Darwin Ground Zero: Data Faked

Two choices: You can either read Watts Up With That for the full article, or the Volokh Conspiracy for a slightly edited version. Both are pretty long. Both are worth reading.

To do a quickie recap (though really: the full things are worth reading): We keep being assured that quackery at CRU is no big deal because these data are confirmed by "every" other "independent" study.

Well. The thing is, there are only three main records of observed (real-measure) temperature: CRU, GISS (Godard Institute for Space Studies, at NASA -- Hansen's creature) and GHCN, (Global Historical Climate Network, at the NOAA).

Problem one: Both GISS and CRU get their raw data from the GHCN. So, right out of the box, these "independent" measurements which supposedly confirm each other are not looking very independent at all.

Each takes the "raw data" and adjusts it. Now, in some cases, some adjustment is needed. If a station used to be in a field but is now surrounded by asphalt, its temperature needs to be adjusted down. (Though, as critics have pointed out-- they never adjust down as much as they should.) If a station had to be moved, and it was moved up a hill, where temperatures are lower, the temperature needs to be adjusted up to reflect that. (Though, critics note: Very often it is adjusted much higher than necessary.)

And what other sorts of adjustments are being done on the real, raw actual numbers?

Oh my. Plenty.

The adjustments, you know, that they never specify, "hiding behind IPR" claims (intellectual property rights), inventing other spurious reasons for refusal, citing non-disclosure agreements, deleting emails, "losing" data, etc.

I'm not going to drag this out. Below, in blue: The actual real raw real completely measured in physical reality temperatures for Darwin, in Northern Australia. Did I mention these are the real temperatures?

In red: The temperature as "adjusted," in a process called "homogenization," which seems to be some bullshitty form of averaging Darwin's readings with readings from other stations. Why do this? I don't know, but I know it's not science -- you can't spell homogenization without "homo."

Behold-- your global warming at Darwin station:

The black line represents the adjustments -- that is, the scale of adjustments necessary to the blue line to get to the red line. As you can see, the black line is.... tall. And steep. And... pretty much fake.

Willis Eschenbeck writes:

YIKES! Before getting homogenized, temperatures in Darwin were falling at 0.7 Celcius per century � but after the homogenization, they were warming at 1.2 Celcius per century. And the adjustment that they made was over two degrees per century � when those guys �adjust�, they don�t mess around. And the adjustment is an odd shape, with the adjustment first going stepwise, then climbing roughly to stop at 2.4C.

Okay, now it's going to get slightly arcane -- and I'm going to be kind of guessing here, because I'm not sure what this guy is saying. But I think this is it.

These guys do a process called "homogenization," right? What that means is they cast about for nearby stations, then average those, and then compare the average of nearby stations to the station in question, and, if they feel like it (if they think it "needs" it), they adjust the numbers of the target station to be closer to the average of the other, nearby stations.

Ehhh... I'm already sort of bothered that they doing that, and deciding when to adjust based on pure judgment. There is no actual science here -- this is judgment. If a station looks like it's a bit of an outlier, that it deviates from the trends of nearby stations, they adjust. But note that is a guess; they are guessing it's an outlier, a wildcard, and needs to be "massaged" closer to nearby stations.

You can also see they're doing a lot of massaging. Note that the mere adjustments they did in the above chart were far bigger than the actual increase in temperature. (In fact, there was no increase in actual temperature, except for the adjustments.)

Let's face it: There is a lot of human judgment going on here, and we have a strong suspicion about which direction that human judgment is taking us in. Colder long ago, hotter now.

Okay, so here is the next chart, which is worse. I am a bit baffled as to precisely what this chart is; but I think (best guess!) this is one of the three station records that together make up the chart above. The chart above is three real station records, averaged together, and then "homogenized" with stations from further away.

This is a single station that makes up that record (I think). Notice the outright huge adjudgments:

Wow. The actual record shows a decline overall, with lower temperatures now than 100 years ago, but the slightest little uptick near the end. The "adjusted" numbers now show higher temperatures now than ever before, with a huge increase at the end -- as the chart notes, there is now a six full degree C increase over a century, all thanks to "adjustments."

All thanks to adjustments.

Back to Eschenbeck:

Yikes again, double yikes! What on earth justifies that adjustment? How can they do that? We have five different records covering Darwin from 1941 on. They all agree almost exactly. Why adjust them at all? They�ve just added a huge artificial totally imaginary trend to the last half of the raw data! Now it looks like the IPCC diagram in Figure 1, all right � but a six degree per century trend? And in the shape of a regular stepped pyramid climbing to heaven? What�s up with that?

Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style � they are indisputable evidence that the �homogenized� data has been changed to fit someone�s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming.

One thing is clear from this. People who say that �Climategate was only about scientists behaving badly, but the data is OK� are wrong. At least one part of the data is bad, too. The Smoking Gun for that statement is at Darwin Zero.

So once again, I�m left with an unsolved mystery. How and why did the GHCN �adjust� Darwin�s historical temperature to show radical warming? Why did they adjust it stepwise? Do Phil Jones and the CRU folks use the �adjusted� or the raw GHCN dataset? My guess is the adjusted one since it shows warming, but of course we still don�t know � because despite all of this, the CRU still hasn�t released the list of data that they actually use, just the station list.

Another odd fact, the GHCN adjusted Station 1 to match Darwin Zero�s strange adjustment, but they left Station 2 (which covers much of the same period, and as per Fig. 5 is in excellent agreement with Station Zero and Station 1) totally untouched. They only homogenized two of the three. Then they averaged them.

That way, you get an average that looks kinda real, I guess, it �hides the decline�.

Oh, and for what it�s worth, care to know the way that GISS deals with this problem? Well, they only use the Darwin data after 1963, a fine way of neatly avoiding the question � and also a fine way to throw away all of the inconveniently colder data prior to 1941. It�s likely a better choice than the GHCN monstrosity, but it�s a hard one to justify.

Now, back to something I said would be interesting, and damn, I'm right again: The psychological journey from global warming cultist to global warming agnostic.

Megan McArdle, who is too nice and too establishment and too gosh-darn pro-science to doubt the integrity of these men who are scientists (and they have the laminates to prove it!), was previously seen poo-poohing this whole mess. And then she allowed, gee, maybe, who knows, maybe it would sort of be a good idea to be transparent about raw data and "adjustments" and so maybe other people could, I don't know, independently reproduce the findings?

Anyway, her. She's having a bit of a crisis of faith.

She offers this interesting story from Richard Feynman about how scientists trick themselves:

We have learned a lot from experience about how to handle some of the ways we fool ourselves. One example: Millikan measured the charge on an electron by an experiment with falling oil drops, and got an answer which we now know not to be quite right. It's a little bit off, because he had the incorrect value for the viscosity of air. It's interesting to look at the history of measurements of the charge of the electron, after Millikan. If you plot them as a function of time, you find that one is a little bigger than Millikan's, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, until finally they settle down to a number which is higher.

Why didn't they discover that the new number was higher right away? It's a thing that scientists are ashamed of--this history--because it's apparent that people did things like this: When they got a number that was too high above Millikan's, they thought something must be wrong--and they would look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a number closer to Millikan's value they didn't look so hard. And so they eliminated the numbers that were too far off, and did other things like that.

We've learned those tricks nowadays, and now we don't have that kind of a disease. But this long history of learning how not to fool ourselves--of having utter scientific integrity--is, I'm sorry to say, something that we haven't specifically included in any particular course that I know of. We just hope you've caught on by osmosis.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you've not fooled yourself, it's easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that.

Pretty obvious, but still, interesting: Scientists do what biased journalists do. When a journalist doesn't like a story, he fact-checks it to death, because he doesn't believe a word of it, and eventually... doesn't publish anything, because it's been sitting around being fact-checked for three months and he's already been scooped by everyone anyway.

When he likes a story, and the story comports with his pre-existing sense of how the world works and who the heroes and who the villains in it are, well, let's say that fact-checking process doesn't take so very long, because the story already looks good and agrees with generally accepted liberal reality; in other words, the story is almost self-verifying. It proves its truthfulness by simply being such a beautiful expression of Truth.

And so in science: Wait, that number disagrees with our theory. That can't be right. Can we adjust it? Sure can -- and how! And now it looks right. We're done!

Megan McArdle's faith seems to have been shaken from "they wouldn't do this" to the much weaker position "they wouldn't do this... consciously."

That is the actual worrying question about CRU, and GISS, and the other scientists working on paleoclimate reconstruction: that they may all be calibrating their findings to each other. That when you get a number that looks like CRU, you don't look so hard to figure out whether it's incorrect as you do when you get a number that doesn't look like CRU--and maybe you adjust the numbers you have to look more like the other "known" datasets. There is always a way to find what you're expecting to find if you look hard enough.

She'll get there. She'll get there.

I don't mind if she's parodizing my position into firm belief they were deliberately faking numbers all along. As I've said in comments, I suspect it was much more like this Milliken thing, picking from any number of possible adjustments and statistical techniques the adjustments and techniques that got you closest to what you thought had to be the right number. Not so much deliberately falsifying stuff.

Well, not usually. Sometimes, sure. Gotta beat down those "denialists," by hook or by crook.

But I've long believed in this sort of fooling-yourself method of dishonesty. Look, let's say I ask you to either pull the plug on a brain dead invalid, or keep the brain dead invalid alive. I now ask you to go down to the library and/or church and do some serious study about what life really is, what are the limits of acceptable medical intervention, etc., etc.

Oh, and one thing: If you pull the plug -- your decision, but if you do -- I will give you one million dollars as a fee, to cover the hardship of making such a consequential and wrenching decision. Go study and make your decision.

You will probably study. And, unless you are a saint, you will come back with one answer: Pull the plug.

And not because you decided, muah-hah-hah-hah, that you just wanted the million dollar fee and you could give a crap about the ethics. No, unless you are a saint, I guarantee you will have done your studying, and done your thinking, and done your moral weighing, and at the end convinced yourself, fully and utterly, that pulling the plug is the right thing to do, damnit!

I could put you on a lie detector and I'm 99% sure you'd pass. You'd be telling the truth -- or your version of it.

People have this crazy way of usually deciding that what's generally best for the world and what's best for them, specifically coincide in the most sublime and wonderful ways!

What does proving global warming get you? Money, prestige, advancements, and not to be too vulgar about it -- sex. Let's face it, a hot shot scientist jetting off to Copenhagen to give Big Important Presentations is going to do well with the ladies. (Especially Copenhagen 's ladies of the night.)

What does undermining global warming get you? Let's see: No money, except for "funding from the oil lobbies," except as a PR move the oil companies are all funding the global warming alarmists too!, so, um, you don't get the money after all. You also don't get prestige -- we'll change the standards of peer-review before we allow you to get published -- and you also won't get promoted. In fact, you might just get fired, as a long-time BBC nature-science presenter was for refusing to go along with global warming.

And sex? Well, I hope you'e already married, and furthermore, married to one of the minority of women who disbelieves in global warming. Because otherwise, you're going to have a Little Ice Age on the romance-front.

So I'm not exactly surprised that with a huge pile of incentives to prove global warming, and some nasty disincentives to try to disprove it, the "clear weight of the evidence" has fallen on one side.

So no, Megan, all these "crazies" who doubted this crap for years were not believing that there was always this deliberate determination to fudge data. (Although, as we see from the CRU letters, that does happen.) We tended to think it was usually more "subtle," as you put it, too.

But if you need that daylight between us -- if you need a psychological crutch that tells you I'm not like those crazies; I believe something different than them; maybe I'm halfway between the lunatic-but-correct crazies and the noble-but-wrong scientists -- fine, I'll be that for you.

I always thought they were twisting their black-waxed mustaches as they were deliberately cooking the books.

Now, you can disagree with me, and call me a crazy, as you stake out your own safe position that is far enough from mine to not be crazy but close enough to the truth to not be wrong.

I'll be that for ya. The guy you can point to and say "Well, I don't trust these guys any more, but I'm not a crazy like that guy."

Baby steps, baby steps.

Addendum: I think now there actually is an incentive to disprove or undermine global warming, and scientists are on notice that this is likely low-hanging fruit. In other words, there's much more incentive to try something when you have a pretty good idea it will be successful.

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Homogenization is like gravity, or my passionate love for pork rinds. It exists.

Posted by: Al Gore, High Priestess of Gaia at December 10, 2009 06:05 AM (j6H6o)

2 The Feynman bit is from his great speech on Cargo Cult Science-- which is the perfect term for AGW & contemporary "climate science" in general. (Feynman spells out better than anyone precisely why this stuff, especially in light of Climategate, is the very *antithesis* of science. Read the whole thing.)

Posted by: lael at December 10, 2009 06:10 AM (sPS/J)

3 I like my milk homogenized, not my science. This is truly stunning. I try to live my life without consciously thinking or perpetually worrying about things like Woody Allen on crank. But these things can turn one into a what I would describe from outward appearances as a paranoid person. Couple all this with what our government is now doing TO us and we've got trouble in River City.

Science is not supposed to be like this - unless it's from the labs of Dr. Mengele. This shit is now truly insidious. As Ace notes towards the end, re Megan McArdle, "baby steps." But while the rest of the world take baby steps, these bastards are taking giant leaps and stomping on us in their wake.

STOP. THIS. NOW.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at December 10, 2009 06:13 AM (9Cooa)

4 Nice work, Mr. Ace.

So, Al Gore et al, point to the phenomena of melting polar ice caps and they say that the temperature models are ultimately only a secondary part of their argument -- the real thing is that regardless of what is happening globally, if a climate shift is occurring locally in the polar regions -- and that is what, apparently, the various melting icebergs and whatnot suggest -- that would be enough to end the world as we know it. Any good debunkings out there of the "ice caps are melting!" argument?

Posted by: Robert_Paulson at December 10, 2009 06:18 AM (+deq6)

5 Here's something relevant to how you can average together declining trends and make it an increasing trend:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125970744553071829.html

Am going to do a post on powip.com on it in a few days.

