NASA climate expert hopes Copenhagen summit fails/ Researcher: NASA hiding climate data

[The Straight Story]

NASA climate expert hopes Copenhagen summit fails


LONDON — A leading scientist who helped alert the world to the dangers of global warming said on Thursday that climate talks in Copenhagen next week were based on such flawed proposals that he hoped they failed.

James Hansen, the director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies since 1981, said attempts to forge a global deal on cutting emissions after the Kyoto treaty expires were based on a "fundamentally wrong" approach.

"I would rather it not happen if people accept that as being the right track because it's a disaster track," he told Britain's Guardian newspaper ahead of the December 7-18 summit.

Hansen is highly sceptical about a favoured measure of cutting greenhouse gas emissions, a cap-and-trade system under which a progressively stricter 'right to pollute' is exchanged in a carbon market.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jO2pLVBLjWYsotROnOiXJDITLByw


Researcher: NASA hiding climate data

The fight over global warming science is about to cross the Atlantic with a U.S. researcher poised to sue NASA, demanding release of the same kind of climate data that has landed a leading British center in hot water over charges it skewed its data.

Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said NASA has refused for two years to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act that would show how the agency has shaped its climate data and would explain why the agency has repeatedly had to correct its data going as far back as the 1930s.

"I assume that what is there is highly damaging," Mr. Horner said. "These guys are quite clearly bound and determined not to reveal their internal discussions about this."

The numbers matter. Under pressure in 2007, NASA recalculated its data and found that 1934, not 1998, was the hottest year in its records for the contiguous 48 states. NASA later changed that data again, and now 1998 and 2006 are tied for first, with 1934 slightly cooler.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/researcher-says-nasa-hiding-climate-data/

[tabatha]

1. Yes, I read that about Chris Horner.

But, I think maybe it would be good for NASA to release the info, and finding nothing, maybe everyone will see that the current data dump furor is nothing.

As for recalculating data - what is nefarious about that if it was done in the open and is well-known? Not all research goes 100% perfectly.

[The Straight Story]

2. Well there is where you hit on something important here:

"Not all research goes 100% perfectly. "

So if I/someone thinks climate change data is wrong, and I question it, than such is ok or would I/them be called a kook/denier?

I have seen enough bad science to be skeptical of studies, does not mean I deny they are right, just nice to be able to be skeptical and not be called a kook (and some don't 'deny' it but the causes).

When questioning studies/research becomes taboo, we all lose.

[tabatha]

6. The fact that the error was found means that people

are reviewing stuff all the time. It is good if it is being reviewed, and checked and scrutinized.
If just one error amongst all the data is found, it means it was probably 99% correct.

[JDPriestly]

11. The Straight Story, how much do you understand about the science

of climate. If you are informed in this area, I would like to know whether you think this is an El Nino year? Will we finally get a decent amount of rain in Southern California? I'm serious. If you know enough about science to be skeptical about global warming and the general consensus about its causes, then what is most likely to happen to the Gulf Stream this year>

[Hannah Bell]

13. what he's saying -- why not open the data? -- has nothing to do with your disingenuous

demand that he "prove" his fitness to ask the question.

transparency is good. under democratic assumptions, at least. ymmv.

[patrice]

3. Isn't the problem that it's all the basis for cap & trade, so it's more than just an argument

amongst scientists, it's a flawed basis for a flawed policy.

[phasma ex machina]

5. Enron inspired cap & trade seems destined to epic fail. nt

[patrice]

8. I don't know whether to be glad or not. I GUESS a bad solution is worse than no solution.

[sam sarrha]

4. "HEAD LINES 2065" one Schizophrenic scientist DOOMED MANKIND..back in 2009.." there's no hope now".

:cry:

[midnight]

7. Wow..... Knowledge is power and apparently NASA is going to share.

[Viking12]

9. For fucks sake! Horner of the CEI writing in the Washington Times? WTF has happened to DU?

The data is on the web for christ's sake! Has been for a VERY long time.
See here:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

[Johonny]

10. Apparently some people want to believe

nothing new really at the DU. There's low probability believers in all kinds of areas. Their view doesn't reflect the majority of DU users and really shouldn't be that big a worry.

[neverforget]

12. Their allies are Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh and Sen Inhofe just to name a few.

nice friends. :sarcasm:

[tabatha]

14. Is he wanting data or emails.

Surely, someone could point him to the data?

[berni_mccoy]

15. Dude. Moonie Rag, not a credible source.

[tabatha]

16. Yeah, but he has filed an actual lawsuit.