When I was a kid there was a game shown on television known as “re-arrange the words into a well known phrase or saying”.  Words on a magnetic board such as “saves in nine a time stitch” appeared and if the contestant could get it right he or she would win a prize.  It was an asinine game but in those days there was only two television channels and not much else to watch.

That game is still being played today, particularly by politicians when talking of other politicians. Someone could speak or write ten thousand words but his or her enemy could select a few of them out of context to “prove” something which is not provable.

This game of rearranging sentences and words and meanings to fit a well rehearsed point of view was played when the email mails of researchers of the University of East Anglia were hacked into a few years ago and it is now being played when parts of a draft IPCC report has been leaked. Someone who thinks that anthropogenic climate change is nonsense has seized on a very small passage in a very long report and now claims “Full AR5 draft leaked here, contains game-changing admission of enhanced solar forcing”.

I suppose that is just about as fair a summary of the draft IPCC report as it would be of the nearly two thousand posts I have made, many about climate change, because in one post I wrote about solar forcing, because I have tried to be comprehensive in my understanding of climate change and have written about all theories that I know of.

The way that the email mails of researchers of the University of East Anglia works is by peer review. It may not be satisfactory but unless there is a genius thinker that we all know and trust, it has to be by a peer review of successive drafts which should, as all drafts should, remain confidential until all those peers have reached agreement upon a final draft. The sceptics should wait; the final report when published will be long enough and comprehensive enough for them to play “re-arrange the words into a well known phrase or saying” for as long as they like.

The draft report is at http://www.stopgreensuicide.com/

2 Responses

  1. As a lawyer you should know that a genuine alibi fits ALL the facts not just some.

    It is the same with theories. The theory must fit ALL the facts otherwise it’s wrong.

    If I write a witness statement setting out my alibi then everything in it must support my alibi. One inaccuracy may expose the whole statement as fiction. Its the same with theories.

    To be a good liar you also need a good memory whereas honest recollection will be corroborated.

    In the IPCC report, failure to maintain a lie/theory throughout a report is not merely inadvertence, as you suggest. In my view it is a sign of inconsistency.

    Remember that the IPCC predicted melting of the Himalayan Glaciers. Of course it was wrong and based on an alarmist unscientific editorial. When it was exposed as nonsense and accepted as such by the IPCC it responded by saying its only a few words out of thousands. Surely no trained scientist would allow any inaccuracy of this nature unless his report had an ulterior purpose.

    Like many quangos and NGO’s, climate change followers have now created a gravy train for themselves and want to maintain it.

    Much of the problem is due to the fact that there are very few active scientists now involved in climate change science.

    However there are vast numbers of lobbyists, middle managers, advertising gurus, etc etc who don’t even have an ‘O’ level in physics between them. These intelligent but ignorant executives are intent on maintaining their income.

    So, they belittle those who query climate change theories because they do not have a clue about physics.

    They ignore the genuine flaws in AGW theory because they do not have a basic understanding of physics.

    All of this means that they can quite happily ignore inconsistencies in their reports because they do not understand how such inconsistencies damage their arguments.

    By way of an example, imagine if Darwin’s Origin Of Species had included a statement like this. “Whilst homo sapiens and all other life forms emerged from a single species the female homo sapiens was created independently when a super powerful being removed a rib from a man called Adam (in about 20,000BC) and turned it into the female.”

    Such a statement could hardly be excused as just a few words out of thousands. It would clearly undermine the whole Darwin’s theory.

  2. Darwin, Einstein and others were forerunners of science and hand sellected to say it as they saw it, many of their theories are patently rediculous as is AGW a model of concern.

    Basically money talks, funding for expeditions are and still are being paid by those who want value over reality.

    Older theories are often debunked over time, and as home grown science gives a physical reality in frame.

    The driving force of all inacuracies are grown by failing to see them directly.

    We are reaching an awakening like we have never seen in modern history, to prolongue the lies and pain all we need to do is nothing and our answers will be decided by those who are paid to promote non sciences by a controlled medium, the masses are forced to follow.

    The truth will out, but not before exhausting the whole.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 329 other followers

%d bloggers like this: