I love how everything since the nineties has added a “gate”. Whoever named the Watergate complex must be getting royalties.
I love the idea of reducing carbon. I like the idea of reducing electricity and fossil fuel consumption. I like recycling (I’m actually a freak about it – ask EK, she’ll tell you). What I don’t like is crazy speculation about what MIGHT happen from the same branch of science that many times has not been more accurate than weathermen or economists. What am I talking about? Hacked emails, baby, hacked emails.
Every single released email I’ve read is pretty much what everyone talks about – smack talk, our contrarian opponents are troglodites, etc. But there are a few smoking guns, like one that outlines how some algorythmic data does not equate for erratic changes into their models (AKA, let’s make it do what we WANT it to, which is NOT science, but justification).
Now, I see TONS of emails on either side saying “AHa! They are idiots” and “Aha! You’re idiots for misreading this”. I think it WILL perhaps cause some people to ask HOW the data has been collected and assimilated. Which I think is good.
So far the biggest “gonna make me barf” science community spin is HERE on BBC.
