----------------------------------------------
만일 인간의 본성이 악해서 그들에게 자유를 허용할 수 없다면, 그렇다면 관리들의 본성은 어떻게 항상 선한가? 입법가와 그들이 임명한 관료들은 인간이 아니란 말인가? 아니면 그들은 자신들을 만든 진흙이 나머지 인간들과 달리 조금 고급이었다고 믿고 있는 것인가?
--- 프레데릭 바스티아
-------------------------------
나심 탈레브 어록
By indiscriminately attacking Trump, even when he does the right thing, the pseudoleft is elevating him & self-destructing.
옳은 일을 할 때에도 무차별적으로 트럼프를 비난함으로써, 사이비 좌파들은 트럼프를 올려주고, 자신들은 자폭하고 있다.
I systematically decline invitations to conf. discussing "populism" as if it were some type of pathology. Mere term "populism" misframes
나는 포퓰리즘을 병리 현상처럼 여기는 포퓰리즘 토론회의 초정을 일률적으로 거부하고 있다. 용어 포퓰리즘 자체가 잘못된 용어이다.
------------------------------
2015년 파리의 기후 협약에 영향을 미치기 위해 NOAA가 자료를 조작, 왜곡해서 온난화가 계속 지속되었다고 발표했다
ClimateGate 2 - NOAA Whistleblower Claims World Leaders Fooled By Fake Global Warming Data
by Tyler Durden
Feb 5, 2017
Dr John Bates' disclosures about the manipulation of data behind the so-called 'Pausebuster' paper is the biggest scientific scandal since 'Climategate' in 2009 when, as Britain's Daily Mail reported, thousands of leaked emails revealed scientists were trying to block access to data, and using a 'trick' to conceal embarrassing flaws in their claims about global warming.
Britain's Mail on Sunday today revealed astonishing evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.
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.
In an exclusive interview, Dr Bates accused the lead author of the paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data – the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) – of ‘insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximised warming and minimised documentation… in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming pause, rushed so that he could time publication to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy’.
The scandal has disturbing echoes of the ‘Climategate’ affair which broke shortly before the UN climate summit in 2009, when the leak of thousands of emails between climate scientists suggested they had manipulated and hidden data. Some were British experts at the influential Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.
His disclosures are likely to stiffen President Trump’s determination to enact his pledges to reverse his predecessor’s ‘green’ policies, and to withdraw from the Paris deal – so triggering an intense political row.
As The Mail continues, whatever takes its place, said Dr Bates, "there needs to be a fundamental change to the way NOAA deals with data so that people can check and validate scientific results. I’m hoping that this will be a wake-up call to the climate science community – a signal that we have to put in place processes to make sure this kind of crap doesn’t happen again.
"I want to address the systemic problems. I don’t care whether modifications to the datasets make temperatures go up or down. But I want the observations to speak for themselves, and for that, there needs to be a new emphasis that ethical standards must be maintained."
He said he decided to speak out after seeing reports in papers including the Washington Post and Forbes magazine claiming that scientists feared the Trump administration would fail to maintain and preserve NOAA’s climate records.
Dr Bates said: "How ironic it is that there is now this idea that Trump is going to trash climate data, when key decisions were earlier taken by someone whose responsibility it was to maintain its integrity – and failed."
NOAA not only failed, but it effectively mounted a cover-up when challenged over its data.
After the paper was published, the US House of Representatives Science Committee launched an inquiry into its Pausebuster claims. NOAA refused to comply with subpoenas demanding internal emails from the committee chairman, the Texas Republican Lamar Smith, and falsely claimed that no one had raised concerns about the paper internally.
Last night Mr Smith thanked Dr Bates "for courageously stepping forward to tell the truth about NOAA’s senior officials playing fast and loose with the data in order to meet a politically predetermined conclusion".
He added: "The Karl study used flawed data, was rushed to publication in an effort to support the President’s climate change agenda, and ignored NOAA’s own standards for scientific study."
Professor Curry, now the president of the Climate Forecast Applications Network, said last night: ‘Large adjustments to the raw data, and substantial changes in successive dataset versions, imply substantial uncertainties.’
It was time, she said, that politicians and policymakers took these uncertainties on board.
아래는 영국의 메일 온라인의 헤드라인
Exposed: How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data
- The Mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper exaggerated global warming
- It was rushed through and timed to influence the Paris agreement on climate change
- America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules
- The report claimed the pause in global warming never existed, but it was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기