A 1-In-100 Blogger: Smelling the ClimateGate data

Thursday, February 4, 2010

Smelling the ClimateGate data

Danny, a good friend of mine from high school and a guy that I have a lot of respect for, and I are having a conversation about a 'hot button' topic, "ClimateGate." It's interesting, because we have quite different viewpoints; we're both pretty uninformed, but Danny will usually take the side of the scientists who claim anthropogenic (man-made) global warming is real. I, on the other hand, am a little more skeptical after news reports of the Climategate scandal went public.

The release of a thousand email messages and a collection of data and data processing programs from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit is calling to question assumptions on anthropogenic global warming. My goal talking with Danny is to help clear up some much-needed, unanswered questions that he may know a little more about than I do.

As I said before, I have utmost respect for Danny Tarlow. So much so that I virtually used the same introduction (Heh) that he did when introducing his own blog entry on our Climategate discussion. I'm his biggest fan! He's probably the smartest guy I know, so his input is invaluable to me.

Like Danny said, the bigger issue on Climategate is really how we as non climate experts can make sense out of so many conflicting stories. Where there is bias and politically-charged agendas looming at every turn, there will always be controversies. In our ongoing discussion, I think we're both seeking the truth; finding common ground in an uncommon scandal, and with civility and respect.

To me, this is one of the most enlightening and fun conversations I've had on the issue of Climategate. While I cannot say the end will result in us seeing eye-to-eye, hopefully we can both learn something new. I know Danny can teach me a lot, so I'm trying to learn as much as I can from his opinion on the issue.

For my readers who are just as confused about Climategate as I am, but who seek the opinion of others from both sides of the issue, I highly recommend heading over to our discussion! And of course, with civility in mind, feel free to comment as we go:

Hot Button Issues Part 2: ClimateGate | This Number Crunching Life

I'm not a number cruncher myself, but through my questions and the enlightening responses from some very intelligent friends, I'm smelling the ClimateGate data... so to speak, you know, like, twisting words and stuff... I'm done.


Danny Tarlow said...

Oh, stop it derek, you're embarrassing me.

It has been an interesting discussion, though. It's nice to step outside our own little worlds every once in a while, to realize that our world view isn't the only one. Thanks for all the time you put into the discussions!

A 1-In-100 Blogger said...

The discussion isn't over quite yet! Like you said, there's still more to cover, but due to the tone and direction of the conversation it makes sense to take a breather.

I still have more questions though. But that could be saved for another day and another time. ;-)

The discussion we had on your blog was one of the most fun I've had in awhile! I think you're right, too. It's always a good idea to learn from opposing view points to grasp a more balanced idea on a topic we're clearly not experts in, but definitely interesting about.

A 1-In-100 Blogger said...

I just noticed more comments keep piling up from our discussion. I knew it was far from over!

This leaves me with no other choice but to respond ...there's something about controversial debates that I cannot help but embrace my desire to join in on the fun.

A 1-In-100 Blogger said...

Comments seem to be currently disabled on Danny's blog post, so I'll post here to clear up one issue:

Science has no agenda; politics is an agenda.

This goes for both sides of the political spectrum. It's why I brought up Cap and Trade, because it's just another tax scheme to funnel profits from the private sector and redistribute to people or programs of the governments choice; there are also private companies who would have an agenda to pass Cap and Trade, in this case it would be all about the motivation of profits. The question would be then, who are the shareholders and who essentially owns the agenda that's driving the global warming movement?

There are also three issues I think is important to bring up with regards to agenda's on global warming.

We have the issue of...

1) Who profits from the global warming movement said to be caused by humans?

2) Global warming (in general) seems more likely to be true, but proving that humans are causing it is a much more complex and almost far-reaching conclusion.

3) If the data is sound and the scientists had nothing to hide - then why did they circumvent the freedom of information act?