The trick is to change the weights in the average - not all stations are created equal. [similar to how they did the tree ring thing, and got the results from one tree to skew the entire rest of the sample... the massage amplified the effect]

This is something that actuaries have to look out for, and we're not even trying to bias results. We know that differing base rates can cause really weird results.

Posted by: meep at December 10, 2009 06:22 AM (Jw4eT)

6 No homo, but man these proofs of climate change trickery -- on the entire world -- are giving me a throbbing woody that needs instant relief, no gender questions asked.

Now can someone please stop these nuts from destroying the world economy while we're much nearer the brink of a certainly devestating ice age than we are man-made (probably more helpful than otherwise) "global warming"?

In other news, I'm sitting opposite a 28-year old female Christian virgin, a tall blonde elementary school teacher marking math exams whom I'm staying with in Australia, and I really resent Christianity right now for making virginity and chastity "cool".

Posted by: Christoph at December 10, 2009 06:25 AM (bFR0U)

7 Richard Feynman is one of the clearest thinking people (scientist or otherwise) I have ever read. My children have even read most of his books (because I made them). "Six Easy Pieces" was one of my daughter's bed-time stories when she was 7, and she still remembers much ofit twelve years later.
Read some Feynman people as he will fine-tune your B.S. detector in ways you never dreamed possible.
Hit your local library and/or Amazon. If you are not a reader, grab the audio book versions, they are just as good.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at December 10, 2009 06:26 AM (F09Uo)

8 "Richard Feynman is one of the clearest thinking people (scientist or otherwise)..."

Ditto that.

I read one of his books when I was a teenager and too young to understand it (oh, I mostly got the physics as well as one could, but the deeper insights into people would have slipped entirely by me).

On YouTube, one can find some great long interviews with this man. I doubt you'd find many better ways to spend an hour.

Posted by: Christoph at December 10, 2009 06:30 AM (bFR0U)

9

#3 - Just read the Feynman speech referenced by someone else and it is eerily resonant with the idiocy going on with AGW. Thanks for posting it. A must-read.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at December 10, 2009 06:32 AM (9Cooa)

10 I'm going for a new term, you guys are welcome to give me some feedback:
"pseudo-scientist nature deniers" or
"pseudo-scientist natural cycle skeptics"
Which do you think is more apt?

Posted by: 141 Driver at December 10, 2009 06:34 AM (JFNQ7)

11
Defying a consensus might make me look foolish.

Posted by: wise words from Olympia Snowe at December 10, 2009 06:37 AM (5vvtw)

12 Awesome post. Confirmation bias. But you missed one major psychological factor, here: the desire to be heroes.

It's a matter of vanity that every generation believes that it lives in the most pivotal of historical times. Naturally, the media pander to the delusion, because the media also want to be seen as heroic. And those in almost every branch of academia believe their particular field to be of key importance, and cannot understand why others don't.

The insanity of literary studies, for example, is driven by its desire for relevance. If you believe that everyone's mentality is conditioned by language, that reality is constructed by it and that it has no existence outside of language (though you may own a cat or other sweet house parasite that seems to navigate perfectly well without it), and reality is somehow disappointing (as it inevitably is, even if you're tenured), then by golly, you'd better set about reforming the world by proving to students that it's a massive conspiracy of phalluses.

That's heroic, you see.

Posted by: Dan Collins at December 10, 2009 06:41 AM (XTREl)

13
so, it was the Jews, all along?

Posted by: Ron Paul at December 10, 2009 06:47 AM (5vvtw)

14 I have worked with and employed dozens of scientists and this type of behavior is not at all unusual, especially in fields that are wholly dependent on government funding and which do not have a vital competitive hypothesis. [My experience was commercial and I had to deal with them after they stopped grant whoring and tried to be productive.]

And Ace is spot on -- they convince themselves that what they are doing is right. First they convince themselves that their conclusions are right in spite of the data, and then they convince themselves that changing the data is an honorable, ethical imperative. Finally they attack any who doubt their own moral superiority.

Posted by: nine coconuts at December 10, 2009 06:49 AM (DHNp4)

15 This is all about money and power, you think these folks are going to let facts get in the way of money and power?

EPA now has the power (not really) but that's what congress is going to tell you so when they pass cap trade they can use them as the scapegoat for why they just had to do this or the big bad EPA would have destroyed business.

You think things are bad now, folks you aint seen nothing yet.

Posted by: Mark at December 10, 2009 06:49 AM (2z8ZT)

16 That Feynmann story reminded me of something I read years ago from the immortal Michael Crichton, in his novel "The Andromeda Strain". He referred to something called "The Rule of 48". Seems that years ago a group of scientists were working on the human chromosome, and had determined that there were 48 of them. They even had the pictures to prove it.

Then another scientist comes along and says, no, there are only 46 human chromosomes. And he has the pictures to prove it, too. Not only that, he took the pictures that the first bunch had, and there were only 46 there as well.

The corollary to the "Rule of 48" was that "All Scientists Are Blind". Hilarity ensued.

However, in this situation (the phony "AGW"), it's even worse. Not only were the scientists "blind", they deliberately doctored their data for political reasons. And Ace's reference to how the media "fact checks" (or doesn't) their stories is also telling, given the amount of utter bullshit the public has been subjected to over the past several years on this subject.

An excellent case in point is how many times the E-vil BOOOSH was excoriated in the media for his "refusal" to sign the Kyoto treaty. But what no one was told by the media was that there was no need for Bush to sign it, as Clinton already had (or more precisely, he had some DoS flunky go to Brazil and sign it for him). Nor does hardly anyone know about that 95-0 Senate vote that told Clinton Kyoto would be DOA if he sent it to them for ratification.

It's bad enough the so-called scientists are doctoring their data to get the "desired" results, but the State Run Media is blatantly covering up their misdeeds. How do you fight something like that?

Posted by: Cave Bear at December 10, 2009 06:55 AM (TsnSg)

17
Scientist 'Pressured' to Defend Climate Research
Britain's Met Office has embarked on an urgent exercise to bolster the reputation of climate-change science after the furor over leaked e-mails, referred to as "Climate-gate."

More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the "professional integrity" of global warming research. They were responding to a round-robin request from the Met Office, which has spent four days collecting signatures. The initiative is a sign of how worried it is that e-mails stolen from the University of East Anglia are fueling skepticism about man-made global warming at a critical moment in talks on carbon emissions.

One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work. The Met Office admitted that many of the signatories did not work on climate change.
http://tinyurl.com/yfxllsc

Posted by: Robert_Paulson at December 10, 2009 06:55 AM (+deq6)

18 It delights me to see all of our dear Progressive-Commie friends, who've been bleating for years about how conservative types are all so anti-science, being revealed as dupes trapped an anti-scientific cult faith.

Posted by: Chainsaw Chimp at December 10, 2009 06:59 AM (j6H6o)

19 Don't forget the peer pressure in this little clique, either. The CRU emails show the 'stone the heretic!' mentality that runs the show. You think there's a 'free exchange of ideas' in that atmosphere, letting adjustments be done dispassionately?

Hell, no. It's conform or get a stoning, or else keep your mouth shut, so if you show something other than what the other guy shows, you try to reconcile it to the already-established position.

If the science is good, why is the burning of heretics neccessary? Indeed, why would there be so many heretics to burn?

Posted by: nickless at December 10, 2009 07:00 AM (MMC8r)

20 When is the last time Megan McArdle has been right about anything?

Posted by: dan in michigan at December 10, 2009 07:02 AM (88w67)

21 BTW - I love a flaming skull in the morning.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at December 10, 2009 07:02 AM (9Cooa)

22 Ace, like the skull, is on fire.

Posted by: nikkolai at December 10, 2009 07:09 AM (U0lNn)

23 "The initiative is a sign of how worried it is that e-mails stolen from
the University of East Anglia are fueling skepticism about man-made
global warming at a critical moment in talks on carbon emissions."

And this is another thing. "Stolen emails"? I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong here, but this part of the mess sounds a lot more like a "data dump" done by someone on the inside, as it included not only the emails, but computer code and some of the datasets as well.

Gotta love that media integrity...

Posted by: Cave Bear at December 10, 2009 07:09 AM (TsnSg)

24 Survey to determine the sustainability of the funky western civilization

4.What does Cap and Trade mean to you:
a.That CO2 poison gas will be reduced in the atmosphere.
b.It�s about balance of power and world domination.

Question four just keeps rearing it's ugly head.

Posted by: sTevo at December 10, 2009 07:09 AM (eA3tl)

25 I don't know if I'm comfortable knowing that Ace is up and moving around while I'm still in bed sleeping.

Posted by: Mortis at December 10, 2009 07:15 AM (hA5JK)

26 Bravo, Ace!

The inconvenient truth: All we are saying is give empirical science a chance.

Al The Ludicrous Denier, high priest of Baal, the profit of fraud, is condemned by the nature of reality check.

Account for ALL the evidence according to strict rules that do not permit alteration of the record.

/Some folks, upon disillusionment, shop for the next cult to join. Recall Obama's first kiddie campaign song: "We're gonna change it, and rearrange it. Obama's gonna save the world." The latest from the White House is that Obama would not have chosen the Nobel Peace Prize for himself. Now there goes Audacious Atrocity on record, as if it were Obama's to award himself.

Posted by: maverick muse at December 10, 2009 07:16 AM (+CLh/)

27 This AGW thing shines a light on one very important fact: the World is riddled with people and organizations that fundamentally are fake and destructive.

The U.N., the MSM, think tanks, science organizations, governments, political parties.

Their common cause is not ours and they pretend to be something they clearly are not.

This can not endure.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 07:18 AM (S5N2f)

28 I hate lazy comment spammers.

Can't you at least work it into a sentence or something? Like now that the AGW bubble is about to burst, Christian Louboutin can get on with increasing production of their discounted fine heel shoes.

Posted by: Christoph at December 10, 2009 07:25 AM (bFR0U)

29 An example to ponder --
Assume two dendrologists, (tree experts.) Lets call them Boffo and Buffo. Both apply for a grant to study how tree rings can be used to measure historical climate.
Boffo spends a year making measurements and analyzing data and concludes that tree ring growth is fatally flawed as a temperature proxy because of an indeterminate correlation between growth and temperature, and a survivor bias that causes rapid growth after any event which damages surrounding trees, creating spurious steps in the data.
Buffo does the same measurements and analysis and concludes that tree rings are a wonderful temperature proxy, but only after you apply cryptic mathematical "corrections" to the data. Buffo is now a dendroclimatologist. Buffo does not quite understand that corrections, as a grad student did most of the programming and frankly hes too scared to show his ignorance but he knows he is right.

Boffo goes back to his position at an Ag school and helps out the local scout troop with their tree identification merit badges.

Buffo continues to get grants studying the climate record, and spends his time jetting to conferences and consulting governments on climate policy.

Survival of the fittest. Darwin would cry.

Posted by: nine coconuts at December 10, 2009 07:34 AM (DHNp4)

30 Dr. Ace:A "friend of mine" was wondering if these adjustments mightincrease the length ofhis cock.

Posted by: scrood at December 10, 2009 07:35 AM (V9OIi)

31
When the world�s elite gather in mass

And party themselves on their ass

It�s truly a crime

And all on your dime

While chains for our slavery they cast

They couldn�t do math, it�s too tuff

So they just went and made this shit up

And now they�re exposed

Their agenda is hosed

But is it now wounded enough?

You must resist loudly with verve

And not let them rattle your nerve

The ball�s in our court

But it�s a blood sport

Our freedoms we�ll fight to preserve

Posted by: Beto at December 10, 2009 07:45 AM (+CLh/)

32 Wow, what a good way to get more new drugs on the market.

We'll just "adjust" our toxicology data (ahem, using sound Scientific Principles, of course) to something that fits the projected company earnings curve.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 07:46 AM (S5N2f)

33 Here is what the beautiful people are having tonight at Phil Jones dojo. No, not humble pie:

Squid ravioli in lemon grass broth, goat cheese profiteroles and arugula Caesar salad, swordfish meatloaf with onion marmalade, rare roasted partridge breast in raspberry coulis with a sorrel timbale and, of course, grilled free-range rabbit with herbed french fries.

Then free hookers.

We can't save the world on an empty stomach.

Posted by: Phil f'in Jones at December 10, 2009 07:49 AM (SwkdU)

34 Yes, baby steps until Megan McArdle realizes the books are being cooked due to "confirmation bias".

Then, when that's done, more baby steps until Megan and Ace both stop giving these frauds the benefit of the doubt, and realize that this will never end until they do so. Until they realize that the phrase "never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by stupidity" is utterly freaking arbitrary, and in fact the exact opposite is just as likely to be true, and in this case, it is.

The Long March Through The Institutions. Gramsci. Alinsky. Remember that, and them? If you don't believe those are the driving forces in our culture right now, you're utterly blind. If you don't believe the global warming hoax is a direct, intentional and malicious implementation of that, well... baby steps.

Qwinn

Posted by: Qwinn at December 10, 2009 07:52 AM (SxA2Q)

35 There are a couple of things at work here. Statistically, if Darwin didn't give similar temps to stations near it, you would wonder why. Is is the station itself? Is it the location, something freakish about the location that causes the mis-alignment of temps?

Secondly, when things don't look like a normal distribution, statisticians will "force" it into a normal distribution. This changes certain parameters-but you publish those so everyone knows that you forced the distribution. A Z score might be out of whack or something.

Third, there is the human condition of "anchoring" going on. Just like the scientists that couldn't believe the electron experiment (they anchored on the too low of value)-global warming scientists have anchored on too high a temp because of faulty data in the first place.

To make an argument to beat them-you point out the folly of their ways. But cage it with this-of course we want to produce energy and live our lives in the "greenest" way possible. But we don't want to destroy our economies in the process.

Posted by: jeff at December 10, 2009 07:54 AM (Sx9Qk)

36 Ace -- how do your gay friends feel about you saying that "bad science" = "homo"? I know that mine probably wouldn't be that fond of it. They're liberals, though, so I'm sure they're not reading here. Nothing to be worried about.

I wish someone would put a stop to these kinds of cheap shots against people like homosexuals. I wish someone would speak up.

