Vincent Gray on Climategate: ‘There Was Proof of Fraud All Along’ (PJM Exclusive)
In 2007, the following paper exposed the whole business:
Keenan, D.”The Fraud Allegation Against Some Climatic Research of Wei-Chyug Wang. Energy and Environment, 18, 985-995.
The author Keenan obtained the original Chinese data and found the claim that the data referred to a continuous series was unfounded. He accused Wang of fraud — and it is interesting to read that Tom Wigley (of the CRU emails) agrees with him.
Wigley fails to say, however, that his colleagues Jones and Karl are guilty of much worse than Wang — as they continued to use their fraudulent paper to boost their constant and sometimes daily assertion that recent global temperatures are unprecedented.
Wang was cleared of fraud by his university. But what about Jones and Karl?
In 1999, I had a stroke of luck. I asked one of the IPCC officials for the data from which one of their maps was compiled, and I received it. I wrote a paper analyzing the results and submitted it to Geophysical Research Letters. They just sat on it. I instead published it on John Daly’s website. Today, it is still the only paper recognized by Google on “Regional Temperature Change.”
I now know my paper was not critical enough, since we have proof that the basic data and its processing is far more dubious than I had envisaged.
I tried to update my paper and resubmit it. Nothing doing. Since the small group — revealed within the CRU emails — control most of the peer reviewers, very few peer reviewed papers which criticize that group are allowed to appear in the most prominent published literature which dominates the academic establishment.
I have only been able to find a place to release my criticisms on the internet, now the only realm where unfettered scientific discussion is possible.
It is a sad truth that scores of scientists have — for years now — put political considerations ahead of valid research and reporting methodology. As a consequence, the term “hard science” means very little these days.
In addition to climate change, the fields of physics, astronomy, and biology have been contaminated by religion-bashers in lab coats.
See: Intelligent Dishonesty (by design) http://emmeffemm.com/id30.html
Why can’t some “respectable” and/or “honest” group take all of the information that is available and actually issue an opinion?
I don’t understand why the U.S.government just plows ahead toward solving a problem that does not exist at the tremendous cost of dollars and human kind.
Who decided this?
No one has had a chance to vote on it directly…………and the whole time our children are being brainwashed. The brainwashers are not experts any more than I am but they are allowed to “teach” our children while we are told we are not scientists and basically are just plain stupid.
WHERE IS ANY NATIONAL LEADERSHIP? Is Inhofe the only one?
Every Liberal remembers Eisenhower warning against the, “military-industrial complex” but few if any know his second stated warming in that same farewell message, his warning against the, “scientific-technological elite“!
This speech could have been made last week, read the whole thing.
David
The Urban Heat Island Effect has always been influencing the data. I have done a small study comparing matched urban and rural sites across the US. There is an increase in only the urban temps. The rural sites do not show heating. It is as if they are measuring the temperature in a forest with the thermometer next to the bonfire.
Look up Global Warming Urban Heat Effect on YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcsvaCPYgcI
So Simple A Sixth Grader Can Understand It!
Phil Jones, you magnificent bastard, we read your e-mails!
It has always puzzled me that with all of the dollars at stake, nobody seemed to think it important enough to create a side by side climate reference network which was completely automated and could therefore be placed far from human habitation. Just as a check to get at the honest truth. Then I remembered why. When they did this with ocean temps, I think it was the ARGOS project, an inconvenient cooling trend showed up.
Welcome to the halls and walls of academia, where no one is allowed “a discouraging word and the skies are not cloudy all day.” This debacle points again to the sad and sorry state of Education, not just in the lower levels but in Universities and Colleges throughout the world.
That scientists are taking their talking points from the likes of Prince Charles and Al Gore is a anathema. Two men who could share a brain between them with half left over for someone else. Science like Journalism has ceased to resonate with the public because they have been proven over and over again to be liars of the first order. Like politicians they will say and do anything to advance their personal agendas.
These people take hypocrisy to a new and unheard of level.
Climategate may spur, upon it’s revelations, a great revival of scientific freedom and discovery. Honest scientists will be free to research and publish again. It may lead to the failure of the global, 1 world government power grab because that is it’s foundation. The media will cover up this fraud and this will be the final nail in their coffins too. The world may be on the verge of an explosion of intellectual freedom unseen since the end of the Middle Ages. The stranglehold has been broken.
WHERE IS ANY NATIONAL LEADERSHIP?
Given what we’ve seen just this year, would you trust it? I share your frustration but have, I think, less confidence.
And while we’re on the subject of confidence, what I want to know is
WHERE ARE THE EDITORS OF THE MAJOR SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS?
Cause you know what, guys and gals? This loss of credibility is YOUR MESS. Had you done your jobs, insisting that data, codes, and those ubiquitous “factors” be published or made public, we wouldn’t be where we are now. And you wouldn’t be where you are now, which is a place where
NO ONE BELIEVES WHAT’S PUBLISHED IN YOUR JOURNALS ANYMORE.
“Why can’t some “respectable” and/or “honest” group take all of the information that is available and actually issue an opinion?”
From the CRU emails, it appears that the raw temperature data that were so painstakingly gathered over the years by Jones et al. have simply been lost or deleted. All we have are the data as processed by their buggy, fudge-factor-filled code. So besides being corrupt and dishonest, these “scientists” have also been incredibly sloppy.
It appears that anyone wanting to do an honest job of assessing global surface temperature trends will simply have to start over.
It should come as no surprise that fraud is central to the climate change cabal. Their leader and high priest is Al Gore, a man of limited intellect. Al Gore was a mediocre student at Harvard where he was accepted because of his family’s wealth and political influence; later on he was a drop out from Baptist ministry school. That Gore is a fraud is a scandal but the bigger scandal is the NEA and their teacher robots who brainwashed young Americans with their Left wing ideology. even now they compel young innocent children to sign songs of praise to their religious/political leader Obama.
Coincidentally, I just came across a site discussing the Wang affair in respect to the emails from CRU which have been made public.
http://www.countingcats.com/?p=5023
Vincent Gray is trying to be an honest scientist, for which he should be lauded, but that is the very thing working against him. I am sure he knows by now (probably long ago) that climate science is not about climate change. It is about politics, money and power.
“Global warming” is a political movement, not a scientific discipline. Simply consider next month’s Copenhagen summit. What the Copenhagen treaty is intended to do is not to care for the planet. It is designed set up a new nomenklatura of bureaucracies and factotums and commissioners, providing them with near-unlimited political power, a luxurious lifestyle and upward mobility for their children and political allies. If you think this sounds like the old Soviet system writ global, you’re right.
I wrote 18 months ago in “Environmentalist religion explained,”
Nothing has happened to make me change my mind.
It’s too late. Green-Socialism has a hand on my wallet.
Our President is going forward with this nonsense as if it were fact. He must know the information is tainted. I myself sent the website where the FOIA liberated emails and documents were available. If there is anyone at the Whitehouse paying any attention to what is flying around the internet, Obama knows this is a fraud. If he goes to Copenhagen and commits the US to some stupid deal, he should be impeaced. He should be impeached anyway.
Hmmmm……
How do you get what you want when no one else wants it and wouldn’t even consider it because it’s so bad that a five year old could see it? You lie and are in a position to control information received by the public, including that five year old….
But that would mean someone is engaged
in a conspiracy, wouldn’t it?
I knew it was fake years ago when I examined the hockey stick graph, and noticed they claimed to be able to tell the average global temps, hundereds of years ago, by looking at tree rings! Good grief.
If that wasn’t enough, they were offering up the same solutions as they did back in the 1970′s when there was a “scientific consensus” we would have another ice age by the year 2000. Shut down American production! How can two opposite catastophes be remedied by the same solution?
That wasn’t enough, they claimed to be able to predict average global temps a decade from now, with an accuracy of 1/10 degree!
They’re not that clever. We just failed to apply good old fashioned horse sense. Now they’re going to destroy our way of life with the Cap and Trade scam, which is obviously just a method to punish production and reward non-production, thereby killing capitalism once and for all.
I remember that a blogger a year or ago started looking a where the temperature data was coming from and noticed that some of the stations in the US were not following the criteria for locating them; one was located in an asphalt parking lot. So not only may we have poor models, fudging of the data, but incorrect data.
#3 LifeTrek, thank you for that link. Inspiring words delivered with a few fumbles.
I found this passage, though, to be the most prescient of the address:
And now I’m going back to that site to hear and read more great American Rhetoric.
Thanks, again.
The politics of the matter are far worse than has been proposed.
It may be that our burning of fossil fuel has saved us from a new ice age. Stopping the use of “pollutants” may bring about a new cold snap. On the other hand, if there is Global Warming, but it is not man-made, then the use of resources to stop something we cannot stop will prevent a robust governmental response to the dislocations such warming will produce. I have heard both of these scenarios, one of which is probably correct. The one least likely to be correct is that there is a stasis, a stability, for which there is no evidence at all. We live in an active complex system that readjusts constantly – up or down.
We are damned by our need to do something, anything at all. We cannot seem to control our need to control things.
Perhaps we need to coin a new term in our New Age post industrial world, Advocacy Science? Advocacy Science certainly better reflects the current man made climate science and its almost biblical peer review procedures where only the chosen get to heaven. The circularity is viscous. The IPCC is the last authority on climate change and the climate is warming: I know this because the IPCC tells me so. In a more enlightened, rational, period this was called junk science.
Well, we can’t believe the “Journalists”, we can’t believe the “Scientists”, we can’t believe “Big Business”, we can’t believe the Politicians, we can’t believe the Government…other than those men and women fighting for what freedom we have left, there is no sanity…it has all become about manipulation and control these days!
While the politicians and media promote this junk science, they pummel with negative PR and stifle with regulations industries (e.g., pharmaceuticals, oil) in which honest scientists routinely make clearly positive contributions to society.
Scientists employed in industry need to make their voices heard, if only in defense of proper, objective science. I imagine there are far more scientists in industry than there are in government/universities.
Thankfully Al Gore invented the internet.
Re: 21, how about “Political Science”?
“I tried to update my paper and resubmit it. Nothing doing. Since the small group — revealed within the CRU emails — control most of the peer reviewers, very few peer reviewed papers which criticize that group are allowed to appear …”
Similar to the claim that the GOP is just the party of no. They “have no plan of their own” for health care reform (even as they stood waving the plan of their own during Obama’s address to Congress) because Reid and Pelosi wouldn’t let them even present it.
The U.S. Senate’s leading global warming skeptic has sent letters to several climate change scientists and to the inspectors general of various federal agencies notifying them to retain breached documents and e-mails that he says prove researchers are manipulating data to make the case for global warming.
The move by Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, is part of his push for an investigation into whether the U.N’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has fudged the science on global warming.
In one e-mail, published in The Washington Post, a scientist wrote, “We can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
(“it is a travesty that we can’t.”)
No it is not-
Its called the.. ‘GORE EFFECT’ … LOL
I never did believe this crap. Anything that Gore is involved in is doubtfully accurate ,but it did make him very rich,while the avrage American became poorer. I bet if you check these scientist political party affiliation they are Demorats . I don’t believe that any human can predict what is in the future of this planet. Can’t wait for 2010
Wake up folks, the government is part of the problem NOT the solution. This has never been about science or the climate. It is about power and control. Copenhagen is set up to try and impose an international agency to control most anything that can be tied to “AGW”. And this agency would have the power to tax (global cap/trade, redistribution to 3rd world, etc.)
This is a stealth attack on capitalism, individualism and democracy similar to the EU. Corporatism and crony capitalism instead of a free market. Oligarchy rather than democracy and the rule of law.
These people aren’t called water-melons for nothing.
Happy post T-day, and holy guacamole! — how much idiotic “climategate” pieces are you guys going to publish? You can get endless numbers of people to claim and provide “evidence” for how the moon landings were faked, but that still doesn’t change the fact that they are seriously, seriously confused. Whether you realize it or not, you’re demonstrating *exactly* the behavior that the climatologists frustratingly discussed in their emails: right wingers, petroleum industry flunkies, dopey news people, and crackpots in general at the ready to seize upon *anything,* however insignificant or even mostly imagined, to try to portray the scientific consensus (by people who actually are active in the field) for human caused global warming to be instead some sort of bizarre conspiracy. No.
I know it’s mostly a waste of time, but…sorry folks, it’s for real
Dear Mr. Gray:
When I read stories of courageous persons like yourself who face such ostracism in your chosen field, I get absolutely irate that these liberal frauds have gotten away with so much scampish and illegal behaviour over so many decades.
This proves that liberalism is literally a fraud. From using abortion to kill black babies, to using climate hysteria to make such as Al Gore rich we have been led down the garden path for too many years by fraudulent liberal/socialist politicians, media and academics.
So many honest individuals like yourself have had your life’s work denigrated as you try to bring the truth to light.
Let us hope that the next few months brings further exposure of the liberal rot.
I’ve got it by jove!
These buffoons have no proven that two wrongs make a right. Now, if you think that was hard, wait until they prove that two rights make a wrong. I wonder if there’s a Nobel Prize for this?
BC, thanks very much for that enlightening post. Now that you have called the rest of names and generally insulted us randomly, you have thoroughly convinced me to how right you really are. Thanks so much for such a thorough rebuttal of our arguments and count me in on your side now!
