Climate study gets pulled after charges of plagiarism

Climate study gets pulled after charges of plagiarism

www.usatoday.com

The study, which appeared in 2008 in the journal Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, was headed by statistician Edward Wegman of George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. Its analysis was an outgrowth of a controversial congressional report that Wegman headed in 2006. The "Wegman Report" suggested climate scientists colluded in their studies and questioned whether global warming was real. The report has since become a touchstone among climate change naysayers.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
content.usatoda y.com
mediamatters.org
weirddream.com
www.washingtonpost.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
You have all gotten in bed with the enemy.
Major Global Warming Denial Movement Linked Directly to ExxonMobil: PROOF
Famous Global Warming Skeptic Scientist admits "40 percent" of his funding comes from Big Oil
Investigations Into Global Warming Scientist Lead to Evidence of Fraud!!

Let me include the sub headline for anyone that skipped the snippet and wants to go straight to more unwarranted bashing of climate scientists:

Evidence of plagiarism and complaints about the peer-review process have led a statistics journal to retract a federally funded study that condemned scientific support for global warming.

There.

That part is for everyone who just wants to repeat the same old meme about how man-made global warming is a hoax because all the scientists are frauds and the government is in on it and whatever -

This was a FEDERALLY FUNDED report CHALLENGING the scientific consensus and it turned out to be the FRAUD.

I have already been following this story for some time now on this thread, and this is all part of a much bigger conspiracy that I've been posting about for years now (see related threads section). There is a massive disinformation campaign being waged mainly by oil companies and radical neocons to cover up just how badly they are ****ing up this planet in the name of profit.

By far the main target of their campaign has been the scientific consensus - and yes, make no mistake, there IS one - that climate change is real, that it's mostly caused by man, and that it's a HUGE problem.

The way they've been conducting this campaign is by generating fake scandals like "Climategate", or by scaring the crap out of everyone about a carbon tax - when instead people should be discussing what a price on carbon actually means. HINT: forcing the market to switch to clean renewable technologies like solar - you know, those same exact technologies that TPTB have been trying to suppress for decades.

Most of all though these hucksters have been selling their propaganda by injecting the public debate with all sorts of false myths about the science - myths like "all the planets in the solar system are warming up", or "climate is always changing, therefore we have no responsibility for what is happening right now".

These myths are all debunked on highly respectable sources like
www.skepticalscience.com

Yet people constantly choose to ignore that and read the websites that are peddling them instead. And then they come to places like ATS and repeat those myths ad nauseum, thus making them internet fact - because everybody says it, so it must be true.

Anyway, whatever. I know from enough experience that most people around here are just going to continue ignoring all this information or throw stones at it, because it's more important to blindly defend your ideologies and your ego rather than deny ignorance.

For those people I say - enjoy your cognitive dissonance, not to mention being a pawn in the game to send this planet quite literally straight to hell.

For anyone actually interested in denial of said ignorance, and investigating REAL conspiracies based on substance rather than tinfoil and ironic propaganda - I would encourage looking further into the extra links I left to go with this post.

There is plenty legitimate debate to be had here.

But anyone replying with more useless diatribes about "yr brainwashed because climategate and carbon taxes and teh guvrment - it's a conspiracyyy: ALL THE PLANETS ARE WARMING UP lollol" will be ignored - but thanks for proving my point anyway

www.usatoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Can you post the part of the article that states that the findings are flawed?

All I can see is charges of plagiarism based on a poor biblography and a lack of original author consent.

Evidence of plagiarism and complaints about the peer-review process have led a statistics journal to retract a federally funded study that condemned scientific support for global warming.

From your source.

I agree that this will create serious questions about the peer review process. How did they miss the (apparently obvious) plagiarisms? Did they actually review it? Or was it rubber stamped?

i really dont want to be the one that points this out to you but you asked for it
climite gate emails = from the mouths of the scientists
benifactors = rothchilds banks
politicians = vote to ban dy hydrogen monoxide (h2o)

weather manipulation = bigger problem
carbon tax = forever paying for carbon instead of removing it
carbon tax = ship jobs to china who does not pay carbon tax

this is a scam to make all carbon related jobs flood to china who pay no carbon tax

how can the usa or any carbon tax country compete against a scam that means your goods cost more?

you have been scammed and if you support carbon tax and global warming you are also supporting jobs for china

xploder
ps not intended to be harsh

reply to post by peck420


There's some more info on the previous thread I started here:
Investigations Into Global Warming Scientist Lead to Evidence of Fraud!!

It was a while ago when this broke so I'll have to refresh up on the details myself but I believe it was actually not peer-reviewed, just peddled as such.

The report unraveled when it was independently reviewed by a guy named John Mashey who posted about it here:
deepclimate.org and put together a 250-page (!!!) report about it's many flaws.

reply to post by XPLodER


Well...like I said, thanks for proving my point.

You might want to try reading the emails in their proper context rather than trusting how someone else interprets them for you.

There was something like 10,000 emails and ONE had some mention of "hide the decline". Ever think there might be more to this story than what looks so apparently obvious and incriminating? skepticalscience.com has plenty of posts about this, so get some perspective and then read them yourself and then decide.

The answers to your questions are all outlined in the links I left above.

reply to post by mc_squared


i guess a good understanding of economics is important in this issue
like everything else this is about money and control
your money their control
why ship huge sums of money out of your country?
when the worlds largest producer china is not involved
and to say paying money will fix the problem is flawed
spending the money on fixing the problem not shipping it to a carbon exchange
is the answer

why are all the jobs heading to china? is it because they have no epa? no carbon tax? no health care?
so you can no longer polute in the usa
just set up in china and polute away

carbon tax shifts the polution and JOBS to countries that do polute and dont pay

so in summery
this will not fix the problem of polution,it will only shift polution to another country along with your job

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


A price on carbon is designed to get the public to invest in renewable energies. Build the wind turbines and solar panels in the U.S. and you don't have a problem.

Are you seriously arguing that Global Warming is a hoax to move jobs to China??


oi...

Originally posted by mc_squared
that climate change is real, that it's mostly caused by man, and that it's a HUGE problem.

do you have any facts to back that claim up? perhaps a percentage or something?

My big hang up is that all this has happened in the past many times, to all of the sudden, claim we did it this time seems a bit disingenuous.

reply to post by mc_squared


you might want to follow the money
who benifits from all this?
al gore?
rothchilds?
china?

the average person pays more for less and losses competivness with china
jobs go there and they polute for you without cost
this is about gutting america wrapped up with sprinkles of environment to get people
to support their own downfall

follow the money
all the way to the carbon exchange
follow the jobs all the way to china

get my drift carbon tax forces jobs to countries who dont pay
and they just polute on your behalf

so please dont be fooled into outsouring your own future to china
they dont belive they HYPE cause thats what it is

xploder

Originally posted by Mason mike

Originally posted by mc_squared
that climate change is real, that it's mostly caused by man, and that it's a HUGE problem.

do you have any facts to back that claim up? perhaps a percentage or something?

Well I would say start by looking at the link I left right before I wrote those words if you want a percentage

But yeah - I also have plenty of other sources if you want to see. And I understand your reservations about how climate's changed before - but what you need to remember is this isn't just some whacko theory based on watching the climate change and then trying to find something to blame it on.

It's based on physics. We KNOW how the greenhouse effect works, and we KNOW that CO2 is a strong contributor to it. I can vouch for this myself as I have an undergrad degree in physics.

Do you know that based on this information global warming was actually predicted over a hundred years ago? Here is the paper, from 1896 that led to all this -
www.rsc.org...

So it's not the crazy Al Gore dominated psuedo science certain people (aka oil funded deniers) try to make it out to be.

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by mc_squared

 

you might want to follow the money

I already have followed the money. Here:
Try following the money in the OTHER direction

Originally posted by mc_squared
reply to post by XPLodER

 

A price on carbon is designed to get the public to invest in renewable energies. Build the wind turbines and solar panels in the U.S. and you don't have a problem.