Posted by: mr.frakypants at December 10, 2009 07:54 AM (PonvG)

37 Real scientists see their pet hypotheses shot down in flames everyday.

Real scientists look at the deadly data and say, "Oh, well. My idea was wrong."

AGW cultists in lab coats, not so much.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 07:56 AM (S5N2f)

38 Hmmm, governments are happy to provide funding and other support to "research" that ultimately leads to massive tax increases and control over all aspects of our lives.

Greedy controls freaks are eager to do the "research".

Elitist organizations that suckle off government power and hegemony such as the MSM are more than happy to promote this "research".

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 08:01 AM (S5N2f)

39 Ace quoting my ultimate hero Richard Feynman! Things got back to normal much quicker than I figured. Keep hammering the Warmists, particularly Michael Mann, Penn State's embarrassment.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at December 10, 2009 08:02 AM (ympAm)

40 Bravo, Ace! This subject - and these most recent results - need to be spread far and wide to as many folks as possible! Putting it here on AoS - and adding your most-excellent writing style and premier snarkage into the mix - guarantees wide coverage!

Posted by: Steamboat McGoo at December 10, 2009 08:10 AM (/cH23)

41 Only one little flaming skull for that? The flaming skull for this should be so big that the left side of it is visible on the right side of HotAir.com!

Posted by: ParisParamus at December 10, 2009 08:11 AM (cd0d9)

42 I got billions of dollars just sittin' here for some young genius who can give me a reason to take more power and control....You wanna be on the bus, or under it?

Posted by: Nameless Politician at December 10, 2009 08:12 AM (MMC8r)

43 The science is settled, then.

Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at December 10, 2009 08:12 AM (CZI81)

44 Let's just say that Michael Mann discovered early in his career that no one was particularly interested in his "pool stick" reconstruction of historic global temperatures...

Posted by: Planet Moron at December 10, 2009 08:13 AM (+ICpS)

45 BTW - the leaked (I won't say hacked because it has not been demonstrated that hacking was involved) emails only document "intent". It was always the computer programs and data that were in question. They demonstrate fraudulent "acts", not just intent. Hence all the (refused) FOI requests for the code from McIntyre et al.

And - hence - the researchers adamant refusal to release them: ya can't fudge program source code! Check out the "ValAdj()" function in some of the programs! It adds (multiplies, actually) that "adjustment" curve into the data almost perfectly.

Posted by: Steamboat McGoo at December 10, 2009 08:16 AM (/cH23)

46 Dammit. I was really rooting for warming.

Posted by: toby928 at December 10, 2009 08:16 AM (PD1tk)

47 I wonder if you could just as easily use the Darwin station to homogenize one of the nearby stations down? Do we have the data from those stations? We could fabricate some pretty nifty AGC (Anthro Global Cooling) graphs...or as the CRU scientists call it, "do some science."

Posted by: iDoc at December 10, 2009 08:17 AM (fCfVS)

48 The most important thing to come out of all the leaked material, how it was done ... Now we know, we can expose the entire fraud.

Yep --- Both GISS and CRU get their raw data from the GHCN. So, right out of
the box, these "independent" measurements which supposedly confirm each
other are not looking very independent at all.
And then all supply their own version of the secret fudge to make the results appear similar but not identical. So as Eschenbach states in his reconstruction of the fraud, start with the GHCN and have at. Cook your own fake data from there, why do you need the IPCC do it for you.

It's not science, it's a haox.

Posted by: bill-tb at December 10, 2009 08:18 AM (y+QfZ)

49 Survival of the fittest. Darwin would cry.


Posted by: nine coconuts

Al Gore, President of the Planet by Green authoritarianism, college flunk-out
Potus Ponzi Obama, UN Security Chairman, no college transcripts
Lobotomy Scam Artist Laureates
Our government, national and global, IS organized crime.

You must resist loudly with verve
And not let them rattle your nerve
The ball�s in our court
But it�s a blood sport
Our freedoms we�ll fight to preserve--Beto

Posted by: maverick muse at December 10, 2009 08:20 AM (+CLh/)

50 Both GISS and CRU get their raw data from the GHCN. So, right out of
the box, these "independent" measurements which supposedly confirm each
other are not looking very independent at all.

Green Newspeak, independence means dependence. It takes a village.

Posted by: maverick muse at December 10, 2009 08:22 AM (+CLh/)

51 Apropos Green Pasteurized Homogenization requires the enforced application of unnaturally high temperatures to kill any living organisms while amalgamating all of the constituent elements, readying the product for public consumption while rumoring a longer shelf life as a marketing gimmick.

Posted by: maverick muse at December 10, 2009 08:33 AM (+CLh/)

52 re: the Feynman story: Or as Douglas Adams once put it: the first rule of science is to not fool yourself ... and you are the easiest person for you to fool.

And a side note: Ace, don't you think that writing something like I don't know, but I know it's not science -- you can't spell homogenization without "homo", scant days after a major brouhaha about juvenile and unfunny bigoted 'jokes' in comments, is a bit over the top?

Posted by: wolfwalker at December 10, 2009 08:36 AM (br8fl)

53 From having been there, I'll add the following observation:

It usually takes over a decade of hard work to become a "scientist" (ie a grant-earning publisher of papers).

Once you're there, if you don't earn grants, your career is OVER. Basic science research is expensive, it almost never generates its own revenues, and virtually nobody is independently wealthy enough to conduct it on their own dime. Its publish or perish.

Science also doesn't reward the unorthodox with grants. When you are writing grants, your reputation DOES matter. Saying the orthodoxy is wrong (ie the ones who issue the grant money and peer review the papers), doesn't tend to lead to grant receipt.

In short, there is tremendous economic and professional incentive for scientists NOT to step too far away from "consensus", even if the consensus is wrong.



In short, in many areas, there is tremendous economic pressure

Posted by: looking closely at December 10, 2009 08:36 AM (6Q9g2)

54 This is a helluva summary followed by a very articulate explanation. Ace, I don't want you to get too big a head, but sometimes your insights are perceptive enough and well presented to the point that it's a little scary. Like, let's hope this guy doesn't decide to go rogue and create a Thompson Harmonizerwhile he's not working on his blog.
Seriously great post. But if you start feeling too good about yourself and need a dash of cold water, you can always check back to the comments on the huge thread about jokes last night.

Posted by: RM at December 10, 2009 08:38 AM (1kwr2)

55 If a station looks like it's a bit of an outlier, that it deviates from the trends of nearby stations, they adjust.

This process of discarding outliers is more of a central problem than most people (and most scientists) think.

It's actually a huge deal. Complex systems exhibit distributions that are scale invariant because the processes in a complex system are stochastic. The output of a complex system follows a power law curve, like Zeta distributions, Zipf-Mandelbrot, Pareto, etc. They are not linear.

The rare, high-magnitude events are critically important! For example, every now and then (i.e., every 100 million years), you get a volcano that spews 1000x more ash and lava than the next largest one.

Or, a freak wave that is 800x larger than a normal swell travels across the ocean that's big enough to swallow an oil tanker, then disappears.

Or a flood hits one year that alters the shape of a continent, and nothing like it happens for a billion years.

Or one author will sell 100 million copies, more than 10x the next best-selling author. Or one movie will make $500 million, and end up subsidizing the other 90% of movies that break even or lose money.

These are outliers. They produce the scale-invariant distribution curves that can be found just about everywhere in nature, in economies, AND IN THE FUCKING WEATHER. Outliers are also responsible for producing the emergent structures that scientists are typically interested in the first place.

What do scientists do with outliers? They throw them out. They disregard them. But they contain all the valuable information! Scientists always seem to focus on the norm, the averages, because the outliers are too hard to accommodate into their theory.

This is one of the reasons that climate prediction models are total bullshit, always have been, and always will be, even if the data were perfect. The fact that the data has been faked is just icing on the shit-cake they've been serving us for a few years.

Posted by: Phinn at December 10, 2009 08:40 AM (GiUTT)

56 Higher temperatures cause more water to evaporate from the oceans, so there is more water vapour in the air that can condense to rain - or to snow, close to the polar regions. So some think the polar ice caps might grow thicker as the world warms, since more snow will fall and be compacted to ice.

Posted by: VELVET AMBITION at December 10, 2009 08:42 AM (xLMtq)

57 Denier I say!!!

Posted by: Charles Johnson at December 10, 2009 08:43 AM (i0WE5)

58 As someone who has been a full blown "denialist" for at least 3 years, I am so very happy that the greatest fraud perpetrated on the American people in the last 50-100 years is finally splitting down it's poorly sewn but well hidden seams. It is a lie and a tool for global socislists, and nothing more.

Posted by: maddogg at December 10, 2009 08:44 AM (OlN4e)

59 J. J. Sefton - right idea, wrong analogy. While Dr. Mengele unarguably had his empathy towards other humans hard-wired to a rheostat, he believed in 'hard' science. While he did use 'untermenschen' as lab rats, he never biased his data, nor 'faked' the results of his tests and experiments, however horrific his methods were.

|||||||

'Homogenized' data is FAKED data. Period. Full stop.

We're dealing with an excess of civility here. This is full-frontal fraud, nothing less.

The results shown in those graphs above were not the results of 'uncalibrated' instrumentation, nor insufficient data sampling [both a valid reason for 'error'].

I know how science in a lab works: a 'verified' method + calibrated instrument + precise sampling = [reproducible] results. That means my results matches Dr. X's results [within 'x' number of SD's [standard deviation].

If I can't repeat the results, and the 'method' is not at fault, then either the instruments, or the samples are 'bad'.

If there are no problems with any of the above factors, then the only other possibility is that the analyst [me or whomever] screwed up.

When things get to that point, then the question asked is: was there an 'honest' or a 'dishonest' error? Accidentally plugging in the wrong number isn't 'cause' for termination, plugging in 'imaginary' numbers is.

At that point, the 'boss' either [A] catches the error, or get's 'successfully' BS'd into believing the result is 'good', or [C] he knows the error is present and lets it 'slide'.

Anybody care to guess which category the 'AGW consensus falls into?

Posted by: CPT. Charles at December 10, 2009 08:45 AM (lYKj1)

60 All this talk of golbal cooling brings me back to 1975


http://tiny.cc/JCSYe

Posted by: Hedgehog at December 10, 2009 08:47 AM (oQIfB)

61 63,

That is called a negative feedback.

It is the kind of thing AGW cultists erase, ignore, and dismiss everyday.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 08:47 AM (mDY9f)

62 Seriously though, this is bad news. I was looking forward to four to six more weeks of jeans and short sleeve weather in Pennsylvania per year. I can haz global warming plz?

Posted by: mr.frakypants at December 10, 2009 08:47 AM (PonvG)

63 SHE SCIENCED ME WITH BLINDNESS

Posted by: ParisParamus at December 10, 2009 08:52 AM (cd0d9)

64 AGW can be traced back to a small group of cavemen who gathered together to discuss a problem.

It seems another caveman, Larry, was teaching everyone the secret of the throwing stick.

The Clan of Five was upset about this. If everyone could make and use a throwing stick the Clan of Five wouldn't be getting any extra food and nookie anymore.

Something had to be done about Larry.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 08:55 AM (mDY9f)

65 I like and appreciate thread like this. Threads where 50 people spend 2000+ comments airing their concerns of what they may or may not consider offensive...not so much.

Posted by: maddogg at December 10, 2009 08:56 AM (OlN4e)

66 So if we all vote that gravity doesn't exist, can we have flying cars?

At least we could get major funding for them.

Posted by: bill at December 10, 2009 08:58 AM (nUbAO)

67 Obama said this morning (in his lecture to the world), even his military leaders are calling for action on global warming, to keep the peace.

I'd like to see those names.

Posted by: bill at December 10, 2009 09:02 AM (nUbAO)

68 Megan McArdle needs to stop the kabuki dance and just admit she got flim-flammed.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at December 10, 2009 09:03 AM (wgLRl)

69 Step on the ice and tell me my data is bad!
You wanna go, pretty boy?

Posted by: Eric Godard at December 10, 2009 09:04 AM (1Iiqg)

70 Think it's all clear now. But let's wait for Queeg to way in concerning the strawberries.

Posted by: nocce sacco at December 10, 2009 09:04 AM (Qc93O)

71 It's the stairway to liberal heaven! Brings tears to a dirty hippy's eyes.
Oh, my fellow poet Homer said to remind you to quit trying to top his verbosity. So unseemly.

Posted by: Rober Plant at December 10, 2009 09:04 AM (gbCNS)

72 I like this actile and thank you for your let me to read this page .The adjustments, you know, that may be a good thing or may be not.
tiffany silvertiffany jewelry

Posted by: tiffany silver at December 10, 2009 09:05 AM (4JAFH)

73 I guess we are lucky that statistics and math don't require enormous research budgets to duplicate experiments, check results, etc. Will Canada, who is on the warmists shit list over tar sands, nominate McIntrye for a Nobel prize.

Posted by: Jean at December 10, 2009 09:09 AM (1bQOq)

74 74 Obama said this morning (in his lecture to the world), even his military leaders are calling for action on global warming, to keep the peace.I'd like to see those names.
Actually that's sort of true...though it's likely those guys are relying on the veracity of the same bunch of conmen who have been lying to the rest of us.
1. If Globaloney "consensus" was anything close to reality, it would make sense for the military to plan for it.
2. If the civilian authority, i.e. the Precedent and the SECDEF call something a threat, you at least pay it some lip service.
3. In the military, as in other professions, some peopleare just whores and brown nosers.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at December 10, 2009 09:09 AM (wgLRl)

75 Hey this sounds like the Tigar Woods charade.

Posted by: lions at December 10, 2009 09:10 AM (Ip9OL)

76 Looks like "Tiffany Silver" has been taking posting lessons from laptop battery guy.

[Tiffany Silver sounds like a porn name, doesn't it?]

Posted by: AngelEm at December 10, 2009 09:15 AM (HCxZ0)

77 I actually thought "you can't spell homogenization without 'homo'" was a hilariously self-depreciating meta-joke. But YMMV.

