New alarmist scandal - fraudulent study!

[billvon 3,131]

A new climate-change study has been found to be fraudulent. The authors not only admit to fudging planetary data, but they submitted the study under false names so it could not be traced back to them. Why hasn't the media picked up on this? Right wingers here - attack! Bring out the big guns! Claim they are Al Gore's minions, hell-bent on destroying America just to line their own wallets! Call for rejection of all climate change studies! 97% consensus? Ha! It's all over, warmists. Now the world will see . . .

Oh, wait a minute. They were claiming it WASN'T CO2 that was causing it. Nevermind. Just walk on by. Nothing to see here. How about that early snow in Maine, eh?

==========================
Scientists published climate research under fake names. Then they were caught.
By Ben Guarino September 19 at 5:46 AM
Washington Post

The scientists briefly known as Den Volokin and Lark ReLlez thought they had found something big.

It was not data wrung from a clever experiment or a lucky field observation. Instead, the pair had constructed a model, a mathematical argument, for calculating the average surface temperature of a rocky planet. Using just two factors — electromagnetic radiation beamed by the sun into the atmosphere and the atmospheric pressure at a planet’s surface — the scientists could predict a planet’s temperature. The physical principle, they said, was similar to the way that high-pressure air ignites fuel in a diesel engine.

If proved to be the case on Earth, the model would have dramatic implications: Our planet is warming, but the solar radiation and our atmosphere would be to blame, not us.

There was a problem, though. The paper, Grinspoon said, “seems to have an agenda.”

There was another problem, too. The names Den Volokin and Lark ReLlez are fake.

The pair thought their mathematics, if accurate, could topple conventional models. As the paper’s authors argued via a 50-page manuscript, the temperature model worked for known temperatures of rocky heavenly bodies such as Mars, the moon and Venus.

And, crucially, it worked for Earth.

Within months after publication, the pseudonyms fell apart.

. . . .

There were other red flags embedded within the study. Nikolov and Zeller recalculated Mars’ pressure and temperature data, in lieu of using the “known data for Mars that people had been carefully studying for decades,” Grinspoon said. “If they hadn’t, their model would not have worked quite as well.”

Rather than aiming to be a universal paradigm-buster, Grinspoon said the study is better served as a handy mathematical approximation. “It’s a kind of clever, back-of-the-envelope way to calculate planet temperatures,” Grinspoon said. Should scientists find themselves with limited exoplanet data, something like the Volokin and ReLlez model could be a simple way to approximate distant temperatures.
===========================

[kelpdiver 2]

seems like rotational period would need to be part of it as well.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

A new climate-change study has been found to be fraudulent. The authors not only admit to fudging planetary data, but they submitted the study under false names so it could not be traced back to them. Why hasn't the media picked up on this? Right wingers here - attack! Bring out the big guns! Claim they are Al Gore's minions, hell-bent on destroying America just to line their own wallets! Call for rejection of all climate change studies! 97% consensus? Ha! It's all over, warmists. Now the world will see . . .

Oh, wait a minute. They were claiming it WASN'T CO2 that was causing it. Nevermind. Just walk on by. Nothing to see here. How about that early snow in Maine, eh?

==========================
Scientists published climate research under fake names. Then they were caught.
By Ben Guarino September 19 at 5:46 AM
Washington Post

The scientists briefly known as Den Volokin and Lark ReLlez thought they had found something big.

It was not data wrung from a clever experiment or a lucky field observation. Instead, the pair had constructed a model, a mathematical argument, for calculating the average surface temperature of a rocky planet. Using just two factors — electromagnetic radiation beamed by the sun into the atmosphere and the atmospheric pressure at a planet’s surface — the scientists could predict a planet’s temperature. The physical principle, they said, was similar to the way that high-pressure air ignites fuel in a diesel engine.

If proved to be the case on Earth, the model would have dramatic implications: Our planet is warming, but the solar radiation and our atmosphere would be to blame, not us.

There was a problem, though. The paper, Grinspoon said, “seems to have an agenda.”

There was another problem, too. The names Den Volokin and Lark ReLlez are fake.

The pair thought their mathematics, if accurate, could topple conventional models. As the paper’s authors argued via a 50-page manuscript, the temperature model worked for known temperatures of rocky heavenly bodies such as Mars, the moon and Venus.

And, crucially, it worked for Earth.

Within months after publication, the pseudonyms fell apart.

. . . .

There were other red flags embedded within the study. Nikolov and Zeller recalculated Mars’ pressure and temperature data, in lieu of using the “known data for Mars that people had been carefully studying for decades,” Grinspoon said. “If they hadn’t, their model would not have worked quite as well.”

Rather than aiming to be a universal paradigm-buster, Grinspoon said the study is better served as a handy mathematical approximation. “It’s a kind of clever, back-of-the-envelope way to calculate planet temperatures,” Grinspoon said. Should scientists find themselves with limited exoplanet data, something like the Volokin and ReLlez model could be a simple way to approximate distant temperatures.
===========================

and they were caught because of a letter written by a guy who regularly posts on Wattsupwiththat

Go figure

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/14/climate-skeptics-behaving-badly/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln