The Latest on Climategate: University Will Release CRU Data
London’s Sunday Telegraph reports that the University of East Anglia has decided that its Climatic Research Unit (CRU) must open all its data files to public inspection as soon as possible. It is not known how much of the raw temperature data have been destroyed. The university’s decision sweeps aside years of obstruction, obfuscation, and prevarication by the CRU’s director, Professor Phil Jones. Leaked emails from Jones give conflicting accounts of what he has done with the raw data upon which the CRU’s global temperature record is based.
Releasing the CRU’s data files is a big breakthrough in the scandal and begins the process of bringing climate science into line with other scientific disciplines. It is standard practice in most scientific research to make data and methodologies available to other scientists in order that they can be checked and conclusions confirmed or questioned. In much climate science, secrecy has been the norm and many scientists have in effect demanded that their conclusions be accepted without any way to scrutinize their research. Thus the nations of the world have been embarking on policies that could cost trillions of dollars based on little more than assurances that “we’re experts and you can trust us.”
As Christopher Booker writes in his column in the Sunday Telegraph, further radical steps are needed to clear up this enormous scandal. Unfortunately, it appears that the British scientific and political establishment are already closing ranks and preparing a whitewash. Replying to demands from Lord Lawson and others for an independent investigation, it was rumored on Friday that there is talk of appointing Martin, Lord Rees to head the investigation. Lord Rees is president of the Royal Society, astronomer royal, master of Trinity College, Cambridge, and professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at Cambridge. He is also, as Booker describes the Royal Society, “a shameless propagandist” for global warming alarmism. Let’s hope he’s too busy to take on another job.
Wow, all this because of some Russian hackers.
Hey Russian hackers, if you’re reading this, I just want you to know you are hero’s in America. You have just saved us trillions of dollars in taxes among other things.
Thank you, and don’t stop at East Anglia…
I think it was an inside leak of a whistleblower and not a hacker.
Now, if they could just somehow get the raw data they destroyed so people could do some science.
The data to be released is the “sanitized” data which has been modified from the original raw data to compensate “for differing conditions”, read “did not support the predetermined conclusions”.
If the University is to have any residual credibility it must publicly state and require all references to their work from these “lost” data carry the disclaimer that they cannot support the conclusions from the available data.
This will certainly thin the available “science” which taken with the three cherry-picked trees in Siberia will leave little or nothing for “proof”, cooked or otherwise.
Meanwhile those retrievable raw data from isolated posts needs to be gather to reconstruct their conclusions or more likely to destroy them. Give them the opportunity to demonstrate their “methodology”. Then the fun really begins.
Now that we have effectually “cleaned” the data, we will make it available to you.
If a PhD candidate did this on even a minor paper, never mind their dissertation, they would be bounced from the program on acacemic integrity issues.
Of course the MSM will ignore this… integrity is never an issue with them… they are into “truthiness”, ask Dan Rather and his staff.
Careers should be ruined and researchers lose their degrees or at least their respect and standing for years to come.
Seems to me like its business as usual in East Anglia and London. The CRU has stonewalled and destroyed or is, I’d bet—right this very instant—in the process of destroying the underlying raw data on which they based their “measurements” and “projections,” so that no one can check those “measurements” and “projections.” I don’t seem to hear them saying that they will also release all of the computer code, the programs they cobbled together to run this raw data through, that resulted in their “measurements” and “projections.” So, without both having all of the raw data and knowing what sort of processing that raw data was given, no one can really be sure of just how true and accurate any of the “measurements” and “projections” were.
On the London front, predictably, there is call for a “Commission” to investigate this monumental, Piltdown Man-level, block-buster of a scandal–with trillions of dollars and major changes in a good chunk of humanity’s way of life hanging in the balance. So, the establishment is seeing to it that this Commission will—just as the CRU was—be stacked to produce the results it wants, by proposing including one of the chief culprits at the CRU on it, and suggesting that it’s head should be an ardent proponent of the very “climate change” that is supposedly to be investigated.
There’s always a “Yes, but..” with these folks. The Times of London also is reporting that during the reign of Tom Wigley (yes, that Tom in the CRU emails) all the historic data was purged and only the “good” “adjusted” data was saved.
This is like saying, for the non-scientist, that you can have any gun in my empty gun safe that you find including the photo-shopped picture of one I’d like to have.
Unfortunately, they claim they have “lost” most of the data. See: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece which article is titled “Climate Change Data Dumped”.
I am afraid we have seen this before.
Get caught and then destroy data and release what is left to an “investigation” headed by someone on the inside…………ACORN is the most recent to come to mind.
You will never win with these crooks!
Not clear it was Russian Hackers. I understand (but only as I read about it somewhere), the data was originally on RealClimate’s web site with link from Climate Audit. Then after a few hours deleted from RealClimate. Meantime, some copies taken which then showed up in a number of places including on Russian servers. Then propagated from there.
Will be interesting if there is anyone looking into the actual propagation. But it may well have not be hackers …
We live in interesting times.
Proven liars find it difficult to regain my trust. I wouldn’t trust a weather report from this lot that said it was raining unless I saw it raining myself.
The proper response to this is a RICO investigation into all of climate “science.” This is a global scam, possibly the largest in human history. The “scientists” took grant money to falsify results. The “politicians” like Mr Gore are happy to use any crisis, real or imagined, to line their pockets and increase their power.
Follow the money.
As mentioned above, they are going to release all of the “massaged” data, because the base datum no longer exists. It was destroyed to protect the authors of the tainted studies. It was dumped to avoid the FOIA requests by many scientists and researchers. Hence the various emails requesting such deletions…
Thus, the whitewash begins…
And if the hackers could just turn some attention to Soros…
After reading just the headline the first thing that popped to mind was yeh right, release the information and incriminate yourself, I don’t think so. Now they revert to the oldest trick in the little red book, examine yourself and report no wrongdoing just mistakes of a minor variety from cleansed data. The creditability hole being dug by politicians, academics, the scientific world and now it seems the legal profession is astounding.
The order of the day is trust no one and nothing from these quarters until the climate Hitler’s and their socialist minions have been silenced. It seems history is repeating its self and the socialists have done nothing more than change the color of their shirts from brown to green. The jack boots have returned.
This is all much to do about nothing (because all the relevant data has been purged).
But even if it were available (the missing data and the code used) it still would be all for naught.
Why you say?
Because this is not about science, not about truth, not about saving the world. It is about:
Control of the people, the industries, the finances of nations and most of all about a political take over of rights and freedoms by those that think Socialism/Communism/Marxism should be the forces in charge of a Global Government in which democracy, liberty and freedom WILL BE abolished.
Science is just the lubricant and fog to hide this global takeover that started more than a decade ago.
Papa Ray
I had read that the data had found it’s way to the public side of the CRU server. that would make the russians publishers instead of hackers. the question is how it got to the public side.
Professor Trevor Davies, the university’s Pro-Vice-Chancellor, Research Enterprise and Engagement, said yesterday:
“Understand that responses may take several months and that some countries may refuse permission due to the economic value of the data.”
This is going to be a joke.
i just had this argument with a friend last night. he told me, yes he did, that i should check the figures and i would see that we (USA) are changing the climate. he’s not to be confused with the facts because he feels we are doing it, i just need to read the data. just like the Big O’s transcripts and the birth certificate, come on now, the sealed ones.
Every key document that cites the IPCC studies (AR anything) will now have to re-examine its provenance. Every. Single. One.
This is absolutely huge.
Now the next step will be to get *all* of the raw data that NOAA has, with raw data *and* station correlations, and point-by-point provenance for the
“corrected” data.
The entire surface *and* sea-surface temperature data set needs to be reconstructed from scratch. I suggest UAH be the official funded agency to do this, and that it make its data immediately available as produced to the world.
Too little, too late. Does anyone believe they will provide the previously hidden data? For these crimes they deserve punishment. The University lost credibility a long time ago in refusing to disclose for peer scrutiny. Liars and cheats. Nothing they say now will be believed.
Not so fast there, Myron. Turns out that all the raw data has been “lost” and what they are going to release is the “homogenized” product with all the corrections in. It’s of absolutely no use at all unless somebody goes back and re-collects all the raw temp info. Very clever.
Raw data is not so easily destroyed, these days.
Have them release the electronic files. All of them. Have them turn over every hard drive involved. Make copies available to anyone who asks. Make them state in writing what they wiped out, and then let anybody who wants to, compare the files and archives to the statements.
No honest researcher will EVER get data from these guys that can be used! What is released will be said to be a lot of what it isn’t and when the shortcomings are pointed out, those doing the mentioning will be gang criticized.
Think of it this way; what would Al Gore do/say? He has hundreds of millions of dollars at stake. He will do nothing that will jeopardize that.
What we will find out and what the captive media will write about is the evil doers who hacked the data. And, when they spend pages and hours identifying them, they’ll discover that one, at one time, actually parked in a no parking zone (or something equally serious) and this, in the captive media mind, erases all the Climaquiddick material that has been discovered.
The leftists will fight this at every turn; most of them have too much cash at risk to do otherwise.
This hoax has nothing to do with climate change.It has everything to do with control and money.The Bore stands to make billions on his carbon credit scam.The US stands to lose billions in tax payers hard earned money.A pox on all their houses.
I’ll believe it when I see it.
This sounds like a delaying tactic, designed to silence critics until public interest in Climategate abates.
Again, whatever you do, forget the fact that every single major scientific body on the globe concurs that climate change is happening, and that human activity is largely responsible. And forget the fact that CO2 (which we are releasing by the gigaton every single year) is a greenhouse gas, meaning that it traps solar radiation, and holds the heat.
Do that, you your little world of creationist science, failed political policy, and goofy ideas will be safe. At least until you have to come up with a reason as to why our climate is screwed. Then maybe you can blame it on the gays… claim it’s god’s wrath, or something.
The CRU’s past practices with inconvenient data indicates that they will destroy it before releasing the rest.
Valarie, I think you are on the right track. It isn’t generally acceptable for the accused party to set the conditions whereby they will be investigated.
I find it amusing that these folks are candidly admitting that they have either lost or destroyed data. This is tantamount to admitting “oops we lost that proof we used to have about man-made global warming”. It’s amusing, but still serious, particularly if they get away with it. It’s one thing to play dumb or obstruct others from reviewing your work. It’s quite another when you no longer feel compelled to carry on with the charade, and it is generally accepted that scientists will destroy evidence at their own discretion.
John, it is you and Al Gore who have a creationist mentality towards science. Just ask him what he thinks about the theory of evolution? It seems like it hasn’t occurred to you that despite CO2 being a greenhouse gas, that this doesn’t prove it is the primary driver of modern climate change. So you don’t even grasp what the argument is about. You also seem to have an exceptionally poor imagination when guessing at alternative theories.
While you throw your hands up in the air, jumping to conclusions while oblivious to any standards of science, you don’t seem to grasp that the status-quo position given scientific uncertainty is not to take a vote or trust our gut, but to realize that there are things that we do not yet know the answer to.
Besides, since when did our climate become ‘screwed’? I hadn’t heard that one yet. So first we thought man was causing climate to cool, them to warm, then we thought it was just causing change, but now we’re not messing around anymore. Let’s just admit that because of man (that is white male conservatives) that the climate is just screwed. I can’t wait to see that headline on the cover of the next IPCC report. (John, do you know who the IPCC is? Never mind…)
John, You are rather missing the point. I do not know how you define “every major scientific body”, but the point is if these “major scientific bodies” you have this almost religious fate in have been fed false data, or members of those bodies have in fact colluded in fraud, then their conclusions at the very least are suspect, and ost likely not good at all. This is the situation that we find ourselves in today.
In any event “appeals to authority”, an obvious and know fallacy, is one particularly at odds with the empirical method. Your assertion carries no scientific proof or weight at all to the face of it. This is really rather the whole point.
If the so called “climate scientists” have departed from this then they have in fact departed from science; if we allow this of them, then we have departed from reason.
It has really become a matter of the left saying to us “we are going to destroy your civilization because we feel like it” and all science, reason or common sense be damned.
As for you throwing out those of your of red herrings of creationism, homosexuality or your rather comic misunderstanding of Christian theology, well they are quite certainly are not germane whatsoever here. If this is all you can do then you have no serious intellectual case to make at all.
This is merely an attempt to slander those who disagree with you and to change the subject, and it is particularly comic given the profile of many people here, who are working scientists and engineers or hae retired from successful careers n those fields. But they are also preposterous claims to make in the broader world, even in the scientific world.