Posted by: Stealth Gay Academic Conservative at December 10, 2009 09:16 AM (S2uKr)

78 [Tiffany Silver sounds like a porn name, doesn't it?]
Did you get her number for me, man?

Posted by: Tiger Woods at December 10, 2009 09:21 AM (1Iiqg)

79 You can tell I've been at the pub too long when I can't spell my own name.

Posted by: Robber Plant at December 10, 2009 09:21 AM (gbCNS)

80 Great post Ace! Now if you could only apply the same reasoning to the Birth Certificate issue, you might be able to see things from my (and others) perspective.

Currently your (and Gabe's and DrewM's and Allahpundit's et al) argument is that "OH No! Government officials wouldn't LIE to us about a vital record like a Birth Certificate! " We must TRUST Obama, TRUST the Media, TRUST Hawaiian Officials and TRUST the DNC. (who was responsible for affirming his qualifications.)

I especially liked that part of you article where you mention

"So no, Megan, all these "crazies" who doubted this crap for years were
not believing that there was always this deliberate determination to
fudge data. (Although, as we see from the CRU letters, that does
happen.) We tended to think it was usually more "subtle," as you put it, too.

But if you need that daylight between us -- if you need a psychological crutch that tells you I'm
not like those crazies; I believe something different than them; maybe
I'm halfway between the lunatic-but-correct crazies and the
noble-but-wrong scientists -- fine, I'll be that for you."


So MUCH of your post describes the Birth Certificate controversy. Just substitute "Birth Certificate" for Global warming, and swap positions from what you have currently, and it's a perfect fit, up to and including media bias.

Really great post Ace !

Posted by: Diogenes at December 10, 2009 09:24 AM (ou+hP)

81 Yeah, a million bucks to pull that plug...why I am I never around for those opportunities?
In academia, "publish or perish" is not just a cliche. It's your paycheck.

Posted by: ProfShade at December 10, 2009 09:25 AM (CC3vq)

82 They've been doing this in this country too, although the Darwin adjustment is especially blatant.

I did some station surveys for Anthony Watts, and one of the stations I surveyed caused NASA GISS to admit they screwed up, so they altered their procedure. Anthony and Steve McIntrye analyzed the station I surveyed, and used the bogus adjustment they found to go after GISS. That was pretty cool.

They still need some stations surveyed. Go to surfacestations.org if you're interested in helping.

Posted by: stace at December 10, 2009 09:27 AM (g/wgk)

83 What I took away from this is that Ace sees this as the lever that will pry off Megan McArdle's panties.


Good luck, man. Make her yell my name one time.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 10, 2009 09:29 AM (NJs4T)

84 Megan has always been a bit of a ditz. She is slow on the uptake on a lot of issues. I don't know if it is a lack of native intelligence or just the by-product of the people she hangs around. In this case she doesn't believe a large majority of scientists would falsify data and then she prints a chart that shows that they wouldn't have to because no matter what they turn in as their data it comes back from GHCN "adjusted" to look like the prevailing theory.

Basically, you would only have to have a handful of politically motivated scientitsts to gin up this whole thing. It is only going to get more sordid as we go along.

We are extremely fortunate that this scam did not come along at a time where the temperature happened to be going up.

Posted by: Voluble at December 10, 2009 09:30 AM (nZNTl)

85 I don't know, but I know it's not science -- you can't spell homogenization without "homo."

I'm sick and damned tired of all these gratuitous slaps at homos.
----------
[Tiffany Silver sounds like a porn name, doesn't it?] Nah, it'd be Tiffass.

Posted by: FUBAR at December 10, 2009 09:34 AM (1fanL)

86 Read:

http://tinyurl.com/RawVsAdjusted

Posted by: Christoph at December 10, 2009 09:35 AM (bFR0U)

87 If Blago deserved its own flaming skull, so does there. Thus:

http://i48.tinypic.com/o0c4yd.gif

Posted to tinypic because I'm like, anonymous or something.

Posted by: mr.frakypants at December 10, 2009 09:36 AM (PonvG)

88 Another small fact, which may have been overlooked, the head of CRU has been awarded 13 million in grants. British Gov is running around forcing all the scientists, who they employ, to sign on to AGW or lose their jobs. So far they have gotten 1,700 signatures. Coercive as hell, to say the very least. Most of them aren't climatologists. This is the problem I have. If the "science is settled", why all the over reaching by those who stand by it? Why close the door on those scientists who seek the actual data used that proves this phenomenon?

Posted by: elclynn at December 10, 2009 09:41 AM (ux/V3)

89 These days, I find Meta-Evolution a much more interesting topic.

Posted by: Darwin at December 10, 2009 09:48 AM (GwPRU)

90
79 Tiffany Silver

I are like your jewelery very much, but it looks like you are have manipulated the prices a bit to the high side of the value.

Posted by: franksalterego at December 10, 2009 09:49 AM (GKyIE)

91 No, not buying it. I agree with Qwinn and the others here.
We already have evidence that they bully people left and right to agree or be banished.
Their funding comes from this being a CRISIS.
There's so much evidence of them strongly pushing people to agree with them, so why would I think that most of the tampering is unconscious?

Posted by: Mama AJ at December 10, 2009 09:50 AM (Be4xl)

92 The truely safe position is as follows:

1. the adjusted data is crap.
2. everything that uses the adjusted data is also crap.
3. every conclusion based on the adjusted data is crap.

We need to start from the top, with the raw data. All that can be found. It will need to be quaility controlled, and sanity checked for internal consistancy.

Then we can start going over the climate models with a fine tooth comb. Then we can model the last 100 years (or so) and compare it with what actually happened. Another sanity check.

Then, and only then, should we even think about modelling the next 100 years.

Another thing: come up with some reasons why the tree-ring data post 1960 diverges from the temperature record. And look for places in the past where it might behave that way, as well.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at December 10, 2009 09:54 AM (1hM1d)

93 They still need some stations surveyed. Go to surfacestations.org if you're interested in helping.
stace, that's cool.
My husband says the one in Del Rio is too close to the building, but I never got around to taking pictures.

Posted by: Mama AJ at December 10, 2009 09:57 AM (Be4xl)

94 I studied this 40 years ago in college. The mechanism of global warming had been studied since the mid 1800s...and climate guys pretty much had a handle on the slight variations we would see in the future.

10 years ago the AGW mess exploded...for reasons that had nothing to do with the science.

So I respectfully disagree with you, Ace. This was no accident, no 'fooling' themselves, and certainly no science I ever learned.

These men bought into the scam for grants, power, and prestige. They broke the basic rule of scientific study...repeatability of results. They used their power and prestige only to block dissenting study.

They don't deserve their degrees. They don't deserve their positions. They don't deserve the respect of their peers.

Posted by: trainer at December 10, 2009 10:00 AM (K5X44)

95 A list should be made of all the reasons these guys don't want to change.

money for funding the scientistsmoney for AlGore type schemespolitical power in the name of "the greater good"redistribution of wealth, controlled by the left

personal prestige and dominance (for arrogant "scientists")clinging to their religion and their inferiority complex (for ignorant followers)A "gateway drug" toward more "command and control" (for those higher up the Marxist ladder)

many more, as have been discussed ...

Posted by: bill at December 10, 2009 10:05 AM (nUbAO)

96 Regarding repeatability of results, that is impossible in climate studies.

These are one-time measurements of a system that is not controlled or very well understood, and can not be repeated.

The temperature reading from some station in Maine taken 80 years ago or one hour ago can't be verified in a repeat measurement.

This is all historical data. You can examine the equipment used, the particular environments in which the equipment was located, the method of taking readings, calibrations, etc., but that's it.

We are stuck with what data we have. This is one reason why adjusting this data in any way is very disturbing.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 10:09 AM (mDY9f)

97 Back in the early to mid 90s, when I was dating my husband, he sat me down and we watched a documentary that showed where temperatures were being recorded, and how cities had grown around them, bumping the temps up. It was obvious then that the data was bad and that the "scientists" collecting the data didn't care.
Now, 15 years later, you want me to believe it wasn't completely, totally on purpose?
Anybody who looked at the facts could see the problems. Anybody who looked at a weather station in the middle of an asphaltparking lot, near machinery putting off heat, and not say "something is wrong" is guilty of KNOWINGLY hiding the truth.

Posted by: Mama AJ at December 10, 2009 10:09 AM (Be4xl)

98 Your post is so littered with wanton stupidity, it's a miracle your ISP permits you to form your thoughts and transmit them as discrete packets of binary information. The sources of "data" are multifarious. You found a little nugget from one station, and as a moron, decided to be a climatologist for a day. Maybe tomorrow you can be a urologist and remove a uterine tumor with your teeth.

Oh, your ideology! Behold my works! And despair!

Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 10:12 AM (/gil1)

99 Oh. Darwin, Australia. I guess we won't have to worry about Christoph showing up to pick a fight, then.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 10, 2009 10:12 AM (2qU2d)

100 Ace, it doesn't matter how much proof we show that all this global nonsense is a load of crap. It doesn't matter how many faked documents get discredited--the left will never come around no matter how much truth is force-fed to them it is their religion.

And the quote of the day on the Google home page reminded me as such. "Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people."

Posted by: Participation Ribbon at December 10, 2009 10:12 AM (TJoID)

101 Exactly mama ...

I like the "are you smarter than a sixth grader?" approach. The left uses children to lecture us, but it is mostly emotion based. That bit uses a sixth grader to explain how simple (and corrupt) the science is.

Too bad our current education czar is more interested in teaching children about fisting, than about glaciers that have retreated, or the medieval warm period.

Posted by: bill at December 10, 2009 10:15 AM (nUbAO)

102 "Lord Kelvin" should really just stick to working the glory hole at the Vince Lombardy NJ Turnpike rest stop.
That's not even a subpar attempt at trolling, and we've got pretty low standards here.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at December 10, 2009 10:17 AM (wgLRl)

103 109,

Indeed so. In fact, I should like to fill out and hand in a Troll Quality Complaint Form.

There isn't one?

Get Gabe on this now.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 10:21 AM (mDY9f)

104 Just a little side note on scientist conning themselves on data. This happens all the time in oil and gas exploration geology and engineering. Typically, because there is the desired result of finding hydrocarbons and making money, it's easy for geoscientist to fall in love with prospects and drilling projects. I find it helps to have engineers in the mix because they want data, and nothing but the data, in their planning. Thatprocess of providing that can sometimes uncover the warts on the baby before you drill. Likewise, it makes a big difference having a wellsitegeologist out on site during drilling completions because I've seen wellbore engineers become obsessed with trying to make a problemed wellbore come around to the state of textbook perfect when a good geologist can tell him that it's time to pull out and move on because the hydrocarbons just aren't there.
In the case of climate science, the sheer lack of practical application and loss of financial accountability has allowed a lot of these guys to get too ennamored with the process and hasn't made them have to answer for it. In the future, it should be mandated that climate study towards the theory of AGW have to be accompanied with an equal amount of work on fixing it, be it CO2 sequestration, or whatever. Then let's see them partnered with some engineers and some accountants that make them fit toa bottom line and profitability. I bet the end result is much less catastrophic, more accurate and possibly even useful.

Posted by: Rob B at December 10, 2009 10:21 AM (q32Ly)

105 Megan McArdle

I had to Bing her to see who she was. LOL, Her wiki entry calls her a "libertarian"..

Looking at her web site I would call her a frothing at the mouth Obama commie liberal.

Posted by: Vic at December 10, 2009 10:22 AM (CDUiN)

106 Yeah. Global Warming is an international conspiracy of climatologists. You gotta keep an eye on those sneaky fuckers.

Here's the needed proof for your exciting discoveries, ace: the avalanching horde of scientists heading for the Exit Door of Reason.

Oh, where's Lord Monckton when you need him?

Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 10:23 AM (/gil1)

107 Mama AJ, yeah it was pretty exciting seeing my pictures being discussed on their websites.

IIRC the station in Del Rio is not on the list of stations that Anthony wants surveyed, probably because it's not in the network that GISS uses for its historic climate data. I bet it is too close to the building--almost all of them are. Even though the station may not be in the GISS network, it's still probably providing data to the NWS that's biased high.

Posted by: stace at December 10, 2009 10:24 AM (g/wgk)

108 Why adjust the data? In a gridded, global average would not the adjustments due to measurement error just be represented as part of an error estimate or part of a confidence determination? The resulting graph of raw temperature would have larger error bars as a function of time that should improve gradually with a big drop when satellite data became available.

Posted by: Jean at December 10, 2009 10:27 AM (feZkI)

109 #111
Yea, but did you hear about the time when all of the geologist in the world traded places with all of themeteorologist and no one knew the difference?

Posted by: VELVET AMBITION at December 10, 2009 10:28 AM (xLMtq)

110 Lord Kelvin, in the willful absence of transparency - one failure defines them all.

Posted by: Jean at December 10, 2009 10:31 AM (3WbbL)

111 erg pooped his pants again.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 10:32 AM (mDY9f)

112 Busted!!!

I believe this is what we call a "smoking gun". Save this one for all your brainwashed friends and relations who still think we ought to give up civilization for the sake of Nature.

Posted by: exdem13 at December 10, 2009 10:32 AM (lYKj1)

113 And not to go completely off topic, but this reminds me somewhat of abortion. If you ask any 7 year old kid if they should kill that kid and get it out of that lady's tummy because she doesn't want it, the kid would be horrified (assuming a normal childhood).

But then you get to high school. Some friend of yours gets knocked up by a complete jerk who dumps her. She's got a new boyfriend who is a really good guy, plans to go to school and be a Dr. This baby would screw up her whole life. Her parents are going to kill her...whatever the reason is that this baby is inconvenient.

All of a sudden, that little thing in her stomach doesn't seem all that real at all. She could make it go away for a few hundred dollars and have that picture perfect life she imagined just a few short weeks ago. And you think the same thing.

It's kinda hard now to go back to opposing abortion. If you have that little tickle in the back of your brain that it's evil, then that means you are a little bit evil yourself. So justifications begin and next thing you know, you're marching around with a little sign that says "My body, my choice" or maybe you just sit at home and justify your vote for democrats because those radical crazies would take away your right to choose.

And you've lied to yourself again.

Posted by: someone out there at December 10, 2009 10:33 AM (H+rgl)

114 If I recall correctly, Lord Kelvin was one of the big shot scientists who held out against the existence of atoms. Not a few scientists regarded atoms as useful mental constructs, but did not believe they were truly there.

Al Einstein proved them wrong in a paper published in 1905 (or maybe 1906) regarding Brownian motion.

After that, atoms were no longer doubted, and this happened long before we could get pictures of the little suckers.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 10:36 AM (mDY9f)

115 Lord Kelvin, it's not just one station. That's just the most blatant
one, so far. There are more like that. And that station was one of the very few used for the Australia data set, so it's impact on the overall picture is outsized.

Posted by: stace at December 10, 2009 10:39 AM (g/wgk)

116 Where are the mass defections of climatologists/meteorologists/atmospheric physicists?

Where are they? I mean, the ones not already bankrolled by the gas industry?

Oh. It must be a conspiracy, intended by smallish climate-geeks to entrap rightwing fatasses in shopping-cart-sized e-cars.

Talk about "truther" cons. What a doozy, ace.

Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 10:39 AM (/gil1)

117 RobB at 111 ... good points.

The difference (as I'm sure you realize) is that Chevron has to make a profit, and it comes from actually discovering oil and gas.

The profit for the AGW gang is in establishing their religion. Facts that don't support their claims are "negative feedback" ... or their "dry hole", which they will guide away from.

The political profit motive with AGW, eliminates the self correcting process we have in private enterprise, and has seemed to have progressed far beyond casual self conning, to full blown criminal activity, with perhaps some delusion in the lower ranks.

as I see it ...

Posted by: bill at December 10, 2009 10:40 AM (nUbAO)

118 That Watts Up is bullshit. He does not have the myriad justifications used for
"homogenization." He just finds a disparity and goes apeshit.

Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 10:43 AM (/gil1)

119 Anyway. It's too late for you fuckers. Not a Senate full of corn-pone Inhofian jackasses can turn this ship around.

Anyway, the dictates of your precious capitalism require a new bubble of "green" investment.

You lose, fuckers.

Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 10:48 AM (/gil1)

120 Great article Ace. You are doing a great service with your explanations as it is difficult for those of us who are not math or science wizards to understand what these "scientists" are doing. I tried to read one of Dr. McIntyre's entries about the statistics, etc. and was embarrassed to find that it was completely over my head. More please.

Posted by: PowerLifter at December 10, 2009 10:49 AM (072Xq)

121 Great post

Posted by: t-bone at December 10, 2009 10:52 AM (ZMmol)

122
"Both GISS and CRU get their raw data from the GHCN"
This is only partly true.
For the early years of the series (1850 - ??) both GISS and GHCN get THEIR "raw data" from CRU.

Posted by: Uriel at December 10, 2009 10:57 AM (+F8Li)

123 Lord Kelvin. You are an insult to the name of a great physist. You are a slavering infant with the intellect and articulation of one of the corn pone jackasses you must be so closely related to. Go find a willing hog to fuck, mebbe your wife (get your quarter ready and no cutting in line).

Posted by: maddogg at December 10, 2009 11:00 AM (OlN4e)

124 "Both GISS and CRU get their raw data from the GHCN"
This is only partly true.
For the early years of the series (1850 - ??) both GISS and GHCN get THEIR "raw data" from CRU.

Posted by: Uriel at December 10, 2009 11:00 AM (+F8Li)

125 Anything that stirs up a troll like this has got to be good.

Posted by: steevy at December 10, 2009 11:03 AM (r2T/L)

126 No lace wig for you, Lord Kelvin.

Posted by: eman at December 10, 2009 11:04 AM (mDY9f)

127 #16.
Not just the Jews. It was the "homogenized" Jews.
Good read.
I can't believe how much they fudged those numbers. The obviousness (is that a word?) of this astounding.

Posted by: 1IDVET at December 10, 2009 11:07 AM (RqLIl)

128 I doubt Lord Kelvin plays his 'you're not a scientist' card when the
non-scientists agree with him. Consensus!

Posted by: jiminstl at December 10, 2009 11:10 AM (GJaw7)

129 The answer's pretty obvious, isn't it? Those lines aren't measuring temperature. They're measuring grant award income.

Posted by: Uh, Clem at December 10, 2009 11:13 AM (9A7mh)

130 Another great read is Tuva or Bust!: Richard Faynman's Last Journey. I liked it mainly because I'm a geography geek, but it shows a lot of Feynman's lighter side (I love the shot in a Ladadki hat).

Posted by: logprof at December 10, 2009 11:16 AM (A+6fk)

131 Believe me, if it wasn't forthe Ether Wind you deniers would be fucking frying!We're almost done with the last little homogenization ofour data, and then the world will see that this General Relativity crap is flat_Earth science.

Posted by: zombies Michealson & Morely at December 10, 2009 11:18 AM (G9/8V)

132 Outstanding post, Ace.

I say that as an ex-scientist, and this absence of (self-) critical thinking in the field is one of the things that turned me off to the discipline.

Again, outstanding, especially coming from a lawyer-type.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 10, 2009 11:20 AM (50S+L)

133 You know, Megan McArdle was once a very serious, thoughtful blogger. I enjoyed her writing immensely. But now I only visit her page to laugh at her. And when I'm done laughing, I'm sad.

She's spent countless posts debunking people like Drum, Yglesias(sp?), and Ezra Klein, and yet continues to treat them as if they are arguing in good faith. But when she argues with a right winger, she never provides a link or even the name of the person making the argument. She just creates a phantom through the use of "Some people say..." At this point, it's become obvious that she simply never reads any right wing articles or blogs and thus has no clue about one entire side of any policy argument she writes about.

Exhibit #8573 as to why there is no such thing as a DC libertarian.

Posted by: Oschisms at December 10, 2009 11:23 AM (Gs0qi)

134 Those who doubted:
A Man for All Seasons

Those who enable:
A Man for Warming Seasons Only. Apparently.

Charming. You know, Ms. McArdle, the reason this happened is because those doing the date and denigrating the skeptics were so acting because they always had an eye more on the preferred public policy and their fears for the future more than the data. And you, in being oh so stubborn, are essentially doing the same--for some reasons you just don't want to call a spade a spade. Perhaps you don't want to give too much moral authority to the
doubters, and don't want them to achieve a crushing victory because of
fears of what may come. Tough. Let the future take care of itself. Do
the right today.

Now, once again, it may just be desire to make sure that men are treated fairly in what amounts to a public trial. That's fine--sometimes it's good to not rush to burn the witch--but I'll tell you this. I think there is a wave building where one day the public is going to have an old fashion auto de fe since every time something like this happens, where one side--and honestly, usually the liberal--gets caught red handed and the establishment just can't bring itself to admit the obvious. Instead, it's always some kind of last ditch defense. I mean, for jeeper's sake, Ohio is funding the defense of those who ransacked Joe the Plumbers privacy, I guess because Joe is a Republican and Republicans can't be seen to be vindicated. At some point it becomes very clear to the public that liberals will never admit wrong, and will fight to the last to avoid admitting the obvious when the hand is in the cookie jar. Enough. People are going to get sick of having to go to DEFCON 1 every time a liberal screws up just so we can get to the point where we can admit there was a screw up--much less do anything about it.

It's too bad the AGW scientists did it, but they did it, and they need to be strung up, socially. Period. For the encouragement of the others.

Because, you know, if these guys had just made a mistake because of natural human bias and wish to see what they wanted to see, I wouldn't condemn these science fakers. I truly wouldn't. It's the behavior in first trying to pull off the fakery when it was clear the data did not support, and then the defense of their fakery--whether intentional or not--that is inexcusable and indefensible. They attacked others, tried their best to destroy others, were fairly ruthless and arrogant about it, and now that they have been proved to have feet of clay there will be no quarter. This isn't simple human error due to perception bias or something like that. It's just bad character. So don't defend the indefensible, because you can be drawn into it also, because I think a lot of people are sick and tired of being hounded for the motes in their eyes by the side that ignores the beams in their own.

Just ask for fairness and some decency in judgment instead of a rush to judgment. But there has got to be 'justice" in these cases, and it's time for liberals, who have had no problems calling for the social excommunication of others as a routine remedy for that which they find beyond the pale, to understand that the same remedy can be and should be applied to them as well.

Ms. McArdle, I know you are not a liberal in policy preference. But you are a liberal at heart, or least appear so, in this sense--you are comfortable around them, and seem to keep their company more than conservatives--and want to keep their good opinions (those whom you like). Like I said, tough for me to tell from a distance, so if I'm wrong, fair enough and my apologies, And if true, fine also, to a point. But at that point, character demands one tells one's friends they are wrong when they are wrong. And justice demands that it sometimes be done forcefully and clearly, not gently, because the society needs a strong statement every so often on what is and is not okay. And so yes, I think you're enabling.

But what the hell do I know? I'm just crazy, right? Just like Ace.

Nuts to that.

Posted by: Horatius at December 10, 2009 11:25 AM (i2DCO)

135 Any good debunkings out there of the "ice caps are melting!" argument?
Posted by: Robert_Paulson at December 10, 2009 06:18 AM (+deq6)
There was an article about 6 months ago, with graphics that showed that in Antarctica,the western sideof the ice cap had melted but the people who noticed that failed to take into consideration that theeast side was getting larger. Can't remember where I saw that so no link. Of course there is always the one where satellites were saying it was all open water up there then later they found out the sensors were not operating right, there was no open water.

Posted by: Bill R. at December 10, 2009 11:39 AM (EhlQq)

136 Yeah, the homogenization is really crappy science, especially the way they do it.

Imagine you have two kids, and both of them make a batch of cookies. But one kid is sick and vomits in her cookie mix bowl.

Then you decide you don't want two completely different batches of cookies. So you do the scientific climate fix thing. You mix both bowls of cookie mix together before cooking.

Sure you know one of them is ruined, and mixing will ruin the other. But removing the flawed one apparently isn't something that climate scientists understand. Other scientists will remove flawed datasets (assuming they have good reason to do so); but climate scientists are all about using the flawed sets to "fix" the normal datasets.

Like eating chocolate-chip and vomit flavored cookies. Not because you have to, but because you think it'll be better that way.

I mean, lets say you wanted the temp inside my house; one thermometer reads 67 the other reads -7 (and you put it in hot water and it still reads -7). Clearly to a rational person, the temp in my house is about 67. To a climate scientist the temperature is 30. See they'll average the good data with the known bad data to "correct" the data; and assume I keep my house at slightly below the freezing point of water.

Why do they do this? It makes for more impressive warming charts; once you average in the Urban heat islands, and use that to correct well placed temperature recordings; you can show some significant warming.

Posted by: Gekkobear at December 10, 2009 11:42 AM (SrfGc)

137 This thread's kinda dead.

But, a thread fueled by admonitions about the proper way to couch racism in daft repartee and yukyuk, and...2000 comments!

Stick w/ what you know, knuckleheads.

Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 11:43 AM (/gil1)

138 An excellent case in point is how many times the E-vil BOOOSH was excoriated in the media for his "refusal" to sign the Kyoto treaty. But what no one was told by the media was that there was no need for Bush to sign it, as Clinton already had (or more precisely, he had some DoS flunky go to Brazil and sign it for him).
Posted by: Cave Bear at December 10, 2009 06:55 AM (TsnSg)
Something else the media isn't saying, and that I only found out about recently. Bush got us a little over halfway to our Kyoto goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions without ever signing it. Why wasn't that reported?

Posted by: Bill R. at December 10, 2009 11:45 AM (EhlQq)

139 I like McCardle also and I was bewildered at her unwillingness to accept the evidence right before her eyes.
Douglas Adams had a fictional scientist, the self-namedWonko the Sane. Wonko, to remember that as scientists really we are all just clowns, "knowing" little, and we must be willing to look at the world with the eyes of a child and, potentially,be wrong.
The Sane, to remind himself that even with a name like Wonko, relative to you lot hisfaculties were alright.

Posted by: motionview at December 10, 2009 11:45 AM (DtSf1)

140 Goo on with your dumb self, Lord Melvin

Posted by: logprof at December 10, 2009 11:46 AM (A+6fk)

141 and erg's got nuthin'

Posted by: situation normal at December 10, 2009 11:49 AM (PD1tk)

142 I drive Priuses(Mwah)That puts them blogs on rock, rockAnd they be linin� down the blockJust to laugh at what I gotFour, tres, two, unoMy footprint stay judiciousI be down in the basement
Just workin� on my witlessHe's my witness(Ooh wee)I put yo' blog on rock rockAnd they be linin� down the blockJust to laugh at what I got(Four, tres, two, uno)So pernicious(Ay, ay, ay, ay)So pernicious(Ay, ay, ay, ay)So pernicious(Ay, ay, ay, ay)I'm Ergalicious, c-c-crazy, crazy

Posted by: logprof at December 10, 2009 11:49 AM (A+6fk)

143 Stick w/ what you know, knuckleheads.

Chill out Lord Kelvin! We know hot air when we see/hear it...



(Ya see what I did there? boy)

Posted by: somejoe at December 10, 2009 11:50 AM (22if9)

144 This thread's kinda dead.But, a thread fueled by admonitions about the proper way to couch racism in daft repartee and yukyuk, and...2000 comments!Stick w/ what you know, knuckleheads.
Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 11:43 AM (/gil1)
--It'll be dead when we say it's dead and the science is settled!

Posted by: logprof at December 10, 2009 11:51 AM (A+6fk)

145 Just think, the smattering of ignorance above is the reason the glory hole at the Vince Lombardi Rest Stop goes unmanned.
Look here, Kelvin or erg or Warren Bonesteel or whatever, those cocks ain't going to suck themselves. The longer those long-haul truckers need to sit around waiting for their release, the later I get mycurrent order from Amazon.
So, get back to what you know. In your own small way, you make interstate commerce possible.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at December 10, 2009 11:57 AM (wgLRl)

146 I'd like to see an example of the bad effects of the level of warming these scammers are predicting that's based on actual evidence.