Finally, the lid is off the astronomically huge scandal of government-sponsored junk science. Since most ‘research’ funding these days originates in the various government agencies (NIH, NSF, DOE, etc.) honest scientific inquiry has morphed into agenda-driven political ‘science’. The scientific method of the rigorous application of the countervailing exchanges of thesis/antithesis has been replaced by funding only those advocating the approved monochromatic paradigms – challengers need not apply. And if you think the current climategate scandal is huge, consider the gigantic fraud that is the ‘AIDS-is-an-infectious-HIV-virus-caused-STD’ paradigm. Can any thinking person really believe this monstrosity – nearly every sexually active American college student knows it to be specious. Why does this outrageous scam continue to exist? – as always, follow the money as with the AGW fraud.
” one was located in an asphalt parking lot” – regarding weather station placement in hot spots I have wondered for some time if something fishy was going on. Here in New Orleans for instance the station used to be in the middle of Audubon Park but some years ago was moved to the boundary adjacent to acres of asphalt, a container terminal and a few yards away from a diesel freight line. I bet this kind of suspect placement happens all over the place.
ALL of science is tainted by this. So many “scientists” and so many scientific publications are implicated, who can believe anything from any field of science? In the end this must be cleaned up by the scientific community. Scientists the world over must aggressively expunge the bad or no one will believe anything.
In days long past, scientists were motivated by the quest for knowledge and truth. Many were very religious and saw their quest as a means to understand the Creator. Kepler said “For a long time I was restless. Now, however, behold how through my effort God is being celebrated in astronomy.”
Now, science is motivated by political ideology, greed, ego and pride. And as Art points out (#22) moral foundations are collapsing everywhere. When God is rejected the vacuum is filled by something else.
30 BC
may have begun to lose ice.
BC take me to one beach in California and show me where the water has risen 1-one inch and I will kiss the feet of your carbon ‘global warming God.’
That same California that has dumped more forest-brush fires and carbon credits into the global climate in the last 5 years than all the cars, buses, planes, trains and trucks ever invented in history of this planet.
But you can not and will not.
Because you still worship your idol that carbon God of ‘global warming’!
Even though his idol likeness is about to crash and burn to pieces around your feet,
brought down by the high priests of global climate liars.
RE: Unger’s comments. Here in California the NRDC http://nrdc.org reportedly pays the ilk of agenda-driven scientists up to $250,000 for expert witness testimony in (initially) obscure lawsuits. One such case ended with SoCal losing our nearly last source of water (the California Aqueduct) 7/12ths of the year. Several years ago the NRDCites already stopped another main canal from the S. Sierras on behalf of Mono Lake–basically a dead-end lake–very large I could see now after a recent fly over en route to watery Seattle. We’re expecting to soon lose use of I-5 and Hwy99 because road kill victims are also endangered species.
Coincidently, the farms affected by the NRDC “expertise” basically feed the nation 8 months a year…probably not a coincidence.
To wit, it’s my understanding that the rules of evidence are in bad need of restructuring. It’s also my understanding that once a case like SAC DELTA MINNOWS VS. PEOPLE OF SAN JUAQUIN AND SOCAL becomes decided, the testimony from these expert witnesses enjoys the same force as laws passed by legislators. The mechanism they use is the Endangered Species Act.
I heard about this from Democrat friends, oddly enough, but have yet to see any critique of whether or not it is true–not even from the many conservative attorneys who cruise these websites.
@#8. nadadhimmi:
According to my research, that scenario is about five or six years away from fruition. A new renaissance will begin in about five to ten years, the likes of which we can only presently imagine.
In the meantime, expect to see more ‘climategates’ being exposed in other fields and disciplines…including ‘climategates’ within your favorite social, political and cultural belief systems.
This is very sad indeed.
It sounds like the end of Freedom.
AND…
The subversives read this and we all know what they will think.
This “Internet” thing has gone too far for them.
Some new U.N. treaty to limit the use of FREE THINKING ?
BC: “may have begun to lose ice.”
They really went out on a limb.
This proves nothing and you know nothing about technology or science.
Donald Sensing @ #13 is spot-on. The socialists have turned to other feel-good projects, to impose their misguided beliefs on the rest of us, and “environmentalism” is one of those. Do not expect the current Administration and Congress to stop this nonsense. They are part of the problem, not part of the solution. (Elections have consequences, and the one in 2008 has had very negative consequences.)
BC @ #30: I see you have toned down your ad hominem attacks, although they are still implicit in how you have chosen to comment. That aside, the problem faced by you and others who view AGW as real is whether the warming that has occurred since the end of the Little Ice Age has been caused by AGW or by natural processes. For those assuming it is AGW, the primary culprit is supposed to be CO2; yet although CO2 has been increasing steadily since the 1860s, the earth, as far as can be told, has experienced warming and cooling periods, with the warmest years being in the 1930, not the 1990s as originally reported. Moreover, all during that period CO2 continued to increase. So, while we have more CO2 now than in the 1930s, it is cooler now than then. Of course, the earth over the last 11 years has not experienced any warming, and possibly some cooling, yet CO2 has increased. How can that be? Shouldn’t that contrary evidence raise questions about CO2 being the culprit for the purported AGW effects? Secondly, even if we presume AGW, and we can figure what’s causing it, then we need to engage in an economic cost/benefit analysis that would justify reducing, and by what amount, whatever activity it is that is causing AGW. Yet, those commenters on PJM who like yourself adhere to the AGW view do not seem to want to be aware of the massive economic costs of attempting to reduce purported AGW effects.
#30 BC the Lonely say: “…the behavior that the climatologists frustratingly discussed in their emails: right wingers, petroleum industry flunkies, dopey news people, and crackpots in general at the ready to seize upon *anything,* however insignificant or even mostly imagined, to try to portray the scientific consensus (by people who actually are active in the field) for human caused global warming to be instead some sort of bizarre conspiracy.”
It must be terribly disheartening to have your core belief shown to be a simple fraud for money. My heart goes out to BC and the crooks he has looked up to for hope and deliverance. This trusting soul cannot accept the fact that he is all alone, as he so describes his fate, with the cheaters. A calamitous lesson, faith without works is dead.
30 BC
37 Fearless Leader
OMG, the Antarctic ice shelf is suffering from melting… at the beginning of summer? Someone call Al Gore! Save the penguins!
Oh, what? You’re telling me that in the last two winters there has been record ice formation in the Arctic? Where did this data come from? Surely, some anthropogenic global warming denier has come out with this data… Of course! It was the International Arctic Research Center. http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
Here’s how the trial should go:
Assemble all of the scientists papers and review publicly all grant support, paid travel, honoraria, and salaries. Look into whether this support was acknowledged.
