That was the astonishing comment coming from Dr. Reto Ruedy, of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS, it’s the lead global warming alarmism outfit within NASA) regarding temperature data – the very thing at the heart of global warming alarmism.
I was thinking of this when reading Tom Friedman’s latest foray into accidental humor in the New York Times. Friedman’s most painfully naive comment was this one:
In my view, the climate-science community should convene its top experts — from places like NASA, America’s national laboratories, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford, the California Institute of Technology and the U.K. Met Office Hadley Centre — and produce a simple 50-page report. They could call it “What We Know,” summarizing everything we already know about climate change in language that a sixth grader could understand, with unimpeachable peer-reviewed footnotes.
What Tom doesn’t understand – in fact, to be fair, nobody in American MSM understands this yet – is this: the “experts” can’t do that. Their “data” is so full of holes (some deliberate) and otherwise manipulated that “unimpeachable” report Friedman wants simply doesn’t exist. Even the fellow Friedman cites so approvingly relies on the very NASA agency that was just exposed above.
Some day, when all of this is finally unraveled, a lot of people should feel very, very stupid. I say “should,” because all of those who should have felt this way about the Soviet Union seemed to keep themselves in denial throughout the 1990s.