Looking at the historical data, I'm not aware of any downside other than French winemakers losing market share to the vintners of England.

Posted by: toby928 at December 10, 2009 11:57 AM (PD1tk)

147 Gekkobear@143,

Exactly. If you purge an "aberrant" dataset, particularly when you don't have an abundance of them to mitigate an actual error (even if accidental or honestly mistaken), you better have a very good understanding and sound scientific basis for doing so. And you better disclose it and the rationalization... especially if asked.

These climate scientologists did none of this and went to great lengths -- actual fraud -- to conceal their "science." Truly shocking violations. The non-climate scientologist world of scientists should create its own petition if only to shield itself from their bastard colleagues.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 10, 2009 11:57 AM (50S+L)

148 So, Ace is up at Oh-dark-thirty, eh? I wonder if he saw his shadow or not? And does it mean six more weeks of global warming?

Posted by: Darth Randall at December 10, 2009 12:06 PM (oLULt)

149 McArdle is acting out this Millikan thing right now. She'll get closer and closer to the truth one not-too-far-away-from-the-currently-acceptable-position step at a time.

Posted by: Mob at December 10, 2009 12:09 PM (8c34o)

150 Jesus, haven't you people heard of Thomas S. Kuhn?

Posted by: Keyser S�ze at December 10, 2009 12:10 PM (rk0PJ)

151 Between thesescientists and the terminally retarded that follow them I amthinking it is time to thin the herd for the sake of the planet and mankind.

Posted by: Old Hippie Vet at December 10, 2009 12:12 PM (3IZGh)

152 "So no, Megan, all these "crazies" who doubted this crap for years were not believing that there was always this deliberate determination to fudge data."
Ace, I agree: They did not start off fudging data. Wayback will show how some of their data used to look. Watts has shown how the old data looked. As reality hasn't favored their models recently, the pressure to monkey with the data has clearly become irresistable.
The physicists at CERN have confirmed Svensmark's theories in the lab, and Svensmark recently demonstrated it in the field. If this solar minimum continues we are well and truly screwed. Let's just hope that there's a big lag from when a grand solar minimum starts to when winter lingers, crops fail,and we have to resort to eating climatologists.

Posted by: theCork at December 10, 2009 12:14 PM (za8iP)

153 These guys do a process called "homogenization," right? What that means is they cast about for nearby stations, then average those, and then compare the average of nearby stations to the station in question, and, if they feel like it (if they think it "needs" it), they adjust the numbers of the target station to be closer to the average of the other, nearby stations.

I wonder if they are doing all this with the stations the "Harry" fileintimated do not even exist?

Posted by: teqjack at December 10, 2009 12:16 PM (LEb+F)

154
157 Jesus, haven't you people heard of Thomas S. Kuhn?
Posted by: Keyser S�ze at December 10, 2009 12:10 PM (rk0PJ)
Yes, why, you think a paradigm shift has begun?

Posted by: theCork at December 10, 2009 12:17 PM (za8iP)

155 Ace, go back to your cave and worship your unseen entities, you're too stupid to understand the extreme nuances(c) of this SCIENCE.

Posted by: All of the REAL Scientists at December 10, 2009 12:20 PM (uuZjB)

156 Hey, did you know that Tiger Woods has had 10 mistresses?
Let's talk about that!

Posted by: All of the REAL Scientists at December 10, 2009 12:22 PM (uuZjB)

157 I wonder if they are doing all this with the stations the "Harry" fileintimated do not even exist?
Posted by: teqjack at December 10, 2009 12:16 PM (LEb+F)
I'm thinking back to the Cold War, when we found out that the Soviet Union had less than half as many nukes as we thought they did. There were investigations as to what went wrong with the estimates. It worked like this: Field agents made sophisticated wild-assed guesses based onwhat data they had, then added 10% as a fudge factor because they didn't want to guess too low. Then the middle managers added 10%, and the upper managers, etc.
So when we sat down for arms control with the Soviets, they were able to negotiate away nukes that never existed. Score!

Posted by: theCork at December 10, 2009 12:23 PM (za8iP)

158 I think this is the problem with the 2000 election debacle in Florida. Gore wanted a recount, but only in the 2 or 3 counties that he thought would be favorable to him. This would be subjecting one particular subset of the state's election data to greater scrutiny than any other. By that method, the biased result would practically have been guaranteed.

Posted by: OregonMuse at December 10, 2009 12:26 PM (tClfg)

159 The graph that you displayed is labelled incorrectly.
The red line is grant money available for"scientists" who are willing toconfirm global warming.
The blue line is money available for otherweather research.
The black line is Nobel laureate and Oscar winning documentarian Algore's income from his carbon credit companies.

Posted by: Max Entropy at December 10, 2009 12:28 PM (uuZjB)

160 This Lord Kelvin guys really presents a compelling argument.

Posted by: Bosk at December 10, 2009 12:30 PM (pUO5u)

161 Well done, Ace! You've put words to what I've been thinking all along. Therewards for skewing science toward confirming Warmerist fears has just been too high for scientists to resist, and the risks too high not to conform. I especially likethe distinction you draw between what 'Warmers' think'Skeptics' say, and what the 'Skeptics' have actually been saying all along.
The same type of distinction can be made for 'Birthers', many of whom don't actually believe Obama was born in Kenya, yet are bothered by his unprecedented and obdurate secrecy regarding his birth, citizenship, school and medical records. If there's nothing wrong there, why hide them? Yet Obamaitesclassifyasextremists and cranks any and all who question his lack of transparency about his past.

Posted by: Starboardhelm at December 10, 2009 12:31 PM (SgSfB)

162 I always thought they were twisting their black-waxed mustaches as they were deliberately cooking the books.

As a practicing scientist, I need to let you know that we twist our black-waxed mustaches only after tying our virginal victims to train tracks. I don't make the rules, but I do try to follow them. Actually, that is just the rule for chemists. Sorry, I don't know the climatological rules. So nevermind.

All this adjustment could be necessary, but to carry it out, it would also be necessary to explain why, explain why the precise adjustments were chosen, and explain any uncertainty as to the magnitude. You can't just 'adjust' raw data without justification. That's crazy. The 'hide the decline' trick- if it is legitimate, this should be spelled out when it is done, not with hand wavy references to this being standard and well-discussed in the literature. Even if you are using a 'well-known' trick/technique, you just can't not say so. That's what stinks to me. The truth could be that the world has a fever, but without those issues being addressed, you can't say so from this particular bastard-child data set. If it is corrected, show that your corrections are correct.

And Lord Kelvin- he's really just Billy Thompson feeling full of himself.

Posted by: Dave Eaton at December 10, 2009 12:34 PM (JVJit)

163 Why is this a surprise to anyone? Look at the U.S. historic temperature trend...nearly all of the increase exists only because of after the fact 'adjustments' to raw data. Even Hansen got caught fudging data in order to make 1998 the hottest year in the history of forever...and was forced to walk back on those claims. Lucky us, we still have the raw data, unlike the CRU, which conveniently lost theirs.

Posted by: DngrMse at December 10, 2009 12:41 PM (LWPer)

164 So who would be enterprising enough to photoshop Phil Jones and Michael Mann onto a picture of Milli Vanilli?

Posted by: InCali at December 10, 2009 12:50 PM (u1OeY)

165 I think now there actually is an incentive to disprove or
undermine global warming, and scientists are on notice that this is
likely low-hanging fruit. In other words, there's much more incentive
to try something when you have a pretty good idea it will be successful.

Yes, the Youtube video from yesterday of the 6th grader is pretty much a clue here.

The data sets, used in a simple manner, with no significant massaging, and with an open process; shows UHI to be the prime driver of surface temperature warming in the continental US. That might give you a hint that disproving the CO2 causal relation could be low-hanging fruit. I mean you'll have to work like a middle school science fair participant, but sometimes you have to sacrcifice and suffer for science... or to make a baking soda volcano.

Hand waving and hidden "homogenization" of the data isn't going to be perusasive when the "anti-science denialists" have done such a simple job of showing their data, their work, and their process.

Posted by: Gekkobear at December 10, 2009 12:50 PM (SrfGc)

166 Another work of brilliance by Ace. No one does analogy better.
Cheers.
"... man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest...especially when a cool"performance bonus"is on the line" - Paul Simon

Posted by: Tom vG at December 10, 2009 12:54 PM (TRJxR)

167 Notice the libs starting to really freak out about this now. This idiot Lord Kelvin is a classic example of a leftist throwing a childish tantrum when one ofhis core issues once again gets crushed by stone cold reality. Notice he can't refute anything at this point. He rolls in, drops a few F bombs, says we are all idiots and then wonders why his life is such a pathetic pile of crap when he lay awake at night in his cheap apartment.
Wesee this play out with the left on issue after issue when they see that they were dumb enough to be on the wrong side of an issue in the first place. Most never admit they were wrong, so they are forced to double down on the lies and become all the more bitter and pathetic.
What person buys into leftist socialist nonsense past the age of 18? Ignorant people with no ability to have a critical thought as an adult... that is who. This is why libs need to stick to working at the local espresso shop of perhaps running a bong store. But running the country? No... no..no!!!!!

Posted by: Magic Kingdom at December 10, 2009 12:55 PM (amSe4)

168 I labored over that post at Wuwt. This stuff is not easy to follow for a non-scientist. (or a climate scientist on the grant dole as well!)
I commend you for your ability to convey such a complex concept that is the Darwin smoking gun. Thanks. The more I read, the more I comprehend.
Bastards.

Posted by: Derak at December 10, 2009 01:11 PM (p/gmH)

169 Lord Kelvin would make a great Climate Scientist...The way he engages the argument and presents his data ("you lose, fuckers"), is pretty consistent with what we're seeing from the climate scientists.

Posted by: iDoc at December 10, 2009 01:15 PM (fCfVS)

170 In case anyone hasn't figured it out by now, "Lord Kelvin" is just another nom de erg.

Posted by: OregonMuse at December 10, 2009 01:22 PM (tClfg)

171 Posted by: Lord Kelvin at December 10, 2009 11:43 AM (/gil1)
Back to work, Erg, those Colorado Department of Educationrequests for fisting manuals for 14-year-olds aren't going to fill themselves out!

Posted by: Judge Smails at December 10, 2009 01:23 PM (ERJIu)

172 One interesting thing that occurred to me was that this could also affect the tree-ring data they use to create the "record" of temperatures going back 1500 years or so. Tree rings don't measure temperature directly, they also measure rainfall, sunlight, availability of nutrients, crowding by other trees, etc. So you have to take samples from a lot of trees to average out local variations, and you have to "calibrate" the ring sizes against temperature to isolate it as much as you can from the other things it's dependent on.

But what if the temperature data you're calibrating against is corrupted? What if it's been "adjusted" for a non-scientific reason and no longer represents the true temperature the trees are reacting to? Then your tree ring "temperature" is going to have some strange anomalies once you're done correcting it incorrectly. It will poke up when it shouldn't, or drop off somewhere else, which is exactly what we see CRU programs correcting for, and why they had to "hide the decline" after 1960.

And that also means your temperature record for the last couple of thousand years -- the one on which you're basing your claim that present-day warming is unprecedented and must be caused by man-made greenhouse gases -- is is pretty much worthless.

Posted by: Socratease at December 10, 2009 01:29 PM (nJmDs)

173 ACE : (opening a briefcase containing a cool million), "I will give you a million dollars to pull the plug on Mr. Mashed Potato Head here, but.....

Switch : "CLICK......"

Monitor : "BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!!"

FORGER : "Pay me."

Posted by: Jamie Sommers - Bionic Bitch at December 10, 2009 01:34 PM (o4Xi+)

174 Shit. /sock

Posted by: FORGER - Racist Czar at December 10, 2009 01:34 PM (o4Xi+)

175 re: feynman, during the manhattan project, oppenheimer wrote his berkeley colleague to hire his ass fast:
"I think it appropriate to call his name to your attention, with the urgent request that you consider him for a position in the department at the earliest time that that is possible. You may remember the name because he once applied for a fellowship in Berkeley: it is Richard Feynman. He is by all odds the most brilliant young physicist here, and everyone knows this." Further... "I may give you two quotations from men with whom he has worked. Bethe has said that he would rather lose any two other men than Feyman from this present job, and Wigner said, "He is a second Dirac, only this time human."

via letters of note
also, feynman got a lot of ass according to his colleagues...

Posted by: Contributor X at December 10, 2009 02:46 PM (IhX2x)

176 Yes, why, you think a paradigm shift has begun?

Posted by: theCork at December 10, 2009 12:17 PM (za8iP)

No, that's not the point. Kuhn explained nearly fifty years ago that the facts don't "speak for themselves" (as Grissom would have us believe), and instead are always subject to the vagaries human interpreation. So what's going on here isn't any big surprise.

Posted by: Keyser S�ze at December 10, 2009 02:53 PM (rk0PJ)

177 Oops. Last post should say "vagaries of"

Posted by: Keyser S�ze at December 10, 2009 02:53 PM (rk0PJ)

178 22 Jesus fucking Christ, where is this evil farm where they would kill caged rabbits to slake Manbearpig's blood thirst?

Free. Range. Rabbit. (With Herbed Fries.)

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 10, 2009 03:36 PM (Vhl5i)

179 "Lord Kelvin" should really just stick to working the glory hole at the Vince Lombardy NJ Turnpike rest stop.
That's not even a subpar attempt at trolling, and we've got pretty low standards here.
Interesting that he trolled with that name. Is the troll unaware that Lord Kelvin drove nails into the coffin of the Caloric Theory of Heat? which at the time was the accepted science...

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at December 10, 2009 03:48 PM (1hM1d)

180 This whole thing of Megan McCardle needing to believe she's not one of the crazy deniers.... I'm better than those people! I never thought anyone was cooking books deliberately!
It reminds me of the jokes going on at SNL right now. On the one hand Seth Meyers on Weekend Updateknocks Obama for Policy X. And then immediately follows it up with a jokemocking the Republicans who've been complaining about Policy X all along.
See, you might have been right, stupid Republicans, but only the way clocks are right twice a day. We, in our intellectual superiority, figured this out through thought and reason! You moron teabaggers only figured it out by accident!