This “consensus” your are talking about is literally a fiction of your mind, or rather, propaganda put in your mind by some very evil forces.
I suggest that you learn how the scientific process actually works and stop looking at them as a tribe of priests who divine from on high (in this case “major scientific organization” and then oracular to the rest of us how the work actually works. Comically, it is you that engage in the very sort of superstitious behavior that you would project onto us. How Leftist of you. How very Democrat of you.
You seem to have caught the leftist disease of moral vanity wherein they imagine that it is the Left that is the force of enlightenment and progress and that its opponents are “anti-science”. In actually the truth of the matter is quite inverted, as history well shows.
Why are my comments being put into moderation. Is this happening to others here on BC as well?
There is another issue, which no one seems to be referencing. These data, the temperature figures from around the world, are presumably compiled on a regular basis. If the University is now required to make available to the public all data, even if they’ve monkeyed around with the historical figures, they still will have to release the new data as they arrive. Presuming they have a transparent system in place, and presuming they are supervised so that they don’t fiddle with the data in the future, this means that in several years we’ll have some real information on what’s happening, not the tainted propaganda that we’ve been getting for years from this place. Of course this is all predicated on the CRU being honest now, or the University or the British Government keeping them honest. All three of those propositions are of course questionable, but one of them *could* occur.
I doubt we will get much out of their “released data.” they have already admitted to erasing much of the data due to “data storage space” issues.
From the comments, I’d say the consensus is “settled.”
This scheduled release of data is too little, and far too late. That data set is contaminated, by the admission of the perpetrators, and totally useless as a description of the real world.
Maybe during any “investigations”, the pro-AGW crowd will be required to defend their assertion that CO2 is causing GW. CO2 levels lag, NOT lead temp. As CO2 levels have steadily increased over the last decade, the temp has declined. They’ve yet to explain this inconvenient truth. It does help explain why they’ve employed a selective use of “normal”, multiple filtering passes, and data exclusion. It does help “hide” the Little Ice Age and the fact that the warmest modern temp occurred in 1934, not 1998.
You can blame most of this environmental CRAP on the media: ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN. They are a joke and everyone knows it! Fox is the only balance. If the left had any desire to do honest reporting, we could have ‘nipped this hysteria in the bud’ decades ago…And Al Gore would have to work for a living. Hey al, how is your daughters Mazaratti sports car doing , solar powered is it ?
Unfortunately, all the original temperature station data was dumped in the 80s, only the “value added” manipulated data exists. Of course, the IPCC head says not to worry about scientific bias:
“Leaked emails won’t harm UN climate body, says chairman
Rajendra Pachauri says there is ‘virtually no possibility’ of a few scientists biasing IPCC’s advice, after UAE hacking breach.”
Gee, wasn’t it just a few UN officials that managed to milk the oil for food program, making a mockery of “containing” Sadam while they got rich and independently wealthy? And now Dubai, the builder of sand islands in the Persian Gulf, is going bankrupt , but at least the Clintons and the Gores got their speaking fees. And of course, the UN will contain the Iranian bomb too, just like North Korea. Isn’t it grand having a Harvard lawyer for president who can stop the oceans from rising with make believe data?
CALL YOUR SENATORS AND CONGRESSMAN,NEWSPAPERS AND TV STATIONS.WRITE YOUR LOCAL PAPERS. ASK FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.STOP FUNDING ANY ACADEMIC PUSHING THIS AGENDA.IMPEACH ANY POLIITCAL OFFICIAL THAT TRIES TO SWEEP THIS UNDER THE RUG.VISIT CONGRESSIONAL OFFICES IN MASS.THIS IS THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY.
Deleting temp readings because of space?
You dont need huge files to store those data. Look at the data in the leaked file.
And, how can they even make a graph going back 100 years if the data was deleted?
I really hope people in the countries affected see what this is really about, and are able to vote for politicans who are able to stand up against ‘secret’ science.
I think Anthony Watts had the best theory about how these documents came to see the light of day. His theory was “never assume something nefarious when simple stupidity will suffice”. He suspects the FOIA2009 file was probably created by Jones himself. Perhaps he was “deleting and archiving” potentially damaging files in advance of having to comply with FOIA requests and plopped them down on an unsecured server. Somebody saw them and away they went.
