SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the we-need-a-full-copy-of-production-for-testing dept.
A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.
The report claimed that the 'pause' or 'slowdown' in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world's media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.
But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, 'unverified' data.
It was never subjected to NOAA's rigorous internal evaluation process – which Dr Bates devised.
His vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were overridden by his NOAA superiors in what he describes as a 'blatant attempt to intensify the impact' of what became known as the Pausebuster paper.
More details can be found in his own words here:
They promised to begin an archive request for the K15 datasets that were not archived; however I have not been able to confirm they have been archived. I later learned that the computer used to process the software had suffered a complete failure, leading to a tongue-in-cheek joke by some who had worked on it that the failure was deliberate to ensure the result could never be replicated.
https://judithcurry.com/2017/02/04/climate-scientists-versus-climate-data/
(Score: 4, Interesting) by canopic jug on Monday February 06 2017, @08:17PM
China experimented with decentralized steel production in one of their idiotic plans or another. From memory it ended up not being terribly productive and definitely not green. Just a warning the decentralized isn't the answer for all industries.
Making steel was just the official reason, the real reasons being in my opinion the destruction of any pre-communist cultural artifacts (even paper and cloth containing pins or rivets) and especially weapons. Anything and everything metallish was thrown into the crucibles. Weapon technology was a lot more primitive and larger numbers armed with knives could overwhelm smaller numbers armed with lame varieties of rifle, especially if the latter group was unmotivated or even demoralized. There was a lot of discontent brewing at that time and the melting to slag of all spare metal objects got rid of potential weapons, and got people worrying more about their next meal again. By the time Mao was done with making slag (yeah it was slag not steel), there were not even sufficient kitchen knives to go around.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 06 2017, @10:20PM
. Weapon technology was a lot more primitive and larger numbers armed with
Bosun's Mate: "15 year old Libertarian decloaking off the starboard bow, Sir!"
Cap't of the Watch: "Does he post a hazard to navigation?"
Mate: "Vessel in heading on a collision course, but it is only a dinghy."
Cap't: "Well then, hardly a threat to a ship of state. Hold course and speed."
Mate: "Should we attempt a rescue, Sir?"
Cap't: "Of what, Bosun's Mate?"
Mate: "Of the debris, Sir."
Cap't: "Not likely to be worth the trouble of salvage. Carry on."
Mate: "Aye, aye, Sir."