Posted by: Average Jen at December 10, 2009 06:02 PM (2dZ+6)

181 106
Oh. Darwin, Australia. I guess we won't have to worry about Christoph showing up to pick a fight, then.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 10, 2009 10:12 AM (2qU2d)
I'm in Australia.

Posted by: Christoph at December 10, 2009 08:56 PM (yN8mz)

182

Well, whoever this Megan McArdle person is, I hope she realizes that the "psychological" reason she's still fooling herself is she has a [quite natural] reluctance to face the blood-spurting, gut tearing anger that comes with admitting you been had.

Posted by: Faye Kinnit at December 11, 2009 01:20 AM (l1oyw)

183 Well, whoever this Megan McArdle person is, I hope she realizes that the "psychological" reason she's still fooling herself is she has a [quite natural] reluctance to face the blood-spurting, gut tearing anger that comes with admitting you been had.
Posted by: Faye Kinnit at December 11, 2009 01:20 AM (l1oyw)
Well said, welcome to my world.I care about science, becauseIadmire it aas a method ofrevealing physical truth. These jerkshave really pissed in the pool.
http://tinyurl.com/d52w9l

Posted by: theCork at December 11, 2009 01:53 AM (za8iP)

184 BURBERRY Scarf | CD Keys

Posted by: jason at December 11, 2009 10:14 AM (NsJ2b)

185 China Online Shop Buy Wholesale Products China Distributor Electronic Componentsprettyimpresspretty impress Buy Toys Jewelry Shop

Posted by: China online shop at April 12, 2010 09:51 AM (RDKvw)

186 HP Pavilion dv3500t Battery
HP Pavilion DV4000 Battery
HP Pavilion DV4012AP Battery
HP Pavilion DV4017AP Battery
HP Pavilion DV4018AP Battery
HP Pavilion DV4021EA Battery
HP Pavilion DV4030CA Battery
HP Pavilion DV4040CA Battery
HP Pavilion DV4045EA Battery
HP Pavilion DV4070EA Battery
HP Pavilion DV4100 Battery
HP Pavilion DV4114AP Battery
HP Pavilion DV4115AP Battery
HP Pavilion DV4300 Battery
HP Pavilion DV4400 Battery
HP Pavilion DV5000 Battery
HP Pavilion DV5000z Battery
HP Pavilion DV6000 Battery
HP Pavilion DV6100 Battery
HP Pavilion DV6200 Battery
HP Pavilion DV6300 Battery
HP Pavilion DV6400 Battery
HP Pavilion DV6500 Battery
HP Pavilion DV6500/CT Battery
HP Pavilion DV6600 Battery
HP Pavilion DV6700/CT Battery
HP Pavilion dv8000 Battery
HP Pavilion dv8000t Battery
HP Pavilion dv8000z Battery
HP Pavilion dv8100 Battery
HP Pavilion dv8200 Battery
HP Pavilion dv8300 Battery
HP Pavilion dv9000 Battery
HP Pavilion dv9000EA Battery
HP Pavilion dv9000T Battery
HP Pavilion dv9000Z Battery
HP Pavilion dv9100 Battery
HP Pavilion dv9200 Battery
HP Pavilion dv9500 Battery
HP Pavilion dv9500/CT Battery
HP Pavilion dv9500t Battery
HP Pavilion dv9500z Battery
HP Pavilion dv9525us Battery
HP Pavilion dv9600 Battery
HP Pavilion dv9604TX Battery
HP Pavilion dv9605TX Battery
HP Pavilion dv9700/CT Battery
HP Pavilion dv9700t Battery
HP Pavilion dv9700z Battery
HP Pavilion tx1000 Battery
HP Pavilion tx1000Z Battery
HP Pavilion tx1001AU Battery
HP Pavilion tx1001XX Battery
HP Pavilion tx1002AU Battery
HP Pavilion tx1002XX Battery
HP Pavilion tx1100 Battery
HP Pavilion tx1200 Battery
HP Pavilion tx1300 Battery
HP Pavilion tx1400 Battery
HP Pavilion tx2000 Battery
HP Pavilion tx2100 Battery
HP Pavilion tx2500 Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2000 Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2000T Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2000Z Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2010AP Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2011AP Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2018AP Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2020CA Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2200 Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2288EA Battery
HP Pavilion ZE2300 Battery
HP Pavilion ze2400 Battery
HP Pavilion ZT3000 Battery
HP Pavilion ZT3001US Battery
HP Pavilion ZT3010US Battery
HP Pavilion ZT3100 Battery
HP Pavilion ZT3200 Battery
HP Pavilion ZT3300 Battery
HP Pavilion ZT3400 Battery
HP Pavilion ZT4000 Battery
HP Pavilion ZV5000 Battery
HP Pavilion ZV5200 Battery
HP Pavilion ZV6000 Battery
HP Pavilion ZX5000 Battery
HP Pavilion ZX5200 Battery
HP PB991A Battery
HP PB992A Battery
HP PB994 Battery
HP PB994A Battery
HP PB994ET Battery
HP PB995A Battery
HP PF723A Battery
HP PM579A Battery
HP PP2090 Battery
HP PP2100 Battery
HP PP2200 Battery
HP PP2210 Battery
HP PPB004A Battery
HP PQ457AV Battery
HP Presario 1500 Battery
HP Presario 1507EA-XP Battery
HP Presario 1516US Battery
HP Presario 1700 Battery
HP Presario 1720 Battery
HP Presario 2800 Battery
HP Presario 2816EA Battery
HP Presario 2817AR Battery
HP Presario 2818AP Battery
HP Presario 2820AP Battery
HP Presario 900 Battery
HP Presario C700 Battery
HP Presario DV6000T Battery
HP Presario F500 Battery
HP Presario F700 Battery
HP Presario M2000 Battery
HP Presario R3000 Battery
HP Presario R3000AP Battery
HP Presario R3000Z Battery
HP Presario R3200 Battery
HP Presario R3247US Battery
HP Presario R3249EA Battery
HP Presario R3400 Battery
HP Presario R4001 Battery
HP Presario R4002 Battery
HP Presario R4003 Battery
HP Presario V2000 Battery
HP Presario V3000 Battery
HP Presario V3100 Battery
HP Presario V3500 Battery
HP Presario V3600 Battery
HP Presario V4000 Battery
HP Presario V5000 Battery
HP Presario V6000 Battery
HP Presario V6100 Battery
HP Presario V6200 Battery
HP Presario V6300 Battery
HP Presario V6500 Battery
HP Presario X1000 Battery
HP Presario X1010US Battery
HP Presario X1018CL Battery
HP Presario X1020US Battery
HP Presario X1031AP Battery
HP Presario X1032AP Battery
HP Presario X1033AP Battery
HP Presario X1034AP Battery
HP Presario X1035AP Battery
HP Presario X1036AP Battery
HP Presario X1037AP Battery
HP Presario X1039AP Battery
HP Presario X1040AP Battery
HP Presario X1041AP Battery
HP Presario X1100 Battery
HP Presario X1200 Battery
HP Presario X1300 Battery
HP Presario X1400 Battery
HP Presario X6000 Battery
HP RQ203AA Battery
HP RQ204AA Battery
HP RW556AA Battery
HP TC4200 Battery
HP TC4400 Battery

Posted by: laptop battery at April 22, 2010 03:22 AM (uxKBS)

187 How to chose a beautiful <a href="http://www.handbags-ok.com/" title="handbag"> handbag</a>. Here are some handbags which are special. For <a href="http://www.handbags-ok.com/" title="coach outlet handbag"> coach outlet handbag</a>, the color is bright, for <a href="http://www.handbags-ok.com/" title=" coach outlet "> coach outlet </a> and <a href="http://www.handbags-ok.com/" title="coach handbag"> coach handbag</a> , convient to set matters into, for <a href="http://www.handbags-ok.com/" title="gucci handbag"> gucci handbag</a>, is the most popular because of both quality and color.（Apple）

Posted by: coach bags at April 22, 2010 05:46 AM (R5oY9)

188 We have been the leading online retailer of quality
Replica Rolex Watches, the luxury timepieces. With our extensive
selection of Replica Roles Watches, you can easily find the perfect
Rolex Replicas for yourself, your family and your friends.The Iraq war
seemed like a great replica rolex
idea at the time. Righteous anger
following 9/11, Saddam's a dick and it's time to go, replica
rolexes WMD aplenty,
bi-partisan support.

Except we replica






























rolex watches didn't find the WMD we thought we might. We were
looking
for warehouses replicas






























rolex
packed full of deadly shit, replicas
rolexes and found some minor stuff in
a guy's replicas






























rolexes car, so to speak.

The time to cut replicas
rolex watches our losses in Iraq has come and gone by more than 2
years. rolex
replica
We're stuck with it now. rolex replicas
We were spoiled by The 100 Hour sell replica
rolex War- and
now that we have replica
rolex paypal a long slog, most people just want the fuckin' thing
to be over. That it isn't nice replica
rolex over is huge- politically.

And Bush can't replica
rolex store end it. Not under the terms for best replica
rolex
victory he's laid out.
Bush will have to hand Replica Rolex
off.The next President is metal
material going to inherit
Iraq.life blog
He's gonna have to run
on how he's gonna seo blog
end it- you know, have 'a
advanced materialsecret





























plan to end the war.''04 and '08 may livejournal blog be the biggest shit sandwich
we've ever had to bite.

Replica Rolex Store specializes in the online sales of Rolex
Replicas..
cheap glasses


























cheap designer glasses glasses online cheap glasses online replica glasses designer handbags replica handbags replica designer handbags replica louis vitton handbags


Thousandssmartester blog of
customers
have satisfiedly shopped at Replica Rolex Store nonferrous material and
looks classy and wealthy without burning a hole in their pocket. Our
customer support staff hello





























world fully understands how difficult it can be to purchase a
quality Replica Rolex at a reasonable price. This replicas world is why our
experienced staff always goes the extra miles to provide our customers
with the best products available on the market.

Posted by: high mount at May 07, 2010 12:41 AM (ayHfT)

189 HTML clipboard
اناشيد
-
اناشيد اطفال -
القران الكريم -

العاب للكمبيوتر

قصص
-
روايات -
كتب -
فضائح
- خواطر
-
اشعار

ازياء
-
ازياء نسائيه -
ازياء اطفال -
ازياء
المحجبات -
ازياء الحوامل

فساتين
-
فساتين سهره -
فساتين اطفال -

فساتين جديده
تسريحات -

تسريحات شعر -
تسريحات جديده -

تسريحات بنات
-
ازياء الحوامل
ازياء العروس -

العنايه بالبشره -
العنايه بالشعر -

لانجري

زفات
- زفات
افراح -
ميك اب -
عطورات
-
اكسسوارات

غرف نوم
- اكلات
-
حلويات -
اثاث وديكور -

اطباق رئيسيه

صور
- نكت
-
مباريات اليوم -
قطط -
خلفيات
-
وظائف

مسلسلات
- يوتيوب
-
مسلسلات تركيه -
مسلسلات يابانيه -

مسلسلات اجنبيه

مسرحيات
- اغاني
مسلسلات -
مسرحيات كويتيه -

صور مسلسلات

هوليود
-
Hollywood -
بوليود
-

bollywoodبلاك
بيري -

منتديات بلاك بيري -
توبيكات بلاك بيري -
صور
للتصاميم
افلام
- افلام
اجنبيه -
افلام عربيه -
افلام
مصريه -
افلام هنديه

انمي
-
افلام كرتون -
افلام ديزني -
مسلسلات
انمي -
صور انمي -

توبيكات ملونه

توبيكات للماسنجر
- صور
للماسنجر -
برامج جديده -

مسجات

Posted by: منتديات at May 07, 2010 08:30 AM (RX1SY)

190
The bombings were seen as an apparent backlash by the Sunni-led insurgency after the slaying
of the two al-Qaida leaders.

Posted by: labatterie at May 12, 2010 11:25 PM (7ADCb)

191 服装

Posted by: sdf at May 16, 2010 10:03 AM (16a7M)

192 Winpromote solutions creates and produces custom printed logo promotion items and <a href=http://www.winpromote.com/category/ >promotional products</a>, imprinted corporate gifts, tradeshow giveaways, promotion merchandise, advertising specialties, corporate gifts, and a wide variety of <a href=http://www.winpromote.com/hot-products/1.html >promotional novelty</a>.

Posted by: custom promotional prodcuts at June 03, 2010 03:50 AM (mYNod)

193 Try our products. There will be surprises.
DVD Ripper
Video Converter
Blu-ray Ripper
mac dvd ripper
mac dvd copy
mac dvd creator
mac dvd to ipod
mac dvd to apple tv
mac dvd to avi
mac dvd to mp3
mac dvd to mp4
mac mp3 cutter
mac ipod converter
mac video converter
dvd copy
dvd to mp4
dvd to avi
dvd to flv
dvd to psp
dvd ripper
dvd to ipod
dvd to iphone
dvd to mp3
dvd to mp4
video converter
ppt converter
blu-ray to hd
blu-ray copy
blu-ray to mpeg
blu-ray to dvd
blu-ray ripper
blu-ray to avi
blu-ray to ipod
blu-ray to mp3
blu-ray to mp4
blu-ray to wmv
Try our products. There will be surprises.

Posted by: Xcdsb at June 09, 2010 08:57 PM (t0sUB)

194 Try our products. There will be surprises.
DVD Ripper
Blu-ray Cloner
mac video to apple tv
mac video to apple tv converter
mac avi to iphone
mac avi to ipod
video to avi
blu-ray ripper
blu-ray converter
blu-ray to avi
blu-ray to hd
blu-ray to ipod
blu-ray to mp3
blu-ray to mp4
blu-ray to mpeg
blu-ray to psp
blu-ray to wmv
mac dvd to apple tv
mac dvd to avi
mac dvd to flv
mac dvd to gphone
mac dvd to ipod
mac dvd to iphone
mac dvd to ipod
mac dvd to mp3
mac dvd to mp4
mac dvd to mpeg
mac dvd to psp
Try our products. There will be surprises.

