there is a more sinister side to this feeding frenzy. Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.

    Fortunately, the public is catching on to this.

  • Dan Kempin

    Dr. Veith,

    “Look, I know this doesn’t disprove global warming . . .”

    A leading expert on the warming side says:

    The hockey stick data is unavailable or worse. The world may have been warmer in medieval times. No warming has occurred for 15 years.

    Are you sure?

  • Dan Kempin

    Dr. Veith,

    “Look, I know this doesn’t disprove global warming . . .”

    A leading expert on the warming side says:

    The hockey stick data is unavailable or worse. The world may have been warmer in medieval times. No warming has occurred for 15 years.

    Are you sure?

  • fws

    I see blogs that normally feed me interesting articles on my faith spending alot of time on explaining to me that global warming is a hoax.

    I am not interested one way or the other. Should I be?

    I do observe that self-restraint is always a good thing. Conservation of just about anything is usually a great thing.

    I note that Lutherans say that earthly righteousness that truly pleases God is self-discipline/restraint that enables one to do acts of love for others that makes the creaturely lives of others better.

    Conservation and recycling and compost , heck even peta´s agenda all have elements that are praiseworthy if only they would be also channeled and disciplined by self restraint AND result in things that make the lives of others truly better materially.

    I try to look for the good and praise it. Therefore: good for those who push back on global warming. in moderation.

  • fws

    I see blogs that normally feed me interesting articles on my faith spending alot of time on explaining to me that global warming is a hoax.

    I am not interested one way or the other. Should I be?

    I do observe that self-restraint is always a good thing. Conservation of just about anything is usually a great thing.

    I note that Lutherans say that earthly righteousness that truly pleases God is self-discipline/restraint that enables one to do acts of love for others that makes the creaturely lives of others better.

    Conservation and recycling and compost , heck even peta´s agenda all have elements that are praiseworthy if only they would be also channeled and disciplined by self restraint AND result in things that make the lives of others truly better materially.

    I try to look for the good and praise it. Therefore: good for those who push back on global warming. in moderation.

  • dave

    I studied climatology in graduate school and meteorology before that.

    There’s no conspiracy.

    Do I think that the ranters here think that could be possible? No.

    Where was your anger when they said there were no WMD after previously saying their had been?

  • dave

    I studied climatology in graduate school and meteorology before that.

    There’s no conspiracy.

    Do I think that the ranters here think that could be possible? No.

    Where was your anger when they said there were no WMD after previously saying their had been?

  • wyclif

    Gene, your Twitter (@geneveith) is broken– whatever WordPress plugin you are using to inject links to this blog into your tweets isn’t functioning, it’s only pushing parenthesis “()” out. Just a heads up.

  • wyclif

    Gene, your Twitter (@geneveith) is broken– whatever WordPress plugin you are using to inject links to this blog into your tweets isn’t functioning, it’s only pushing parenthesis “()” out. Just a heads up.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X