This post doesn’t deserve a title as good as that. And it’s not even a very good title. Where does carbon come into it? Maybe we’re just hungry.
Apologies. We have each been otherwise engaged to the extent that we don’t appear to have posted very much. And even now, all we have time for is an amusing pasta-related introduction to Steve McIntyre’s Swindle and the IPCC TAR Spaghetti Graph at Climate Audit. Except we can’t think of one.
“If a practising scientist selected a 1987 data set over more recent versions, failed to cite it correctly, altered the appearance of the data without a clear explanation and didn’t include the data from the last 20 years then I think we’d all be asking serious questions about their professionalism.”
This was, of course, put forward in the context of Swindle, but surely IPCC is a bigger fish to fry. Let’s apply these principles to IPCC…
And he does. Compare and contrast and enjoy.
And it would be rude not to mention that we have a piece in spiked about Nullius in Verba: The Royal Society’s ‘motto-morphosis’