Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br /> 2. But then the shock of CLIMATEGATE, circa 2009, reverberated throughout the <br /> climate change community. The revelation, due to an unauthorized release of <br /> HADCRU emails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia(part <br /> of the IPCC), that some researchers were manipulating climate data to make it appear the <br /> earth was heating up dangerously, was a game-changer for ethical scientists who had <br /> previously trusted the IPCC to present honest and accurate reports. <br /> The emails revealed that a number of IPCC authors (1) had evaded FOIA requests for <br /> data, (2) had cherry-picked data, (3) had manipulated the peer review process, (4) had <br /> downplayed uncertainty, and(5) had otherwise attempted to squash and discredit <br /> skeptics. <br /> The IPCC had been funded to study/discover only negative, anthropogenic influences on <br /> climate change, thus avoiding a comprehensive look at all influences and all results, <br /> both positive and negative, which would have been the most scientific approach to the <br /> topic. And Climategate was, apparently, one result of this narrow directive. <br /> In the aftermath of Climategate, one scientist—Judith Curry—posted this commentary6 <br /> "ON THE CREDIBILITY OF CLIMATE RESEARCH" on Climate Audit, an award- <br /> winning skeptics blog'. The Climate Audit site is worth reviewing, to read alternate <br /> professional viewpoints on issues (the essence of what science is supposed to do— <br /> discuss/debate in an arena where all information is welcomed, where all voices may be <br /> heard). <br /> '��I @K <br /> �[ <br /> rd <br /> winner <br /> Prof. Curry points to the need for the climate scientists to do better at making data <br /> publicly available, to be completely transparent about their methods, to be honest about <br /> uncertainties, and to be more respectful to scientists critical of the research. <br /> "..two broader issues raised by these emails that are impeding the public <br /> credibility of climate research: lack of transparency in climate data, and <br /> "tribalism"in some segments of the climate research community that is <br /> impeding peer review and the assessment process." <br /> School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences,Georgia Institute of Technology,Atlanta,Georgia;National <br /> Center for Atmospheric Research,Boulder,Colorado <br /> CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:Judith A.Curry,School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences,Georgia <br /> Institute of Technology,311 Ferst Drive,Atlanta.,GA 30332-0340,E-mail:curryjaneas.gatech.edu <br /> 6 hops://climateaudit.org/2009/11/22/curry-on-the-credibility-of-climate-research/ <br /> 'hLtps://climateaudit.org/author/stevemciptyre/re/ <br />