UN Climate Panel Accused of Possible Research Fraud

[Terri]

NewsBusters

At virtually the same time NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies was correcting historical climate data with the assistance of Climate Audit's Steve McIntyre, a British mathematician discovered serious flaws in papers used and cited by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its most recent Assessment Report.

Douglas J. Keenan, a former Morgan Stanley arbitrageur and current independent mathematical researcher, identified "fabrications" in such studies that suggest a "marked lack of integrity in some important work on global warming that is relied upon by the IPCC" and that "the insignificance of urbanization effects on temperature measurements has not been established as reliably as the IPCC assessment report assumes."

More (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/08/10/un-s-ipcc-accused-possible-research-fraud)

[Whitetop]

Who expects the IPCC to use integrity when reporting anything? They do have their own agenda.

[qrayjack]

Actually Al Gore is right. It's deathly hot here in Arkansas. Got to be global warming. All is lost. We're doomed. We should have listened to... uh... oops. Sorry. False alarm. Just looked at the calendar. It's August.

[candles]

Jack you scared me for a moment. :o

This is a lot of junk math, if wrong numbers go in a wrong number will be the final result.
Meteorological stations sometimes move, and this can affect the temperature measurements of the stations. For example, one of the stations relied upon by the above two papers was originally located on the upwind side of a city and later moved, 25 km, to be on the downwind side of the city. Such a move would be expected to increase the measured temperatures, because a city generates heat. Another station relied upon by the papers was originally located in the center of a city and then moved, 15 km, to be by the shore of a sea. Such a move would be expected to decrease the measured temperatures.
Jones et al. and Wang et al. consider the same 84 meteorological stations in China. Regarding 49 of those stations, the DOE/CAS report says, "station histories are not currently available" and "details regarding instrumentation, collection methods, changes in station location or observing times ... are not known" (sect. 5). For those 49 stations, then, the above-quoted statements from the two papers are impossible.
The method of collecting data must remain the same, locations must remain the same, time of day must remain the same. Do I see a pattern here?

[rangerrebew]

I believe :algore: when he says people are being paid $10,000 per pop to call into question his "data":rolleyes: . My question is why would they pay that much when its so easy for people to see through the hoax to begin with?:confused: What does this make of Lenny DeCraprio's new sci-fi flick on global gore(ing)? By the way, are any of these measuring stations near the Chappaquidick bridge or Cape Cod?:p Oh yeah, the Kennedy's wouldn't allow them to detract from their scenic compounds.:barf:

[schillerbjr]

Rush Limbaugh has more credibility than the UN
on "any given day"!! Get the USA out of the UN!