Track all manuscript reviews and editorialships.
Look into all sponsorships and advertising revenue of the journals.
Then, demand and publish raw data from all publications. The error rate will be huge discrediting a great percentage of all work.
Suppoenae, all authors on any work to determine what if any role they played in the research — there’s bound to be numerous padded resumes created in this fraud.
Look into what role any intitution may have had in secondary gain from publication of these fabrications and hold them jointly liable.
If we are going to try terrorists in public court why not scientific fraud suspects?
It appears that google is censoring their autosuggest function. Yesterday it would autosuggest “climategate” but it no longer appears in the list! This is extremely significant because “climategate” would appear first in the list for any search that begins with “climate.”
It would be good if other folks could confirm this, and if it is true, trumpet this coverup on the web. Google is a gatekeeper of global news …
#18 and 35: You refer to the work of Anthony Watts at the site wattsupwiththat.com — which ought to be declared a national treasure for the work he’s done on Climategate alone, but Watts, who is a retired meteorologist, was the impetus for a citizen-based inspection project of our temperature measurement stations. He’s periodically reported on the results at his site, and he’s collating all the results for a full-volume, highly-depressing report, which you can acquire from him. Check out his site–it’s well worth your time.
The release of these emails has broken the back of global socialism. The socialist frauds who inhabit the main stream media are in shock and denial and judging by their silence have not been able to come up with a believable lie yet. Obama and the socialist frauds will be all dressed up with no place to go. Any government programs relying on IPCC data should be immediately frozen, cap & trade, EPA, grant funding. An investigation into what moron in our government pushed the 70 billion funding for grants to these frauds is going to have to do some fast talking. Any government employee’s who continue to hide their head in the sand and pretent nothing is changed is going to be held responsible.
Print is dead ~ peer reviewed journals are no longer sufficient to cover science and provide room for discussion.
Anything that’s not posted on the internet, complete with all the data and references, should simply be ignored.
It’s gratifying to see so many people in these comments, and comments of other blog posts, so vocal in their condemnation of the anthropogenic global warming fraud. Right before Copenhagen and its abolition of sovereignty, national and personal. Right in the middle of changing our food producing land to fuel production as we head into a possible dramatic cooling period that will further reduce farmland. Right in the middle of another round of collectivism-inspired condemnations and centrally-controlled “fixing” of that tainted thing we still amazingly call “Capitalism”. Right in the middle of so many devastating things. Let’s hope it’s not to late.
My question … where were you years ago when a small amount of information and a 5-step logical sequence made it obvious that even the most basic claims could not possibly be true? Some of us were blogging this. Writing news article comments on this. Writing congressmen on this. Writing letters and canceling our Scientific American subscriptions when they started writing articles in support of the charade. Writing in support of those who had the bravery to speak up.
Where were you? Did you really need a “Step 1: Fraud. Step 2: Hey, wait, did you see that step 1?” process to figure this out? And will you bother taking the one more step necessary to realize that every single outrageous claim of the active consequences of AGW … from alleged apocalyptic arctic and glacial ice melting to polar bear extinctions to every devastating weather phenomenon to every drought and heat wave … need to be, not just questioned, but held as suspect, along with the individuals making the claims and those that supported them and ostracized their opponents, with no more proof than that they “feel” it’s true after decades of conditioning by a corrupt and poorly educated culture?
I’m not hopeful.
#50
“…and canceling our Scientific American subscriptions”
Been there, done that.
BC- thanks for the link…it proves NOTHING about AGW, but it did lead me to this interesting link on the site:
“Is Global Warming Unstoppable?”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091123083704.htm
Some VERY interesting conclusions by the author of the study, Tim Garrett, an associate professor of atmospheric sciences:
•Energy conservation or efficiency doesn’t really save energy, but instead spurs economic growth and accelerated energy consumption.
•”Stabilization of carbon dioxide emissions at current rates will require approximately 300 gigawatts of new non-carbon-dioxide-emitting power production capacity annually — approximately one new nuclear power plant (or equivalent) PER DAY,” Garrett says. “Physically, there are no other options without killing the economy.” (Cap and Trade, anyone???)
“I’m just saying it’s not really possible to conserve energy in a meaningful way because the current rate of energy consumption is determined by the unchangeable past of economic production. … If it feels good to conserve energy, that is fine, but there shouldn’t be any pretense that it will make a difference.”
Ahhh…I can feel my guilt dissappearing as I type (not that I ever really had much…I knew it was a MEDIA foisted mirage after all!)
So, what is the answer to a GLOBAL economy that REQUIRES energy and can’t be stopped???
Why…NUCLEAR WAR and the ensuing nuclear winter!
Global warming stopped cold~!!! (Pun intended.)
Vincent Gray: “I have only been able to find a place to release my criticisms on the internet, now the only realm where unfettered scientific discussion is possible.”
How many other realms of academia, politics, media, etc., are in this same boat?
Answer: Most
OK, we’re all amateur scientists at heart. There’s nothing we don’t want to explore – icebergs at the Poles, polar bears stuck on ice floes (oh, forget that they can swim), rising oceans, disappearing hurricanes, and temperature anomalies dating back to the beginning of time – all improbable discoveries, but worth gazillions in grants at the esteemed universities of the planet.
I’m sure it’s worth trying to solve the improbable, but curiously, generations of inconclusive results suggests that these kooks silenced and books need to be closed and other pursuits undertaken. I, for one, am tired of the fraud in the results of these aimless, tireless pursuits and “hope” (that’s a Barack Obama clever term for WTF) and let some of these fraudulent participants join those bears on the ice floe (man can also swim).
The dirty little secret is that this is about global population control. People buy into climate change because they see evidence of destuction of habitat by people. We do effect our environment and diminishing resources will be an issue. Ceding control to government (or world government) should concern us as individuals if we take the long view.
There is a reason Holdren got his job. The end game justifies the means. although I personally believe we will hit a natural set-point that pushes us back to equilibrium, I’m not so sure, that the only thing antropomorphic won’t be an induced catastrophe.
How much CO2 enters the atmosphere each year? SkepticalScience.com (a global warming advocacy site) says,
And this tidbit: “CO2 in the atmosphere is rising by only 15 gigatonnes per year.”
So there is a total of 796 gigatons of CO2 entering the atmosphere annually, of which 3.27% originates from human beings. And 43% of that is absorbed. Now you can see how science proves that global warming results solely from human CO2 emissions. It’s got nothing to do with the sun, water vapor, etc.