A file of all emails during a 12-14 year span of time would be HUGE. What was contained in the FOIA2009 zip file was a sampling (and probably the most damaging). The same thing goes for the other (even more damaging) stuff.
I think somebody at CRU made that file and inadvertently put it somewhere where somebody could find it. Notice how you don’t see much about the “investigation”. I think the “hack” and “whistleblower” theories are rather weak.
The days of Woodward and Bernstein are long gone.
Today it takes a Kosevich and Ivanov to uncover the big schemes while today’s Woodwards and Bernsteins are busy covering reality TV stars and Sarah Palin’s latest typo.
So called destroyed or deleted computer files and e-mails can often be retrieved by someone skilled in computer forensics. Let’s see the university take all the involved computers off-line and out-of-network, bar the “scientists” from the building(s), bring in experts to retrieve the missing data, and then publish everything. You cannot thoroughly delete files from any computer without pretty advanced software, and the presence of such software on a computer would be very telling.
Where are the British police agencies in all of this?
I agree; it’s too little, too late. The RAW DATA should have been released instead of deleted. The raw data will eventually come out regardless of this pathetic PR stunt.
Simple math.
They have the results and they have the programming. Reverse the operations on the ‘massaged numbers’ and you have the original or raw data.
It isn’t gone – but it will never be retrieved, because to do that they would have to demonstrate their ‘quality control’ operations – which always somehow fell on the upper end of the temperature mean, a statistical error, and flagrant manipulation.
There are no real numbers here, people. AGW is a fraud. Cimatologists have now redefined the term “imaginary number”.
AJ Strata doesn’t believe the raw data has been destroyed. See http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/11630 where you can see his logic and evidence. More likely, this is another scam by Phil Jones and his gang to put people off the trail of getting to the truth about the global warming scam.
Any young lawyers feel like getting rich quick? File a class action lawsuit on behalf of all Americans against Al Gore and the CRU for perpetuating a fraud on the American people. They’ll get wiped out and you’ll become a multimillionaire, with the rest of their wealth redistributed to the American people. Payback’s a bitch, Gore, and the irony is sweet.
Re: Kathy #44
read this e-mail
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=1046&filename=1255298593.txt
Jones says “The original raw data are not lost either. I could reconstruct what we had from some DoE reports we published in the mid-1980s.”
For background on the FOI requests see this
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/24/the-people-vs-the-cru-freedom-of-information-my-okole%E2%80%A6/
Mr. Eschenbach asks for “…a list of the meteorological stations…”, “… a list of the actual sites used”. And of course the computer code that used to go from the raw data to the finished product is required to know how the data was adjusted.
CRU promised to release data…let us see what they really release. And let us see if they reverse the their stand on FOI and send the data to the people they have stonewalled.
The statement the university released was so full of wiggle room it would make Bill Clinton jealous. I’ll be a beliver when I see it.
I find it interesting to note that the acronym for CRU Data is CRUD.
From the Linked Telegraph story (second paragraph): “the university said it would make all the data accessible as soon as possible, once its Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had negotiated its release from a range of non-publication agreements.”
This is one HELL of a caviat! My bet is this: it’ll take at least weaks, and quite likely months for them to release any data, it won’t be complete when they do, and they’ll make all kinds of excuses, based on the above, not to.
Methinks some “scientists” need to meet a big sweatty man with a rubber hose…
None of this is a suprise to me. From the start one could see that this is a highly complex and newly developing field of science with significant limitations.
It does not lend itself to laboratory experimentation or the double blinded ‘gold standard’ type of studies which medicine (my field) uses to bypass unknown or unquantifiable variables including researcher bias, which is unavoidable. Nonetheless even in medicine what was true yesterday may not be true tomorrow despite far greater latitude in experimental design.
This is much worse. The challenges are so large that I cannot imagine how they can be overcome to derive anything meaningful from historical data given the precision required in estimating the small changes we are talking about.
So this is less precise than anthroplogy in my estimation.
We all know that global climate is dynamic and has been long before our ancestors walked on two legs.
This bothered me from the start. Then the issue is compounded by trying to implicate a causative factor, human CO2, an admitted minor factor in the big picture of greenhouse gasses. Then the headache of politics kicked in over an esoteric science just beginning to see the dawn.
