Friday
Feb242012
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill More Fakegate bits and pieces
Feb 24, 2012 Climate: fakegate Mark Fischetti, writing at Scientific American, interviews Gavin Schmidt, "a climate scientist who has been a consistently moderate voice at the center of the climate and ethics debate" about Gleick's activities. Fischetti seems to think that "Deniers are well funded and politically motivated." I guess he didn't actually read the Heartland documents then.
Meanwhile, Anthony Watts has a copy of Gleick's blagging email here.
Reader Comments (55)
Mailman
The Meet the Fockers et seq films have probably already registered that one.
That 97% is an unexploded bomb far bigger than the Gleik Fakegate incident I think. It was based on a nine question survey as part of Doran's PhD student Zimmerman's research project, and was emailed to around 1200 earth scientists listed, from memory, in a professional geological directory. The only(?) survey to probe outside as well as inside the public funded climate science community.
Someday, somewhere someone is going to find a full copy of that nine question survey email, and ask why the reported results only considered the two excruciatingly banal questions that it did, and why the responses to those so far unrevealed remaining seven questions (almost certainly more specific and searching, being targetted at the geologically savvy community of Earth Scientists) were suppressed.
Another one off the press
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/scientists_behaving_badly.html#ixzz1nR0ytZ36
Pharos,
Its worse than that! I'm sure that 97% is based on 37 responses!!!
Regards
Mailman
andy,
There is part of me that would enjoy seeing such a trial happen; of course, it won't happen. As Fakegate has proved, you can't control everything. Having such a trial for "crimes against humanity" would lay the warmists open to debate in a court setting, where anything could happen. Even if they were to stack the court, enough of the truth would be available to open minds.
What saddens me is to see the loss of SA to the court of professional opinion. The duty of every scientist is to the truth. Daniel Shechtman's journey to the Nobel prize in chemistry shows sadly that this is not the case. His personal trials in the discovery of quasicrystals detail what happens when scientists ignore what their senses are telling them and prefer to fall into line.
One day we will look back on this time and be shocked at the damage to the process of science this has caused. Until then, we can only commit ourselves to the truth.