The Glade 4.0

... broke the law when they refused to release the raw data that no longer exists for public scrutiny.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/e ... 004936.ece


More at the link.

Awesome stuff.

_________________

A college did not comply with FOIA request, therefore HIGCC is fake.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

You should really address the issue of the original post instead of making statements that are not contained in this thread.

_________________

Hackers broke the law when they exposed emails from these folks, therefore the information contained in the emails should be discounted.

The raw data was out of context thought; so perhaps we're missing context about why the CRU broke the law?

_________________

To say that HIGCC is conclusively false because the colleges did not comply with FOIA requests would be bad science.

However, refusing to make your data available to someone who might prove you wrong on the grounds that they might prove you wrong is the very definition of bad science. This means that HIGCC has the dubious honor of joining Heliocentrism and Intelligent Design.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Kind of like using claims about glacial melt and vanishing rain forest from unrelated articles, opinion pieces no less, as the basis the for your conclusion while claiming the peer review unmatched in scientific circles.

Not quite yet. They also might not prove you wrong. HIGCC has one foot in that door, but it's not all the way in just yet.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Generally, however, people withhold data out of fear of negative consequences. It's very rare that anyone withholds data that is expected to produce a positive outcome.

_________________

That's true, but we don't want to go down the road of "but Comrade, if you are not guilty, why are you on trial?"

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

It doesn't matter why the data is withheld. Doing so is, by its very nature, bad science. This is why we make people taking freshman chemistry turn in a **** data table along with their labs. You aren't suddenly exempt from having to properly record data and make it available just because you got a PhD.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

The book I'm reading (between schoolwork) indicates that, at the federal law level, we're already there.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

We're not going down that road. We are going down the road of "In keeping with every established tenet of science, where is your data?"

_________________

I understand that. However, if we're saying "If you haven't shown your data, your conclusions are necessarily wrong" then yes, we are going down that road, even if its highly likely that the data is withheld for that reason.



Then they're barking up the wrong tree. To the degree that such a principle exists in this country, domestic violence law and domestic law in general has the market cornered.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Diamondeye:

I would suggest our President has made comments indicating such thought before, particularly with regards to certain high-profile criminals.

_________________

He may have, but the situation with regard to domestic violence, divorce, child support, etc. predates both Obama and the terrorist problems of 9/11 by quite a while. Anything that has happened in that regard since 9/11 is just building on the basis of state laws on those topics and Lautenburg.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

You have to look into what those consequences might be. There is a presumption that the data was bad, that it was ginned up, or that the data was somehow indicative of a conclusion that would bring down the supposed conspiracy of HIGCC. None of this is true.

Like the emails that got illegally hacked, then cherry picked for sound bites, this data likely doesn't say what it would be portrayed as saying. Scientists do not have the mechanisms in place to wage a political fight and a media battle over how their data is represented, or misrepresented. The people attempting to quell legislation aimed at curbing this threat, however, do.

So when they withold something from people hell bent on making them look bad, regardless of the factual nature of their accusations, it's an act of self defense that is not necessarily born of some nefarious intent.

In other words, people will lie about the work the scientists are doing. They have the money to make those lies stick, as was clear with the email theft. So scientists are legitimate worried that their work will be severely damaged by powerful interests that seek to cut off and hamper their efforts.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

Wow....

_________________
The Dude abides.

Except... if the data was released, and it stood up to scrutiny... maybe it wouldn't be so bad?

What are they worried about? If its happening as the data *so clearly shows*, then peer review and other scientific entities could come to the same conclusions.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Science education has become muddied in recent decades. Rather than data being something to be held up to close scrutiny, it is presented as something to be fudged so that you arrive at the proper known values.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Which works with **** like statistics. With harder sciences, run your experiments, show your work, and see if someone else can repeat it. If the replicate your experiment, and get the same data, then a third person can confirm it etc. That's the way science works.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

How do you know this without having the data? If you can't see the data, how do you know it even exists? How do you know it's not bad, and how do you know it wasn't "ginned up"?

And even if you do buy into it, how do you justify telling taxpayers to pay millions, possibly billions, to correct a situation identified by non-existant data?

What if I told you that Iraqistan was developing nuclear weapons and working directly with Al Queda, and we need to invade them to stop them? I can't show you the data behind my claims, but it's extremely important that we act now!



Do you honestly believe that scientists should be withholding their data to protect themselves from scrutiny? Where's the accountability for bad claims? If their data was correct, wouldn't it help their case and get more people on board? What if their data is wrong? People that will make false claims will do so anyway, don't you think? Why give them ammunition by hiding your work?

Why should I take anyone's word for it? Show me. Why is that wrong?

Because, it is not for you to question the minions of Gaia! Or something.

So the scientific groups, say out of Russia, claiming that the total data collection points do not follow the conclusions of the much smaller subset used, and "adjusted", by another gorup are lying, despite putting their data values on the table for review?

Are you saying that the IPCC didn't just admit to using unrelated and opinion based statements as the argument in favor of global warming?

They don't need the media to make them look bad, they got that covered all on their own.

It's actually a really good book by a civil rights attorney who handled some big cases or whatever.

Really goes to show you how precarious freedom is when the government decides to target you.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine