Federal Lab’s ‘Extremely Troubling’ Data Manipulation Spurs Hill Probe

Comment

Comment by Ellin Beltz on October 7, 2016 at 11:09am

If you go back to the primary source for the above which is Denver Post, they say that the samples affected were water quality samples from the Everglades and solid materials from outside the United States.  When they found the problem, they closed the lab immediately.  Twenty-four research papers were affected.  If they had been published, they were fixed and republished, the ones which had not been published were fixed.  It hardly seems worth all the conspiracy fluff, if you just go back to source instead of inflammatory middle-man websites.  Instead of knee jerking on special interest website reports, take a peek at the original story  here.

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on September 28, 2016 at 9:57am

I believe this though not researched, to be how they (the government and its minion agencies) determine all energy policies along with in particular FERC and state governments. They skip past the disclaimer portion and read only the Starry Glimmerings < (faint) as being an absolute path to travel.

All the promises premised on expected results based on theory of science, instead of the actual based on the physical science which include variations of results when unexpected variables are factored in. 

The Carbon Reduction for example looks good for the U.S. and those countries that are not producing the Green Dream Machines, but if the producing nations are re-factored into the equation, or even the smaller components producers are pulled back into the same strings of the equations, this would be obvious the net reduction is Zero and may show a net increase in a futile attempt.

Though this has produced some temporary jobs in the effort to justify,read about, consider, enact laws, to produce, construct, monitor, maintain, sell product, replace parts, eventual removal or replacement, recycle, landfill, these are but added hidden CO² contributions through increased activity.

This False reporting of data on energy is a CON to keep the public in a "Lul of feeling good in the name of doing the right thing" so that they keep on drinking the Kool-Aid and buy the next greatest innovative product. A shoe is a shoe is a shoe, though maybe a different design, the usefulness is the same. To Reduce, the demand must be reduced, through technology. So long as demand increases, CO² will increase. 

Comment by Penny Gray on September 28, 2016 at 6:26am

If this is all about wind industry data hiding behind the shroud of "proprietary information" and skewed figures, this is huge.  Will it just be swept under the rug?

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on September 27, 2016 at 9:55pm

The how, was most likely the use of the industry's expected results as promoted to stock holders. The Why is most likely they did not have the resources or manpower (their excuse) thus needed more funding from the taxpayers.  NERL is know for this type of data manipulation when they place a disclosure statement on the few documents they put out for the public. Within the disclaimer I have always seen where they used the Industry data of expectation, not actual test data that they carried out. 

Comment by Penny Gray on September 27, 2016 at 5:54pm

How and why was the energy data manipulated?  Not much information here.