Dave II @ #52: Very good points. They are along the lines of my cost/benefit analysis that I keep asking BC and others who defend AGW to address. Donald Sensing @ #56: Spot-on. Even if we completely eliminated all human based carbon production (aside from breathing) we would make a trivial contribution to reducing the purported problem.
46
Google does not autosuggest climategate even if you type to entire word
Vincent Gray. Ah, yes, another one of PJM’s unimpeachable sources:
http://www.desmogblog.com/vincent-gray
“Yet, those commenters on PJM who like yourself adhere to the AGW view do not seem to want to be aware of the massive economic costs of attempting to reduce purported AGW effects.”
Its typical of a “greenie”. I just saw the remake of “The Day the Earth Stood Still” and had to laugh at it, but it was typical of the “Environmentalist” view point. The original had much greater value as a political statement since global thermonuclear war can actually destroy all life on the planet. In the remake Klatu (played by Keanu Reeves) comes to “save the Earth” from the ravages of humanity. The story and dialog was just as contrived as the AGW data.
1) Humanity short of a concentrated effort like nuking the entire planet cannot destroy it, our living planet is MUCH more dangerous to us than we are to it. Look at things like earthquakes, tidal waves, hurricanes, volcanoes, and tornadoes. Greenies have a “god complex” in thinking humanity is much more significant than we are.
2) Should humanity damage our environment to the point it can no longer support us we will go extinct or if we’ve developed the technology leave it we will do so. Either way the planet will recover, the Earth’s environment has been WAY more hostile to life than it currently is and on several occasions has experienced mass extinctions. We’re barely a blip on the radar in terms of the planet’s existence. Species come and go, the Earth and life always renews itself even if it takes millions of years and a completely radically different form.
3) In the movie the aliens (and writers) were concerned with preserving the other species of the Earth yet were fine with committing genocide on humanity. Why are other species worth saving and not humanity? Why save all the non-sentient animals and plants? If that was the case why didn’t they save the dinosaurs or other species that were the victims of mass extinction? A more advanced species exterminating humanity is no different as humans deciding wolves are dangerous and wiping them out. Ask a Montana rancher how they feel about the reintroduction of wolves by environmentalist groups.
4) The “solution” in the movie (and in the minds of many Environmentalists) was to send humanity back to pre-industrial status. The sub-message was that humanity was a violent race in addition to being a environmentally destructive race. Sending us back to pre-industrial times would only create more violence as food, medicine, etc. became scarce. Tens of millions (if not hundreds of millions) would starve as our ability to produce enough food was destroyed. Disease and infection would become a huge factor as modern medicine is no longer availiable; all the Purell, antibacterial soaps, bathing, and sanitation would be gone too. It also destroys humanity’s capability to produce environmentally friendly and non-polluting technologies. The writing for the movie was all in all terrible.
Basically the movie is an exhibit of all the stupidity and short sightedness associated with AGW believers. The writers, producers, actors, and directors of the movie should be ashamed they produced such garbage.
How sad it is for the children (“Progressives”). They wanted ponies (socialism) for Christmas, and they knew their parents (the society they live in) would never buy them one. But–Santa Claus (AGW) would bring them a pony (socialism). But now someone has told them that Santa Claus (AGW) is not real. They are indignant, hurt, and angry–because if Santa Claus(AGW) isn’t real it means they really aren’t going to get their pony (socialism) this XMAS.
Weep for the spoiled children. If AGW is discredited I’m sure they will shift their attention to the tooth fairy or the Easter bunny. Socialism has always been a lonely solution in search of a problem to justify its lonely existence. Maybe it ought to try signing up on e-Harmony.
The best weather forecasters in the world cannot tell you with a large degree of accuracy what the weather will be one week from now, much less one year or one decade. Besides, weather forecasting is dependent on the TROPOSHERE , the lowest layer of the atmosphere where weather occurs. Weather does not occur in the statsophere, the second layer of the atmosphere. So therefore weather forecasters trying to tell me about “climate change” have no clue what they are talking about. Even a climatologist only has records that go back a century or so and besides climatology is nothing more than the weather history of a particular region(desert/arid climate in the Sahara, Mediterreanean climate in Southern California are examples). There is no current science that can even measure “global warming” or “climate change”.
bc @30 still at it, eh? “…however insignificant or even mostly imagined…”? Have you not read the e-mails? The discrepancy in the numbers was anything but insignificant, and we didn’t imagine them discussing the need to “hide the decline”.
There are plenty of people “active in the field” who aren’t in on the consensus. There never is any such thing as consensus in real scientific circles. If the whole thing was so strong of a case, why did they have to lie? To manipulate data? To delete data that would have countered their theory?
The article you pointed to was not very convincing, given the date (yesterday, after all the CRU data has been reviewed) and the fact , yes FACT, that your biggest proponents have been caught lying, cheating and committing felonious fraud. The best line in the article (yes, I read it all ) is right in the first paragraph: “…may have begun to lose ice.“ MAY! MAY! You think that sounds conclusive? The downside to this entire episode, for all of science, especially the alarmists, is that nothing could possibly be believed at face value. That article doesn’t cut the mustard. Especially not if you consider (and I’m sure you won’t) the following links:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/environment/waterworld.html
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/271218
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/media_credibility_not_ice_caps_1.html
@56 As a gas, CO2 has a limited ability to absorb and contain heat, that is to say that more CO2 doesn’t equal more warming. If it did, then why, if CO2 has been rising by 15gt/yr (for, how many years?), have temps been flat and/or declining? Also, the number 796gt/yr can’t be annual if it is increasing by 15gt/yr. The number would be constantly changing. And the ocean can’t release and absorb the same amount of CO2. The ocean releases CO2 when temp rises and reabsorbs when temp falls. Basic science.
The numbers being exactly equal are dubious and very difficult to quantify. Did they share their data and have it checked by responsible scientists?
And the bottom line is, if nature maintains such a perfect balance, why has the Earth’s climate been in a constant state of flux since the beginning of time?
Go sell your junk science to schoolchildren (but don’t come near mine!) or keep it contained in your echo-chamber. It’s getting pathetic.
out
“It would be good if other folks could confirm this, and if it is true, trumpet this coverup on the web. Google is a gatekeeper of global news …”
I would if I had personal knowledge of how it was yesterday, but I didn’t google for it yesterday. All I can confirm is that “climategate” isn’t auto-suggested today.
Jack @57 re Donald @56: Did I misunderstand the point of his post? Was it sarcasm? I may have misread based on an overly quick read or just flat out brain cramping! My apologies to Donald @56!
bc @30 still at it, eh? “…however insignificant or even mostly imagined…”? Have you not read the e-mails? The discrepancy in the numbers was anything but insignificant, and we didn’t imagine them discussing the need to “hide the decline”.
There are plenty of people “active in the field” who aren’t in on the consensus. There never is any such thing as consensus in real scientific circles. If the whole thing was so strong of a case, why did they have to lie? To manipulate data? To delete data that would have countered their theory?
The article you pointed to was not very convincing, given the date (yesterday, after all the CRU data has been reviewed) and the fact , yes FACT, that your biggest proponents have been caught lying, cheating and committing felonious fraud. The best line in the article (yes, I read it all ) is right in the first paragraph: “…may have begun to lose ice.“ MAY! MAY! You think that sounds conclusive? The downside to this entire episode, for all of science, especially the alarmists, is that nothing could possibly be believed at face value. That article doesn’t cut the mustard. Especially not if you consider (and I’m sure you won’t) the following links:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/environment/waterworld.html
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/271218
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/media_credibility_not_ice_caps_1.html
@56 As a gas, CO2 has a limited ability to absorb and contain heat, that is to say that more CO2 doesn’t equal warming. If it did, then why, if CO2 has been rising by 15gt/yr (for, how many years?), have temps been flat and/or declining? Also, the number 796gt/yr can’t be annual if it is increasing by 15gt/yr. The number would be constantly changing. And the ocean can’t release and absorb the same amount of CO2. The ocean releases CO2 when temp rises and reabsorbs when temp falls. Basic science.
The numbers being exactly equal are dubious and very difficult to quantify. Did they share their data?
And the bottom line is, if nature maintains such a perfect balance, why has the Earth’s climate been in a constant state of flux since the beginning of time?
Go sell your junk science to schoolchildren (but don’t come near mine!) or keep it contained in your echo-chamber. It’s getting pathetic.
out
#56 Donald, you must be careful when you present stats that are readily available and haven’t been manipulated yet. How can trust such data? Where are the dead octopi on the beaches and polar bears attacking shoppers on 5th Avenue?
Now, if Mann and company had a chance to use their data manipulators, you see it published as “man causes ocean temperatures to rise when they are attacked by sharks in temperate waters Penobscot Bay”, and they’ll find an aged lobster fisherman to verify it and give him a doctorate in ocean sciences for cover.
We need legitimate discussion from new faces in climatology to perform peer review before any further of these global meetings are held. Cancel Copenhagen NOW! Naw, can’t do that; Obama has to have a reason to go to Oslo to collect his prize. Tee hee – he’s committed to donate it to a charity – maybe Rahm Emanual’s charity in Chicago.
Goracle has no shame. Now he published an article in the Financial Times about how AGW is real and how CAPITALISM DAMAGES THE EARTH. The b… is incredible: “Time is up for short-term thinking in capitalism” -
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1b1067b2-dacd-11de-933d-00144feabdc0.html
O.k., Financial Times is a libtardian piece of … No wonder Goracle is welcome there. And the readers of FT are rather lefties. I never expected much of the comments section of the FT. But my goodness! Even there people REVOLT AGAINST GORE.
The MSM ignores the scandal, but it’s spreading, and even the readers of the lefty papers feel screwed by Algore. That’s sweet.
I’m a teacher who showed my classes the story of climategate on Tuesday. Too many teachers have lied to their students too long about so called global warming. For the past 11 years, we have been cooling, in spite of ALL of our so called “efforts” to warm the Earth. We could NOT do it.
It appears that in 2002 NASA launched the Aqua Satellite and if the climate models were correct they would have found hotspots in the Troposphere over the Equator.
They found no such evidence and subsequent checks with weather balloons came up with the same result.
Should have been game over….but from memory it was about that time that Global Warming became Climate Change.
Work it out yourself.
Al Baby, how about that debate?
This needs to be up front in the news cycle before some lame brain law binds the US into some Global Grifting scam.
43. globallycool is correct. We must TAKE ACTION with litigation or the stealth liberal totalitarians … Google, CNN NBC, AOL, BBC et al will undercut and hide the truth of the hoax that has been revealed.
Remember that GE has billions on the line for global warming projects.
Obama does not control his own actions … his handlers are all set to make billions on we the people.
Do not stop the discussion and do not hesitate to file lawsuits against every last fraud.
Posters like BC just work for the big bosses, that’s all. It is all about money, nothing about life on earth.
And here is another thought. Let’s not just complain about Google, let’s support the alternatives … Bing, Yahoo, etc. We are the ones who gave Google the power. Stop using them, stop using gmail. They are just in Soros’ pocket. Their power is here, now. It can also disappear …. just like Dubai’s money.
Before Chairman Mao launched the “Cultural Revolution” he was on vacation. He saw that, in order for the fire of the mind to succeed that was kindled by Marx, Engels, Lenin, and all those identified with the hammer & sickle, who preceded Mao, the old culture had to be eradicated.
He saw the old culture was very much alive, so he wrote, “Cold Eye’d I contemplate the world”, which firmly affixed the vision laid out by those deformed souls who preceded Mao.
I mention this because, regardless of all that counters the vision, it is only the vision which counts.
In other words, new clothes have been put on the old gambit – each statement which says the emperor has no clothes is to be ignored.
The evidence of fraud in regards to climategate is to be ignored.
Such is the hollowness of those who deem they know best, but demonize all of Bernard Goldberg’s
books starting with “Bias”.
Why do we even listen to such trash as global waring or climate change? I have always refused to believe it and now we all can with a few exceptions. It is a FARCE and money grab that is communistic in its basic premise, mankind does not or can not control the climate either by adding taxes or doing even more of what they already do so get over it you who want my labor and money to fix what the planet already does each day or century!
If we are seeing that observers of this recent development believe that this will INCREASE debate, freedom of information and innovation, can we apply this to our education system and our media? Yes, even though there would be opposition, there is great opportunity here.
Proponents of AGW are hurting the honest discussion we could be having about protecting our environment.
To nolan: yes, they *are* insignificant. The CRU email excerpts I’ve seen so far provide absolutely no support whatsoever for all these malicious and/or idiotic claims of fraud, like for example these numbnuts here. In that case they bolded a group email sent that had been sent from someone obviously a bit clueless about how to interpret climate data, including rehashing the right wing nonsense about the climate cooling since 1998 and then took it as a conspiracy to shut out dissenting voices when the email’s author got casually dismissed. Believe it or not, peer reviewed journals are not exactly the same as Wikipedia, where any numbnut can pop in and try to make a dopey change.
And as far as the other comments go, if we start seeing things like 1 inch rises in ocean levels anytime soon, we are screwed. One key thing you must understand about the global climate system is that it goes from equilibrium point to equilibrium point pretty rapidly, at least according to the paleo records. This means things are not just going to very slowly warm up, and the arctic ice very slowly melt: it’s more likely some “tipping point” will be reached, and then there will be an accelerating change leading to an abrupt climate change to a different equilibrium point in terms of global and regional climates, as well as stuff like ocean currents.
