Hundreds of emails and documents exchanged between world's leading climate scientists stolen by hackers and leaked online
Hundreds of private emails and documents allegedly exchanged between some of the world's leading climate scientists during the past 13 years have been stolen by hackers and leaked online, it emerged today.
The computer files were apparently accessed earlier this week from servers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, a world-renowned centre focused on the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.
Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege they provide "smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in manipulating data to support the widely held view that climate change is real, and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind.
Folks at Real Climate are in the best position to address the specific details. I will only comment on the research process.
Science has built in uncertainty. If there is no risk, there is no science. The hypotheses, experiment, and conclusion may all be "wrong". Science proceeds by continuously refining all the three. Every result should be considered tentative (except may be mathematical proofs). It is routine to say previous work X made wrong assumption Y, we corrected for it and got result Z.
Research into complex systems such as the atmosphere is difficult, time consuming, and often fragile because we have limited knowledge. By their very nature, the results have to be tested and retested constantly. From all that I understand, IPCC has been doing an excellent job verifying as much data as possible and continuously, and in being conservative in its claims. But uncertainty simply cannot be eliminated in such spaces.
It seems to come down to three things - outlook (how you see the world), values (how you make your choices), and systems (how groups react).
Outlook. People are comfortable accepting the products of science such as the electricity, Internet and new drugs but cant accept it when the results are inconvenient. Either you accept science with its imperfections or not.
The world is getting only more complex over time due to advancements of science, and it is overwhelming. In such conditions, it is easier to cope with the world by sticking to some political, social, religious or other dogma instead of struggling with the reality as it is. I catch myself doing that all the time. The challenge is overcome the dogma and see the world as it is.
Values. This came across to me during the financial crisis. The crisis is not about subprime mortagages but rather about subprime culture. It is the attitude that it is fine to sacrifice somebody else's interests if it means enhancing personal interests. Everyone along the chain starting from the homeowner to the international investor had that attitude. The financial system as a result came to the brink of the collapse. I see this all the time in academics as well. There are no saints. The challenge is know where to draw the line as individuals and societies.
Systems. Asking for certainty is asking for the impossible. Reasonable people know that. It is trick. Then why does it happen? I think it is combination of marketing, confusion, fear, and ignorance. Who is doing it and why? It is the outcome of a battle between a large set of players (scientists, politicians, companies, non-profits) for the common man's mindshare. From a systemic point of view, each has their set of institutions, resources, and interests. They are trying to preserve, and enhance their interests. Because the direction will determine the winners and losers - personally and as an organization - the fight is fierce. The timing of the leak is not an accident. The challenge is know at what point the institutions have to be changed to cope with the changed world.
Where does all this leave us? As I said in an ealier post (Climate Pact Postponed. A Crisis of Leadership.), if we dont have a medium to have the global conversations, a realistic framing of the problems, and willingness of people to compromise, social collapse is potential outcome. It is not impossible. Nature does not have any obligation to treat humans differently than other species.
0 comments:
Post a Comment