Saturday, November 28, 2009

Data Destined to Save All of Humanity Thrown Away...To "Save Space"

Let's try and put the destruction of the AGW raw data in some perspective.

Joe's Hardware store, Ma and Pa Kettle and the rest of us are required to keep records for tax audit purposes, Sara Palin had to keep her daily receipts, lest the international media pack successfully accused her of improperly reporting her lunches, heck I have to keep my dog's vaccination records or I can't cross the border with them.

Yet the data set which forms the foundation of a theory which seeks to reorder the world economy, affects the transfer of trillions of dollars, the purported purpose of which is to save all of humanity (at one of the most well funded international institutions on the planet) decides to throw it away space?

Uh, huh.

In other news, the Vatican was reported to have thrown away the remains of the Holy Grail, to make room for a new copy machine.


  1. Please tell me that Harper isn't going to Copenhagen before the government, at least, looks into the hacked emails, which expose the socalled, settled, global warming science. One more thing. These emails have allegedly been cherry-picked. What was left out? And, if taken out of context, what was the context?

  2. Hey, I'm not a subsidized scientist and neither are you. Hard drives are expensive things. It can reach as much as $100 per terabyte. Since 1990, CRU director Phil Jones has received only 22.6 millon dollars in grants. How can you expect him to keep crucial, irreplaceable data on such a tiny budget.

  3. I laugh at the "context" arguement because the emails are not single entities cherry picked but rather are available as part of the entire email strings. If you can see the emails before and all the replies there is NOTHING out of context.

  4. Some words, in or out of context have the same meaning.
    from the climategate files:

    "But what are all those monthly files? DON'T KNOW, UNDOCUMENTED. Wherever I look, there are data files, no info about what they are other than their names. And that's useless ..." (Page 17)

    - "It's botch after botch after botch." (18)

    - "The biggest immediate problem was the loss of an hour's edits to the program, when the network died ... no explanation from anyone, I hope it's not a return to last year's troubles ... This surely is the worst project I've ever attempted. Eeeek." (31)

    - "Oh, GOD, if I could start this project again and actually argue the case for junking the inherited program suite." (37)

    - "... this should all have been rewritten from scratch a year ago!" (45)

    - "Am I the first person to attempt to get the CRU databases in working order?!!" (47)

    - "As far as I can see, this renders the (weather) station counts totally meaningless." (57)

    - "COBAR AIRPORT AWS (data from an Australian weather station) cannot start in 1962, it didn't open until 1993!" (71)

    - "What the hell is supposed to happen here? Oh yeah -- there is no 'supposed,' I can make it up. So I have : - )" (98)

    - "You can't imagine what this has cost me -- to actually allow the operator to assign false WMO (World Meteorological Organization) codes!! But what else is there in such situations? Especially when dealing with a 'Master' database of dubious provenance ..." (98)

    - "So with a somewhat cynical shrug, I added the nuclear option -- to match every WMO possible, and turn the rest into new stations ... In other words what CRU usually do. It will allow bad databases to pass unnoticed, and good databases to become bad ..." (98-9)

    - "OH F--- THIS. It's Sunday evening, I've worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done, I'm hitting yet another problem that's based on the hopeless state of our databases." (241).

    - "This whole project is SUCH A MESS ..." (266)