Are you seriously arguing that Global Warming is a hoax to move jobs to China??


oi...

ask this
why pay for carbon credits when you could pay for wind turbines?
why pay for carbon credits when the money could be spent on resurch into green?
why pay for carbon credits when the largest poluter in the world does not?
if you make everybody less competitive the manufactoring goes to china where there is no carbon tax

so how does this fix anything except to outsource jobs to china where polution is cheep and so is labour?

this is a transfer of wealth jobs and carbon to a country who has not signed

imagine this
your business has to pay more for fuel materials and ,anufacturing energy (electricity)
all have extras carbon pricing involved
you compete with china
they have no carbon tax
both your products are for sale in a free market economy

the cheeper product is purchased and the chineeze product captures the market and puts you out of business
china keeps poluting

how does that fix the planet?

xploder
it really is a scam targeting environmentalists

Originally posted by mc_squared

Originally posted by Mason mike

Originally posted by mc_squared
that climate change is real, that it's mostly caused by man, and that it's a HUGE problem.

do you have any facts to back that claim up? perhaps a percentage or something?

Well I would say start by looking at the link I left right before I wrote those words if you want a percentage

But yeah - I also have plenty of other sources if you want to see. And I understand your reservations about how climate's changed before - but what you need to remember is this isn't just some whacko theory based on watching the climate change and then trying to find something to blame it on.

It's based on physics. We KNOW how the greenhouse effect works, and we KNOW that CO2 is a strong contributor to it. I can vouch for this myself as I have an undergrad degree in physics.

Do you know that based on this information global warming was actually predicted over a hundred years ago? Here is the paper, from 1896 that led to all this -
www.rsc.org...

So it's not the crazy Al Gore dominated psuedo science certain people (aka oil funded deniers) try to make it out to be.

ok so mr physics

It's based on physics. We KNOW how the greenhouse effect works, and we KNOW that CO2 is a strong contributor to it. I can vouch for this myself as I have an undergrad degree in physics.

ok what is the greatest source of heat for the planet
what chemical is responcable for the most green house heating?

xploder

Sounds like a storm in a teacup to me - and doesn't change the substance of the conclusions!

Neither Dr. Wegman nor Dr. Said has ever engaged in plagiarism," says their attorney, Milton Johns, by e-mail. In a March 16 e-mail to the journal, Wegman blamed a student who "had basically copied and pasted" from others' work into the 2006 congressional report, and said the text was lifted without acknowledgment and used in the journal study. "We would never knowingly publish plagiarized material" wrote Wegman, a former CSDA journal editor.

The congressional report, requested by global warming skeptic Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and the study concluded that climate scientists favorably publish one another's work because of too-close collaboration. They suggested this led to the consensus that the Earth is warming.

www.usatoday.com...

Originally posted by XPLodER
ask this
why pay for carbon credits when you could pay for wind turbines?
why pay for carbon credits when the money could be spent on resurch into green?
why pay for carbon credits when the largest poluter in the world does not?
if you make everybody less competitive the manufactoring goes to china where there is no carbon tax

First off - there is a difference between carbon credits and a carbon tax. Carbon credits are a way of paying to pollute and I agree, they are generally a bull**** idea.

Meanwhile a carbon tax is EXACTLY how to get people to pay for wind turbines and R&D into green technology, both from the tax revenue AND from the fact when you make carbon more expensive you make those other things more competitive and the market will naturally fluctuate in that direction.

I don't know how it could be any more simple - I think you can't see it because you've been drinking a little too much kool-aid from the naysayers on this

reply to post by XPLodER


Listen dude, I know what you're trying to do - and believe me - you want to get into one of these pissing contests on this topic you're barking up the wrong tree.

Of course the Sun is the source of virtually all heat on this planet - but if you understood how radiative physics work you would also know that the planet has to re-radiate that energy back out. The greenhouse effect changes this radiative balance.

And I know that water vapor is the most prevalent GHG. That doesn't mean CO2 isn't important. Water vapor is also highly variable in the sky - that's why you have dry days, rainy days, humid ones, etc. CO2 stays up there for a very long time and causes the atmosphere to hold even more water vapor, making the problem EVEN worse.

Go read up on the basic info and educate yourself some instead of trying to suck me into some worthless meme battle.

I'm going to stick to my initial pledge to ignore this kinda crap.

ATTENTION: All fingers to point towards Al Gore & Bill Clinton!!!

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
Sounds like a storm in a teacup to me - and doesn't change the substance of the conclusions!

Noooo...not at all.

And I suppose the fact that it was spear-headed by "I want to apologize to BP" Joe Barton is just a coincidence too...

Man, people around here just refuse to get it.