“God, I love this woman! I’m retired and semi-handicapped, so I watch a lot of CSPAN, and I’ve seen her testify or take part on panels a number of times, and her intelligence and earnestness shine. I say let her and Sheila Baer run the economy and let Larry and Tim go back home!”
On Knowing Where the Wind Blows, With or Without Weathermen
Fallout from “ClimateGate”—the leaked e-mails from University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, purporting that the immediacy of concern about global warming may have been forced—prompted a lengthy and thorough analysis by CJR’s Curtis Brainard about the objectivity of climate coverage.
“I like the logic on display here. Emails deleted in response to an FOI request are no biggie (and who cares what the emails said anyway), but emails released by a whistleblower are a “hack” and “theft.”
“Real Climate may have been surreptitiously and dishonestly barring any opinions from its “neutral” site that went against the AGW “consensus (even to the point of deleting reader comments), but they’re still the best place to look for info. What??
“You guys are in denial. The upstart of all this is that people no longer trust AGW-promoting “scientists” and that goes triple for anyone or thing remotely connected to Climategate. So goodbye Jones, Real Climate, Mann, “value added” data, etc, etc.”
“Kudos on a surprisingly even handed article on this ongoing story.
“Couple of points. Although the emails have received the most attention, the data release was not strictly limited to emails. Also included were chat logs and raw source code and the code is one of the more interesting, and under reported aspects of the story. Programmer Eric Raymond took a look at the code and concluded that Mann’s now famous hockey stick was hardcoded into the program so that no matter what data was entered, the results would always show a similar significant warming trend. This follows a critical report issued by the National Academy of Sciences Edward Wegman who found significant issues with the statistical methodology used by Mann and co. It’s no wonder why the CRU and its affiliates were so hesitant to release the source code for their models.
“While the emails may show a degree of tribalism, professional bullying, groupthink and possible criminal conspiracies (misreporting grant money and destroying FOIA material), the code is where we might see real evidence of scientific fraud.
“The lack of transparency is what’s key, and journalists have fallen flat on their asses when it comes to demanding it.”
Shut Up, CJR!
After President Obama’s speech on strategy in Afghanistan, CNN convened a small party of media types to analyze his remarks—including, for some reason, Dr. Sanjay Gupta. A reader not-so-subtly slammed CJR for not giving the good doctor his due. for presenting opinion as fact; perhaps the journalistic equivalent of a premature “mission accomplished” speech.
“I am getting a little tired of these CJR reviews. You are doing a disservice to the Columbia name with these trivial, opinion-as-fact articles. Your editorial peculiarities are particularly annoying. Sanjay Gupta was one of the few that taught me something I hadn’t already heard a thousand times, I wonder sometimes if the writers for this site even watch or read what they blog about. I expect a little more diligence from this brand name school.”