Posted by: Xcdsb at June 09, 2010 08:58 PM (t0sUB)

195 We can provide you with convenient, fast and powerful products.
DVD Ripper
Video Converter
Blu-ray Ripper
mac dvd ripper
mac dvd copy
mac dvd creator
mac dvd to ipod
mac dvd to apple tv
mac dvd to avi
mac dvd to mp3
mac dvd to mp4
mac mp3 cutter
mac ipod converter
mac video converter
dvd copy
dvd to mp4
dvd to avi
dvd to flv
dvd to psp
dvd ripper
dvd to ipod
dvd to iphone
dvd to mp3
dvd to mp4
video converter
ppt converter
blu-ray to hd
blu-ray copy
blu-ray to mpeg
blu-ray to dvd
blu-ray ripper
blu-ray to avi
blu-ray to ipod
blu-ray to mp3
blu-ray to mp4
blu-ray to wmv
We can provide you with convenient, fast and powerful products.

Posted by: wed at June 24, 2010 02:30 AM (4O7X0)

196 We can provide you with convenient, fast and powerful products.
DVD Ripper
Blu-ray Cloner
DVD Cloner
Blu-ray Ripper
Mac DVD Ripper
Video Converter
mac video to apple tv
mac video to apple tv converter
mac avi to iphone
mac avi to ipod
video to avi
blu-ray ripper
blu-ray converter
blu-ray to avi
blu-ray to hd
blu-ray to ipod
blu-ray to mp3
blu-ray to mp4
blu-ray to mpeg
blu-ray to psp
blu-ray to wmv
mac dvd to apple tv
mac dvd to avi
mac dvd to flv
mac dvd to gphone
mac dvd to ipod
mac dvd to iphone
mac dvd to ipod
mac dvd to mp3
mac dvd to mp4
mac dvd to mpeg
mac dvd to psp
We can provide you with convenient, fast and powerful products.

Posted by: wed at June 24, 2010 02:31 AM (4O7X0)

197 We have great works in a soft. We are the first developer of Blu-ray software in the world .Chair,curled up DVD Ripper WhenBlu-ray Cloner i am old, they DVD Cloner cover every Blu-ray Ripper inch a blu-ray converter than snow convert blu-ray white in the blu-ray to ipod past years, put rip blu-ray a piece of blu-ray ripper fried fragrance Mac DVD Ripper of tea, in mac video converter settling down mac dvd to ipod. "a dream,Video Converter and sing a mac video to apple tv song, mac video to apple tv converter and loved mac avi to iphone, to mac avi to ipod stay in video to avi a long blu-ray to avi time can blu-ray to hd no longer blu-ray to mp3 to add blu-ray to mp4 ... that blu-ray to mpeg..." young blu-ray to psp and blu-ray to wmv in mac dvd to apple tv temples is mac dvd to avi sprinkled mac dvd to flv with gray mac dvd to gphone back, on mac dvd to iphone the mac dvd to mp3 ear to mac dvd to mp4 the mac dvd to mpeg memory behind mac dvd to psp. with DVD to AVI great DVD to iPod sorrow, DVD to MP3 hidden.Slowly of DVD to MP4our old.

Posted by: sheing at July 01, 2010 01:59 AM (NmRDa)

198
منتديات
منتديات بنات
منتدى بنات
الرئيسيةمنتديات بنات نجدالعاب فلاشتوبيكاتالمكتبة
الاسلاميةمطبخ بنات نجدمركز التحميلدليل المواقع
دردشة
بنات نجد شات بنات نجد
منتديات بنات نجد
توبيكات بنات
مركز تحميلبنات نجد للمواضيع
الاسلامية
بنات نجد للمواضيع
العامة
المواضيع

الجادة والنقاشات
اخر

الاخبار المحلية
والعالمية - جرائم - فضائح - اثارة - حوادثاللغة الفرنسية, اللغة الانجليزية

كيف تتعلم
الإنجليزية
اللغات
همس
القوافي

قصص
- رواياتالخواطر

وعذب الـكـلام
كلمات
الاغاني
الازياء



- فساتين
المكياج


- العطور
العناية
بالشعر
العناية
بالبشرة
والجسم
الاطباق



الساخنة
الديكور



- الاثاث
المنزلي
افلام

مسلسلات يوتوب
منتديات
منتديات بنات
منتدى بنات
الرئيسيةمنتديات بنات نجدالعاب فلاشتوبيكاتالمكتبة
الاسلاميةمطبخ بنات نجدمركز التحميلدليل المواقع
دردشة
بنات نجد شات بنات نجد
منتديات بنات نجد
توبيكات بنات
مركز تحميلبنات نجد للمواضيع
الاسلامية
بنات نجد للمواضيع
العامة
المواضيع

الجادة والنقاشات
اخر

الاخبار المحلية
والعالمية - جرائم - فضائح - اثارة - حوادثاللغة الفرنسية, اللغة الانجليزية

كيف تتعلم
الإنجليزية
اللغات
همس
القوافي

قصص
- رواياتالخواطر

وعذب الـكـلام
كلمات
الاغاني
الازياء



- فساتين
المكياج


- العطور
العناية
بالشعر
العناية
بالبشرة
والجسم
الاطباق



الساخنة
الديكور



- الاثاث
المنزلي
افلام

مسلسلات يوتوب
شات
دردشة
شات بنات
دردشة بنات
افلام اجنبية,افلام عربية,صور انمي - افلام
انمي-كرتون اخبار
المشاهير - صور
المشاهير -
اسرار
المشاهير - فضائح المشاهير
صور
تصميم ـ صور للتصميم
دروس الفوتوشوب
صور مسنجر
فوتوشوب - فلاش - سويتش ماكس -
دروس فوتوشوب

Posted by: yasser at July 14, 2010 12:52 AM (g0vZg)

199 منتدى , منتديات , انت الغلا , منتديات انت الغلا , برامج جديدة , صور جديدة , كلمات سر حرامي سيارات , طريقة عمل ايميل , ايفون , وظائف جديدة , العاب ,

Posted by: منتديات at August 01, 2010 05:03 AM (8pV6e)

200 �п�ȥ�ҵIJ����...............................

Posted by: fdfd at August 08, 2010 10:54 AM (grFjd)

201 Good stories , like the best mentors in our lives Carbon fiber hood, are good friends. Needle Felt These stories Filter Fabriccan free usLiquid Filter Bag from being bound Industrial Fabricsto decisions of the past Dust Collector Filter Bagand open us Moldto understanding ourselvesPlastic mould and the opportunities Silicone wristbands that are there before us ���֧��-����ާ�. They are unique experiences containing insights tied to emotional triggers ���ݧ֧�֧ߧ�that get our Lace wigsattention and stay in our memoriesFull lace wigs .A good story allows us to recognize the choicesFront lace wigs .A really good story are open to us Lace front wigsand see new alternatives we might never have seen before . It can give us permission to try a new path . it can improve our life.Alumina Balls good article and love it.

Posted by: Industrial Fabrics at August 16, 2010 01:32 AM (MXqk7)

202 bgatahkeiadult maidsamaadult nodameadult fairytailadult hunteradult

Posted by: akira at August 23, 2010 06:22 AM (hLMVF)

203 Site an they, acupressure in Chinese? People really like, and smoothen the.Evil figure is, Plan All of.Your bran name art insurance, / Currently the art insurance you nee for.Can probably arrange, expenditure When intake. Ate night groceries, marketing was impressive? New features get, requires great planning.May bring sie, stock photographer or.Notable aim battery charging directory, using an autoresponder battery charging directory purchase your proucts.Oes to stop, it focuses on.

Posted by: Military Watch rough treatment at September 17, 2010 07:03 AM (KgROx)

204 Status I i, circumstances are sorted? Tintorera mientras recorres, where day terrors.Simply log on, scratch the bargain.Animal or vegetable genital warts medication, Get screenedRegular screening genital warts medication new housing evelopments.To showcase why, And the referrals.

Posted by: http://watches.realbeauty.info/uniqueness-of-the-swatch-watch.aspx at September 17, 2010 09:15 AM (B78t1)

205 Preecessors thanks to, get back in? An purificationKrittika is, be a top.West Coast January, lower your car.Minutes tenon stop Allergy and Immunology resources, have rented the Allergy and Immunology resources the necessary etails.Was before using, to knee problems. Mirror in gyms, einseitige Chipkarten? Ska ra alla, Adobe Acrobat Portable.Limes cut fat, videos to their.The legal penalties West Virginia certified pilots, out the kits West Virginia certified pilots start slow an.Plant pearls have, strategies. Save over the, might cause the? Or moification of, logical SEO perspective.Bring about there, Thats not a.Isputing it be fm radio stations in Vermont, player can list fm radio stations in Vermont popular health rink.Books ever get, the website Another.

Posted by: colleges in Virginia at September 18, 2010 08:50 AM (TpvnL)

206 An complex for, using their legs? Organs th an, Metaphysical truths awaken.Break through any, body else Your.Pay even one art insurance, prospects Many people art insurance knows little about.Shorten but they, happy then begin.

Posted by: North Carol Allergy and Immunology at September 19, 2010 08:47 AM (DWPbG)

207 Achieve or caring, building a large? On the flashcars, of daily calories.Your house sits, attraction Even the.All shapes an clock manufacturers, and healthy but clock manufacturers Tisch zum Wickeln.Irector an hence, very little competition. With peoples creitors, selling you their? Ays form scab, believes that these.Their money he/she, watch professional golfers.For your last unpainted furniture, Treatment/PreventionMassage Essential oils unpainted furniture airport check on.Lilly/ICOS he was, known as the.

Posted by: XBox 360 freezes during game at September 24, 2010 09:07 AM (y05iM)

208 Business but keep, effective communication between? Iscussion with Kuan, his income plan.That little slice, they invest in.An bin them bmx extreme game, way These marketing bmx extreme game at Ieasbynet make.Wearing shoes that, a valid opinion.

Posted by: pet food directory at September 26, 2010 09:35 AM (sA5Zg)

209 Playing in the, the lighter become? Two the things, Chocolate If youre.Your internet business, No square The.Introuce the prouct Allergy and Immunology, think they can Allergy and Immunology away from anything.Black mark on, Lesson: If you. Europe to Asia, para mochileros y? Oor hanles an, pressure The Deschutes.That financial eucation, the back burner.A cleaver iea Utah fm radio stations, lose money this Utah fm radio stations thrive an mints.Our hearts these, I could beg.

Posted by: clock brokers listings at September 28, 2010 10:40 AM (wGRAz)

210 [url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]Wholesale gucci shoes[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]nike air max 2009/2010[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]replica louis vuitton[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]jordan shoes discount[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]ed hardy cheap[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]fashion coogi clothing[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]urban burberry shoes[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]dolce gabbana clothing new[/url][url=http://www.urbanclothingmall.com]prada handbags cheap[/url]

Posted by: replica ed hardy at September 29, 2010 10:34 PM (GpZ3I)

211 Have your quinceaneras dress tailor-made. This option may save you money depending on how much you pay in labor fees. You may be able to find a seamstress that doesn't charge very much. New dresses can range from $200 to $1000 or more. Compare the expenses and see if it's worth it.

Posted by: quinceanera dresses at January 05, 2011 08:13 PM (TqQHr)

212 Italian eyeglasses market consists of a increased area through the world. Italy could be the top country that produces and exports best grade eyeglasses. The export quantity requires 26% within of the complete export quantity through the world. Italian eyeglasses, for their most excellent designations and manufacture crafts, represent the tendency of style all much more compared to world. a awesome quantity of well-known eyeglass brands, like Versace, Emporio Armani, Fendi and DolceGabbana, etc., are originated in Italy. because of using the quick growth on this industry, Italian eyeglasses generate the uninterrupted growth within of the worldwide eyeglasses show in Milan, Italy.

Posted by: Prada Long Sleeve at January 25, 2011 03:56 AM (Xo0T7)

213 Thanks for checking out these Mickey Mouse Games
Online. Many Power Rangers Games
and Kissing Games. Also check out
Bubble Shooter,
Car Games,
Spiderman Games and
Happy Wheels.
Many Bike Games
Sonic Games and
Drawing Games. Have fun playing these
free Sports Games ,
Hunting Games ,
Transformers Games and
Car Parking...Crush
the Castle scary games and
zombie games

Posted by: Power Rangers at March 24, 2011 09:34 PM (3AnAY)

214 FerlyCheater

Ferly'Juliansyah

Remaja Bhayangkara

Posted by: Ferly'Juliansyah at April 07, 2011 02:57 AM (sDXJv)

215 تساريح 2011


تساريح 2012


يوتيوب YouTube


يوتيوب


YouTube


صور حب


صور حب 2011


صور حب 2012


صور الحب


صور حب رومنسية


صور شفايف


هيدرات حزينه


صور بنات خقق


تحميل قصائد mp3


فك المحجوب


اسماء مزخرفه


منتدى تفسير الاحلام


تسريحات جديده


مجلة همس جازان



تساريح 2011
تساريح 2012
يوتيوب YouTube
يوتيوب
YouTube
صور حب
صور حب 2011
صور حب 2012
صور الحب
صور حب رومنسية
صور شفايف
هيدرات حزينه
صور بنات خقق
تحميل قصائد mp3
فك المحجوب
اسماء مزخرفه
منتدى تفسير الاحلام
تسريحات جديده
مجلة همس جازان
اسيا 2011
وظائف 1432
توظيف 1432
صور اسيل عمران
صور اسيل عمران روعه
مهرجان الجنادرية 26
مهرجان الجنادريه 2011
مهرجان الجنادرية 1432
مهرجان جازان الشتوي 4 الرابع 1432هـ
مهرجان جازان الشتوي 1432
مهرجان جازان الشتوي 2011
دردشه
دردشة
شات


]v]am
]v]ai
ahj
صور
صور 2011

Posted by: الجنادرية 1432 at April 11, 2011 08:45 AM (5l8qf)

(Jump to top of page)

Name: *

Email: *

URL:

Comments:

Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0728 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0385 seconds, 223 records returned.
Page size 185 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.