By Lubna Abdel-Aziz Do we trust science? It is imperative that we do. "--mistrust science and deny the validity of the scientific method, is to resign your job as a human". So, what are we to do now as we face a scientific scandal of mammoth proportions? Scientists are bound by a sense of duty to mankind -- a search for truth, a motive for ethics, honesty and integrity. We trust science because it has given us our civilization. We depend on it to be helpful, useful and truthful. What if it is not always so? When science is mingled with politics and politics is deceitful, shifty and untruthful, the result is no longer science. It is a disgrace. Are we experiencing global warming or are we not? If we are, is it caused by man-made emissions of green-house gases or is it not? Is the issue a reality or the biggest hoax of the century? We are dismayed, disillusioned and downright outraged. Can we not save the sacred territory of pure science? Can we put conscience back into science? We rely on science everyday of our lives. Just look around you. Your telephone, your lap-top, your radio, your television are essential for communication. Your automobile, your train, your plane, your rocket are fundamental for transportation. Your vaccine, your antibiotic, your X ray, your radiostope are indispensible for your treatment. One look at your kitchen and you'll feel indebted to science for your refrigerator, your oven, your microwave, your washing machine. They are crucial for everyday convenience. Scientists have contributed immensely to our comfort, our well-being and our longevity. So who are those scientists manipulating data, changing numbers, hiding evidence scamming and conniving to change their findings in order to prove their theory, rather than seeking the truth? They are lords and masters of the global warming issue and they will exert every effort to convince the world of a glaring untruth. The University of East Anglia's (UEA) Climate Research Unity (CRU), the world's leading center for reconstructing climate and temperature has just dropped a bomb in the lap of global warming advocates. Their scientists have admitted throwing away much of the original temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based. Why is that inadmissible? Because other academics are unable to check basic calculations that claim to show a long term rise in temperature. Why would UEA reveal such an unforgivable error. There is in Britain a Freedom of Information legislation that forces such organizations to reveal their information on request. Skeptics of climate change have been itching to lay their hands on such data and examine how it was compiled. Now, it can never be done. Known as the "climate - gate" scandal, it is an embarrassment to all global warming devotees, led by their guru, former Vice President Al Gore. The head of the CRU Phil Jones has stepped down and climatologist Michael Mann of Penn State University in being investigated. Republicans in Congress are also clamoring for an investigation in order to blow the administration's push for legislation concerning "cap 'n trade" on fossil emissions. Such exchange of E-Mails between the main players revealed on the internet ran something like this: "the fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming global at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't". Mann of Penn State in Oct. 2009 another sample of revealing communications is from the lead of the CRU Phil Jones to Michael Mann and others. "P.S. I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don't any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a "Freedom of Information Act"? A May 2009 e-mail from Phil Jones told Mann to delete e-mails. And the most famous is from Jones to Mann which indicated manipulation of scientific data: "I've just completed Mike's nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (from 1981 onwards). And (SIC) from 1961 for Keith to hide the decline" in temperature of course. "Hide the decline" is key. For years global warming dissents have been shouting from the rooftops --"it is getting cooler, not warmer", but there was no one listening. They were hushed up, fired rejected or neglected. The Western media was a major accessory as it made global warming it's cause célèbre and they were not about to reveal that they were all, at best well meaning idealists, at worst greedy, mercenary cheats. What an embarrassment for Barack Obama, a global warming champ and for the rest of the army of supporters not only among the media, but the academic institutions, environment zealots, movie stars etc. What bad timing for the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change) of the UN, meeting now in Copenhagen with 100 heads of state and governments descending on the Danish capital to solve the calamitous global warming threat. This column has never been an advocate of the UN science that formed the basis for the IPCC conclusions. They were dubious to say the least and strongly denied by more reliable scientific minds. The IPCC involves 2000 scientists from over 10 nations. There are over 17000 basic and applied scientists who signed a petition negating the IPCC, which in turn admitted it was not quite certain about its own conclusions??!! The most embarrassed of all, with egg all over his face should be Al Gore. The Oscar winner, Nobel Prize (2007) Winner and Cannes Festival's mega-star guest, honored world- wide for his film "An Inconvenient Truth" based on a series of untruths. Gore has increased his bank account by $100000 since he carried the banner of global warming. He is now a major investor of alternate energy projects and stands to double his fortune very soon. A little egg can be easily wiped off with a million dollar bank notes. "An Inconvenient Truth" turned out to be a Convenient Lie for Al Gore, mainstream media, alternate fuel technology, the internet and the myriad scientific environmentalists whose research funds have been flowing in torrents by interested corporations. So many have benefited from this pseudo-scientific theory. Have they built their castles on a mound of sand? It has been almost 3 weeks since the Climate-gate scandal hit the news. Stories in the N.Y. Times and Washington Post are growing into an international storm flood that is leaving us with mouths agape. We are all for cleaning the planet, limiting harmful emissions, seeking alternate fuel, recycling, re-organizing and re- thinking our wasteful ways. But please do not feed us lies and deception. Save the integrity of science and put back con- science into science. Scientific principles only triumph when based on truth. That is the essence of science. "The pertinent answers to impertinent questions" - and not impertinent answers to pertinent questions. No one should approach the temple of science with the soul of a money changer. -- Thomas Browne (1605-1682)