Too me, cancer is just beginning to see the dawn and we have lots of controlled experiments to study that. Every patient is essentially a controlled experiment.
So why is politics so interested? Why have these scientists and their celebrity spokesmen become so invested? Why is this a left-right issue at all? It should not be if it is science. There is no left-right issue over cancer treatment, automotive safety, or relativity theory for example.
My sense is that there is a crack in the vase and we will see some return to sanity. Maybe not.
When I see this I think about basics. This is a human endeavor and many formerly forgotten folks in the basement of the physical science departments are now hot celebrities. They cannot avoid the surge of applications for graduate students and the money pouring in. Simple human nature.
Spindok
I don’t understand how the original data can be lost. It is temperatures measured at stations all over the world. Such data belongs to the national meteorological services in each country and they will all have copies of it.
AStoner:
“I think it was an inside leak of a whistleblower and not a hacker”
No kidding. I was once a very disgruntled employee and dreamed about doing something like this (no relation to climate change, so don’t even speculate). But I (and most other people) have a sense of perspective and respect for the law, so I’d never have actually done it. I saw this as an inside job as soon as I heard about it. It’s exactly what I would have done.
This guy narrowed in on precisely the best (worst?) stuff to embarrass the people he worked for (I think we can assume he/she has left the organization). It’s collected over a long period of time, from a variety of sources (i.e. not just emails – which would have been on completely different file systems to scientific code). He knew exactly what he was after. And then he filtered it for maximum effect and put it “out there” in a way that gave him deniability, but maximum exposure. I reckon it’s personal, and he knew the guys in those emails. Which means they know him.
So if CRU and the police have any sense, they’ll be talking to disgruntled ex-employees – probably from an IT section, or possibly a scientist who was marginalized or unpopular. When they find him (and my bet is “they will”), my bet is on prison time.
Thomas:
“Such data belongs to the national meteorological services in each country and they will all have copies of it.”
Exactly. That’s what the warmers have been trying to tell you – but nobody’s listening. Have a read:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack-context/
The more we learn, the less “gate” there is in this “climategate”. I guess that’s the lesson we’ve learned from previous scandals – get the shouting in early, create a “controversy”, then you can refer to the controversy later after the (rest of the) facts come to light and the story loses any real interest. I give it about another 2 weeks – by the end of the copenhagen conference, this story will just be the bleating about the controversy.
54. Thomas: I don’t understand how the original data can be lost. It is temperatures measured at stations all over the world. Such data belongs to the national meteorological services in each country and they will all have copies of it.
It wasn’t Lost. It was destroyed!
http://www.nogw.com/illuminati.html
Do you really believe Climate Change Enviroment Protection is what the UN and the Elite IMF is after? After witnessing the Fraud at Copenhagen?
Re:In its quest to create a New World Order that restricts individual freedoms and places ultimate power solely in the hands of a small cult of wealthy, prominent families Skull and Bones has already succeeded in infiltrating nearly every major research, policy, financial, media and government institution in the country. Skull and Bones, in fact, has been running the United States for years.Chaos, confusion and ultimately a battle between the individual and the State. The individual is the stronger and will win. The state is a fiction sanctified by Hegel and his followers to CONTROL the individual.
Sooner or later people will wake up. First we have to dump the trap of right and left, this is a Hegelian trap to divide and control. The battle is not between right and left; it is between us and them. The message is getting through. ASE America’s Secret Establishment has sold for 15 years, small but steady. No advertising. Its an underground work. But the breadth of interest is amazing. From Black Africa, to Russia (12,000 copies), right, left…it cuts across all ethnic, political, social lines…The spirit of God is within us as individuals. Skull & Bones represents death. It has no life spirit and pretends that the State “is the march of God on earth”.
The thinking of immature juveniles, deadly and destructive and has almost totally infected Washington. What to do? Find yourself and then go to work tell your friends and put out the message. The answer is within you. The Illuminati teaches its disciples that as they acquire knowledge and power they are illuminated as such they are better than the ordinary people in the world. To them their purpose as they are “above the Law”. Their purpose is simple, to unite the earth into a one world government. They will use any ruthless means to achieve that goal. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU