Byung Kyu Park's Personal Website

Global warming always had many signs of bad science (politicization, demonization of skeptics, and lack of verifiable predictions), but had many liberal scientists believing in it. Hopefully fraud is where even these liberal scientists stop:

One of the most damning e-mails published comes from Dr. Jones himself. In an e-mail from almost exactly ten years ago, Jones appears to discuss a method of overlaying data of temperature declines with repetitive, false data of higher temperatures:

Now that the fraud on the part of some of its advocates is known, will scientists (climatologist or not) finally start acting like scientists, looking at claims with skeptical, analytical view and being wary of inconsistent data—even while, as we always do, trusting it as a rule of thumb (experiments are expensive and difficult to repeat, and for a scientist to alter his raw data is like a clergy altering words of the Bible)?

Or will they brush this aside, saying, “So, what if some of us committed fraud? It was for the public’s own good. They need to be scared into doing the right thing!”

Well, the public will be scared into doing the right thing—they will cut off science funding, and backlash doesn’t need to be limited to global warming research—and it will be for their own good—and the scientists, if only as a lesson for posterity.

Seldom is it good science ever comes out of politics. When someone tries politicizing their research (Al Gore and his acolytes), be very wary. Politics has a way of freezing everyone into their (often prejudiced) position, and there is no room for that in science.

In Guardian:

‘It does not really matter whether 2007 or 2008 is the worst year on record for Arctic ice,’ Maslowski said. ‘The crucial point is that ice is clearly not building up enough over winter to restore cover and that when you combine current estimates of ice thickness with the extent of the ice cap, you get a very clear indication that the Arctic is going to be ice-free in summer in five years. And when that happens, there will be consequences.’

Good!

Now, in only 5 years, we can see if global warming is hoax.

Either the North Pole’s icecap disappears in 5 years, in which case these scientists are true prophets, or it is still there, in which case these scientists are at best fearmongerers and at worst charlatans.

And I thought that I would have to wait a lifetime before seeing the global warming (… as a consequence of human activities thus far) hoax dispelled.

Note that if this “5 year” estimate is based on a true trend (rather than a linear fit on two freak accidents), it is already to late to change that figure—so, the usual leftist excuses, such as “our campaign against global warming is succeeding” is not going to work here. Either icecap does melt (in summer, I presume some come back in winter) in 5 years, or global warming is a hoax—at least in the sense it’s not as serious a problem as the false prophet Gore makes it out to be.