Most conspiracy theories don’t hold up well to scrutiny for very simple reasons. People are not that efficient, and it is not that easy to persuade all the people who have to know into silence. Some either want no part in a conspiracy of silence or are arrogant enough to be unaware that what they are saying exposes them. The conspiracy would become obvious.
To prove that rule there is a genuine conspiracy, and it is becoming ever more obvious as inefficiency causes leaks and as some of those in the conspiracy tell all.
Last week The Register published an article about the refusal of various organisations involved in climate research to release their raw data and data processing information. The excuses given beggar belief from confidentiality clauses (why are the UK and Danish Met Office keeping data secret?) to losing data, some of which might have been made verbally and not written down. So a research organisation is seriously suggesting we forego tens of trillions of dollars, yet they cannot be bothered to write the numbers down.
The worst excuse might be,
“Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Well maybe because that is science, Professor Jones. Interesting that The Register considers him an “activist-scientist”. The two terms are mutually exclusive; I know which I think he is.
In any other field a scientific paper with a novel conclusion is an invitation for others to try to replicate the results. Until someone can do so then the original paper is considered highly speculative. If other groups are not able to do so then it is generally concluded that the original research was flawed in some way. So if the data are not available then the science can never be judged to have solid grounding, let alone settled beyond all debate.
It is clear from the article that there is a conspiracy to keep the raw data from being studied by scientists who might challenge the conclusion that human activity is changing the climate in a predictable way. This seems to be part of a wider conspiracy. Notice how difficult it is to conceal such a conspiracy, even with the collusion of the UN, of most of the news media and of almost all politicians in the democratic nations? Professor Jones did not remain silent, and the CRU made an error, leaving information on a server, that makes the conspiracy obvious.
Hat tip Small Dead Animals.
