A speaker from Natural Resources Canada followed me at a conference on “Global Climate Change: Forest Industry Impacts and Responses.” He was speaking in a section titled, “Science and Climate Change Modeling” presumably providing the official government position. Did the Minister approve his position? Government employees doing research almost guarantees a compromise with science. Worse, they have the entire power of government to impose their views. It is at the heart of the problems with climate science because Maurice Strong promoted the bad science through the bureaucracies of the UN and then weather agencies in every country. Instead of disproving the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hypothesis following normal scientific procedure they worked to prove it. The conference tells the story. It was more about dealing with government policies than with the validity of the science on which those policies were based.
Distortion of The Temperature Record
Weather and climate boondoggles are almost all associated with government agencies and there are two major areas of concern, research and data. Governments control climate research funding so the problem is extended to those they choose to support. What happens if those paid by them find evidence that contradicts the government’s position? Governments control collection and distribution of data. There are many examples of governments creating a record to suit their position. As Anthony Wattsnotes in his examination of US weather stations that, “We observed that changes in the technology of temperature stations over time also has caused them to report a false warming trend. We found major gaps in the data record that were filled in with data from nearby sites, a practice that propagates and compounds errors. We found that adjustments to the data by both NOAA and another government agency, NASA, cause recent temperatures to look even higher.”
He concludes, “The conclusion is inescapable: The U.S. temperature record is unreliable.” And it is supposedly the best in the world. Watts with Joe D’Aleo have produced an excellent monograph of worldwide problems.
A Classic Example Of Government Science
The government employee opened by taking issue with my presentation when I had no opportunity to respond. Apparently his problem was because I openly gave a biased presentation identifying what was wrong with the ‘official’ climate science that was the basis of the government’s position. I argued that all most people had heard was a bias and they could put the two together and draw their own conclusions. What I presented clearly put his scientific view and therefore the government’s claims in jeopardy. It had to be attacked.
I presented Farhad Manjoo’s claim that: “Facts no longer matter. We simply decide how we want to see the world and then go out and find experts and evidence to back our beliefs.” He misunderstood this by saying the facts do matter, not realizing the facts Manjoo is talking about are manufactured for the purpose. Ironically, in attempting to refute my presentation he used an example that reinforced my position; except he was unaware of what was wrong.
His view and presentation was based on total acceptance of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claim that the warming is due to CO2. It was the government’s position not what the science shows. He said recent temperatures are the warmest on record. Of course they are because the world has generally warmed since the end of the Little Ice Age. He simply accepts data without understanding its source and limitations.
What he ignored is that global temperature has not increased since 1998 and declined since 2001 as Phil Jones, former Climatic Research Unit (CRU) Director acknowledged.
Kevin Trenberth, another CRU member said, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
Well government agencies have found a way to account for the lack of warming. The example used to show I was wrong was a classic example of Manjoo’s claim.