So, it's come this far

[Norse]

Alarmed that decades of crucial climate measurements could vanish under a hostile Trump administration, scientists have begun a feverish attempt to copy reams of government data onto independent servers in hopes of safeguarding it from any political interference.

The efforts include a “guerrilla archiving” event in Toronto, where experts will copy irreplaceable public data, meetings at the University of Pennsylvania focused on how to download as much federal data as possible in the coming weeks, and a collaboration of scientists and database experts who are compiling an online site to harbor scientific information.

“Something that seemed a little paranoid to me before all of a sudden seems potentially realistic, or at least something you’d want to hedge against,” said Nick Santos, an environmental researcher at the University of California at Davis, who over the weekend began copying government climate data onto a nongovernment server, where it will remain available to the public. “Doing this can only be a good thing. Hopefully they leave everything in place. But if not, we’re planning for that.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/13/scientists-are-frantically-copying-u-s-climate-data-fearing-it-might-vanish-under-trump/?tid=pm_business_pop&utm_term=.db7b92f168b1

That scientists feel the need to backup vital data offsite, out of the reach of the public administration is in itself a pretty damned scary thing. That honest, publicly employed scientists don’t trust their employer (us, the state, the government) to safeguard vital data, should be freaking everybody out.

I’m afraid this isn’t even going to register in the public mind.

[running_coach]

Maybe this should not have been publicized?

[Two_Many_Cats]

@running_coach

Maybe this should not have been publicized?

Why in hell not? It’s important!

I still cannot understand why the Press are sitting around like lapdogs when there’s a bounteous scandal harvest to be brought in!

[voltaire]

@running_coach

Maybe this should not have been publicized?

LOL, at not publicizing the public data that they’re publicly copying for the expressed intent of keeping it publicly published.

[Ethilrist]

Sound advice in any case. If your business is to examine possible catastrophic changes in the weather, having another copy of the data off-site (preferably halfway across the country) is a really good idea.

[usedtobe]

As the USA continues its transformation into a Third World country - businesses are not regulated by law, they’re making deals with the President (elect).
Our President (elect) and Vladimir Putin have a mutual admiration society, and the President (elect) is suggesting that our NATO allies can fend for themselves.
Japan and S. Korea?
If China wants 'em, how much are they willing to pay for Us protection?

Charming: the USA is now running a “Protection Racket” with geopolitical stability in play.
The Baltics (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) can fend for themselves. Ukraine is toast to the New! Improved! Russian Empire!

I’ll be dead soon; I sympathize with those young and healthy - you will inherit the disasters in the making.

[running_coach]

@Two_Many_Cats

Why in hell not? It’s important!

I still cannot understand why the Press are sitting around like lapdogs when there’s a bounteous scandal harvest to be brought in!

I was thinking it might be better to get the job finished before saying anything. Maybe buy some time if it’s not done before Trump is inaugurated.

It might not have occurred to Trump’s Cast of Idiots that anyone would have done this.

[rowrrbazzle]

@Norse

That scientists feel the need to backup vital data offsite, out of the reach of the public administration is in itself a pretty damned scary thing. That honest, publicly employed scientists don’t trust their employer (us, the state, the government) to safeguard vital data, should be freaking everybody out.

What freaks me out is that scientists are so consumed by paranoia as to think that what they fear actually might happen!

I mean, WTF???

@Two_Many_Cats

I still cannot understand why the Press are sitting around like lapdogs when there’s a bounteous scandal harvest to be brought in!

It’s obvious! THEY’RE IN ON IT!

@running_coach

It might not have occurred to Trump’s Cast of Idiots that anyone would have done this.

:rolleyes: The left obviously has its own Cast of Idiots.

[Hari_Seldon]

Uust for the record, I will observe that this news was on CBC this morning. Doubtless because of the Toronto connection, but it is not being kept secret. I think it might be best if the archives were kept outside the US. Color me paranoid. Trump might accuse the downloaders of theft and insist they destroy these archives.

[Clothahump]

@Norse

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/13/scientists-are-frantically-copying-u-s-climate-data-fearing-it-might-vanish-under-trump/?tid=pm_business_pop&utm_term=.db7b92f168b1

That scientists feel the need to backup vital data offsite, out of the reach of the public administration is in itself a pretty damned scary thing. That honest, publicly employed scientists don’t trust their employer (us, the state, the government) to safeguard vital data, should be freaking everybody out.

I’m afraid this isn’t even going to register in the public mind.

Why should it? Can you say Chicken Little?

[Dewey_Finn]

I can see it now; the climate change deniers will claim the data was mucked with, either before or after it was copied.

[running_coach]

@Dewey_Finn

I can see it now; the climate change deniers will claim the data was mucked with, either before or after it was copied.

They already claim that.

[Iggy]

@Dewey_Finn

I can see it now; the climate change deniers will claim the data was mucked with, either before or after it was copied.

Well, climate scientist pretty openly admit that they adjust the raw data. So I would hope those engaging in this off site backup are copying raw data as well as adjusted data.

…
NOAA NCDC has for years produced a data set called the U.S. Historical Climate Network (USHCN) where they choose a subset of stations with a long period of record and hopefully good siting and exposure, then “adjust” the observations to remove known biases and inconsistencies. Some of the known problems are instrument changes and observation practices (including time of observation), station moves, siting problems, and influences of urbanization around the station. They adjust the past observations to be more in line with recent and current observations at each station.

These adjustment methods sound good in theory and are all defensible from peer-reviewed literature, but the problem lies in that it is all done automatically with programmed algorithms that detect, then adjust for these biases and break points. It is the ultimate “black box”, where no one outside of NCDC would be able to reproduce their processing. That alone is one opening for the seeds of distrust.
…

[Happy_Fun_Ball]

@Iggy

Well, climate scientist pretty openly admit that they adjust the raw data. So I would hope those engaging in this off site backup are copying raw data as well as adjusted data.

I am a scientist, albeit not a climatologist, and I also regularly “adjust” my raw data. I always explain what I did when I present or publish. I also always keep the raw data as well as the code that does the adjustment and the notes that justifies it. There is nothing unusual or shady here.

[Happy_Fun_Ball]

@Clothahump

Why should it? Can you say Chicken Little?

Maybe they were feeling nervous after Trump’s transition team requested a list of all the people that worked on climate science.

[Iggy]

@Happy_Fun_Ball

I am a scientist, albeit not a climatologist, and I also regularly “adjust” my raw data. I always explain what I did when I present or publish. I also always keep the raw data as well as the code that does the adjustment and the notes that justifies it. There is nothing unusual or shady here.

I understand the need to adjust data. But do hope raw data is saved.

There were some spotty issues of climate scientists refusing to release raw data that was subject to Freedom of Information requests. And that caused something of a stir. If raw data is not preserved I can only imagine what critics would say.

IMHO better science communication, including an explanation of how data adjustments are carried out, is vital. Saying “I’m a scientist. Trust me.” is not enough.

[running_coach]

@Iggy

I understand the need to adjust data. But do hope raw data is saved.

There were some spotty issues of climate scientists refusing to release raw data that was subject to Freedom of Information requests. And that caused something of a stir. If raw data is not preserved I can only imagine what critics would say.

**IMHO better science communication, including an explanation of how data adjustments are carried out, is vital. ** Saying “I’m a scientist. Trust me.” is not enough.

You just saw how that is ignored by a lazy populous. Trump will just tweet: “Altered data! Fraud! Don’t believe!” and the dogs start salivating.

[Northern_Piper]

@Happy_Fun_Ball

Maybe they were feeling nervous after Trump’s transition team requested a list of all the people that worked on climate science.

I’d not heard about that. Could you point me to it? Thanks.

[billfish678]

Unfortunately some random grad student jackass will use a version of PKzip to store the data that nobody can unzip 50 years from now…

[JohnT]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/powerpost/wp/2016/12/13/energy-dept-rejects-trumps-request-to-name-climate-change-workers-who-remain-worried/