A simple lab test, even a six-year-old could conduct would be able to verify the results of CO2 concentrations and the effects on temperature. Where is this test? It probably was conducted, but the results did not match the desired outcome. CO2 is not a pollutant! If we did not have CO2 all life would cease, you see plants require CO2 to grow, all life depends on plant growth fro survival. The addition of more CO2 may actually be better for the planet in that more plants will grow, or at the very least crops will grow faster. And I guess this is bad if we are able to then feed the millions that go hungry every day. Just perhaps the use of fossil fuels has an intended purpose, there may be a plan and mankind is attempting to screw it up with Cap and Trade scam.
“Global Warming became climate change”
Windscale became Sellafield
It was still as full of dangerous waste
What a tremendous turn of events! The AGW crowd of eco facists caught red handed fudging data and concealing the truth. And think of all the dupes who swallowed it, starting with President Obama who was ready, along with his lefty sycophants in the House and Senate, to hamstring the American economy after assuming a completely unproveable and now discredited “scientific” theory was true. How perfect. I can’t wait to see how these fools are going to handle Copenhagen.
The legacy media is always telling us how smart all these leaders are. Do they have any idea how discredited and foolish they look, after wasting a couple of forests telling us breathlessly how much danger we were all in? I couldn’t dream up a more wonderful way for the world to learn what fraudsters this whole group is.
There really is a Santa Claus!
Has anyone else ever noticed that the actual temperature record for early years (150 yrs ago) is almost nonexistent? For example, the so-called “Global Average” temperature for January 1850 is derived from actual measurements from less than 16% of the planet’s surface.
Has it ever bothered anyone — anyone at all — that global temps are NOT normally distributed – either geographically or over time – and that the sampling is not random at all, but merely represents whatever happened to be “reliably” recorded in certain places at the time?
Do people have that much faith in Bootstrapping?
Does bootstrapping have to be based on ANYTHING? Anything at all? Or, can I bootstrap GLOBAL temperatures from, say, the temperature in one particular place, or, from my personal salary over the years of my life, or, from the amount of tea in China, or ….?
You’ve got this from 2005:
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/170473/data_reveal_sea_levels_have_risen_more_than_1_inch/
-And this from 2008:
http://www.greendaily.com/2008/03/24/nasa-scientists-puzzled-as-data-show-oceans-actually-cooling/
Obviously, science has along way to go into ‘predicting’ diddly-squat.
# 80 Keith the Mastermind Global Warming became Climate change because Climate Change is a REAL undeniable Natural Phenomenon and Global Warming is a debunked SCAM. Wake up moonbat.
As of a few minutes ago Google shows about 11 million hits for ClimateGate (no auto thingy) but Bing shows over 50 million hits!
I suggest a 6 month moratorium on federal grant money for all scientific research, and a permanent banning of all involved. Make this episode so painful that nobody in their right mind will ever think about this kind of cr@p again.
There’s more information to be found here:
http://algorelied.com/?p=3294
Beautiful little chart linked there, which shows who sent emails to whom…
Plus, a whole list of related links at Infowars:
http://www.infowars.com/climategate-for-dummies/
Announcement of a chair of the inquiry and terms of reference will probably be made on Monday, a source says.
The University of East Anglia’s (UEA) press office did not confirm the date.
But a spokesperson said information about the investigation into the hack at UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) would be made public very soon.
Scientists will be scrutinising the choice of chair and the terms of reference.
One senior climate scientist told me that the chair would have to be a person accepted by both mainstream climate scientists and sceptics as a highly respected figure without strong connections to either group.
Two quick comments please, algore wrote in the Finiancial Times now believes passionatly from his heart in ‘sustainable capitilism’ -whatever the heck that means. The second comment, DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
it’s important to understand the sociological dynamics behind AGW hysteria, this is the key to understanding this whole manufactured crisis. Whilst money interests are there, including Third World despot govts trying to scam the taxpayers of rich countries (this is what the IPCC is about, see the chapters on technical transfer/review in the assessment reports, it’s all there in the fine print), remember the IPPCC is UN appointed; the major factors are still a kind of groupthink psychosis predicated on PC delusions. It’s all about blaming the corporations and the rich white man, and of course especially America, rather than focusing on very real worldwide ecological devestation because that means criticising the Third World as much as the First world, and we can’t have that. There are other factors of course including a religious dynamic. An irony lost on the secular Left who always make fun of conservative Christians is the apocalyptic hysteria of the sky is falling AGW madness is very much rooted in apocalpytic end-times religious thinking, just mutated into a secular pseudo-scientific form.
I’m with you, Dr. Gray. It has been fairly obvious to the impartial observer that something was going on.
When I first heard all that ‘the debate is over’ talk I was stunned that the scientific community as a whole didn’t stand up and say ‘actually, the debate is NEVER over in science’. Even accepted, proven theories deserve to be challenged.
I think we have to look further than just fudged data by agenda driven researchers and scientists.
There should be a larger focus on the IPCC Chairman and Vice Chairs, IMO. Bert Bolin is perhaps the grandfather of the AGW movement. His place is rarely discussed (Google ‘did Bert Bolin fool us all’) – nor are some of the other past vice chairs. Wealth redistribution activists and some questionable names from science such as Yuri Izrael (openly lied to USSR citizens about dangers after Chernobyl) pepper the lists.
The whole movement needs to be looked at from top to bottom. From the promoters like Al Gore to the data fudgers like Mann, Jones, Briffa and the rest. From the IPCC heads to the politicians that promote economic policies based on this fudged junk science.
The worst part for me is I used to be an avid reduce-reuse-recycle participant. Even if I my neighborhood didn’t I took my recyclables to the drop off spot.
Since the warm mongers have taken over the movement the ‘green’ movement has been hijacked. Recycling is down, and the business as a whole is teetering on collapse. We’ve been fear mongered to death about global warming to the point that nothing else matters.
The alarmists have killed the green movement – and it is going to take decades to get people back on board. They are going to lose seats politically and it is going to be very tough for them to accomplish anything going forward.
heheheheheheheh
Up is down, left is right, big is little, flat is round, a lie is a truth. The world is getting dangerously warmer. Oh, no it’s not. And the truth wasn’t hacked as idiots say, but there in public view for any idiot to see. Now Obirdbrain goes to some foreign country to further the slimy-global warming lie while Gore goes back to counting his chads.
And as the hot sky is falling liars belch out their nonsense, the global Obama logic is seeping into every facet of American life, much like a sewer leaks till you smell the stench. If Obama has a nose the size of those ears, he’d be holding it wherever he goes.
Regardless, here’s a piece of my world that doesn’t accept the Neo-Com, post modern relativist logic. On climate change or anything else.
Obama, without a smidgen of a doubt, is the most extreme left President, the worst President America that has ever elected (the fact that Acorn may have really elected him I won’t address here). His crimes, misdemeanors and wrongheaded objectives (spread the wealth and tactics to get there) puts this nation in severe and present peril. Every week, Oblunder pulls some idiotic unAmerican idea out of his butt.
The fact that his approval rating is now about 47 doesn’t surprise me, but the fact African Americans still give him a 90% backing says they don’t give a whit about the content of his character. Just the sound of his voice and the color of his skin. At the same time, Holder doesn’t have a clue how to lawfully run America. He gets an open and shut case against the voter intimidating Black Panthers, they don’t show up for trial, and Holder decides to drop the case.
Sure is nice to have friends in high places.
Sure is unfortunate we have a commie as attorney general.
If Obama isn’t led out of the white house in handcuffs within the next six months, there’s no justice left in the world. Obama is more than a
seditious, clear and present danger to the United states. He’s the old proverbial fox in the chicken coop. The Coop being freedom, free enterprise and liberty. The Fox being a assortment of fascist, liberal, socialist, Neo-Com ideologies mixing together in Obama’s on the blink mind.
While it looks like we’re starting to smell him out because Obama no longer passes the simplest of smell tests, marching him out of government can’t be too fast for most of it. Every day he’s in office is another day the country is weaker.
The worst President in American history needs to be plied with justice in the worst way.
Maybe we try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Barack Hussein Obama together. I believe they’re very similar. Trying to destroy the United States
as we know and love it. One kills Americans overtly. One, I believe, kills Americans (the American way of life) in his own way.
Re: my own prior question: “Do people have that much faith in Bootstrapping?”
Does anyone have the faintest clue what I’m talking about?
Getting back to Vincent Gray’s original letter I have looked at his paper that he pointed to on Google ‘Regional Temperature Change’ and note that he identifies a substantial discrepancy between the surface temperature record and that of the lower troposphere, as measured by satellites. I thought the temperature in the lower troposphere was now changing as expected, although I am not able to check this for myself. This measurement is obviously free of urban bias.
The physics by which atmospheric carbon dioxide reduces heat export from the globe (causing it to warm) is indisputable although there could easily be other mechanisms that counteract this effect. The current increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is also indisputably caused by human activity although natural events have in the past caused much greater changes.
None of this diminishes the core point about the unwillingness of the academic and political community to hear or allow to be heard stuff that challenges their preconception. I too have experienced this repeatedly although I am reluctant to abandon my faith in the open-mindedness of scientists borne of many years experience as a chemical engineer inventing and developing new technology for BP Chemicals.
Unless we keep an open mind, scientific progress will soon grind to a halt as it has historically in many civilisations.
I just don’t understand – no one wants gratuitous pollution. No one wants to waste. But the liberal politicians take that simple concept as a mandate to destroy the economy and justify not accessing the vast repository of natural resources that we have here in the US that could last hundreds of years. Or work on more home electricity generation based on nuclear technology that has very low pollution output but can provide power for decades.
Limbaugh is right – We now face a corrupted media, academia, science and government. Welcome to the new dark age.
Neo at 88,
Obviously any auditor will have to be scientifically credible, but I laughed out loud at the implied demand that the chair be “accepted” by mainstream climate scientists. Are they actually serious? NOW they are demanding the person be “acceptable” to them?! After they defrauded us for years and knitted a global web of deception for political ends?!
These people need to be arrested and charged with criminal fraud. Think of the billions these scientific crooks diverted to their purposes based upon their trumped up calculations. The deception went on for many years. It very likely legally meets the definition of a conspiracy.
Note the near silence of the trollkins. They are back under the bridge trying to figure out what hit them and what their next line of attack should be. They share something in common with the AGW climatetologists, they are incredible and well practised at deception and fraud.
There is a contemporary template that can be used to deal with the climate change alarmists in the MSM.
A lot of fear mongering was taking place in the MSM regarding H1N1. The media got the message that their efforts were discrediting them.
So, given the cheer leading of AGW or whatever the human species can be blamed for regarding climate change, the fear mongering stops, otherwise the credibility of the MSM will be in a deeper hole.
I don’t know if this is truly a worldwide conspiracy but by changing policy based on AGW is a great way to make a boatload of money. As far as the scientists go the conspiracy they are involved in is the coverup of their incompetence. If you don’t want to get caught in a lie you have to keep on lying, especially when you have people giving you money to keep up the good work.
When it becomes absolutly clear this fraudulent data was transmitted over the wires of the internet, fax machines or the US mail for the purposes of advancing their fraudulent scheme towards the redistribution of American wealth, then it is time for a RICO Lawsuit! Period.
Civil and/or Criminal. Criminal to lock them up for a hundred years and civil for trebble damages mandated by statute. On either front of RICO litigation the depositions[civil] will be of the most important record in discarding the Global warming Hoax.
They may be able to shut up their opposition scientists for all this time, but the magic and power of a Subpeona Duce Tecum served by a 6’5″ US Marshall “Commanding” their presents before a US Federal District Judge is a “Change” in their lives they “Hope” would never come.
It only requires two [2] predicated acts of wire/mail fraud to meet the RICO requirment. Continuity has already been established through these e-mails as well as their intentional conspircy to defraud the world but more important the United States citizens of their wealth.
RICO’s magic WILL eliminate this world wide fraud along with this “Criminal Racketeering Enterprise”. RICO is REAL, not junk science. Ask those of La Cosa Nostra, but I think they and everyone else already knows the answer, as does Al Gore.
Neo (#88) I hope someone is watching the CRU’s trashcans, photographing their burn runs before they “make the data public”.
BC, if the science were settled, we would still be saying that the earth is flat. Scientific forecasting is never settled, any more than economic forecasting. BTW how much did you invest with Madoff?
I’ve read a lot of Vincent’s reviewer comments in the final drafts of IPCC AR4, and wondered why almost ALL his suggestions were rejected.
Now it’s all so clear and casts a bright light on the real circumstances.
Thank you Vincent, for your truly and honorable engagement trying to change the drafts over and over, and again thank you for your attendance to reveal the rest of this big fraud!
Just searched on Google for “Climategate” and as #46 Richard states, it is true, Google is censoring. I did a search previously and today’s results are completely different. Guess it’s time to find another search engine. There have been other incidents of censorship pertaining to Google in the recent past. Seems to me their fraud will also be uncovered eventually. Too bad Google execs. You had such a good thing going for quite a while. Like the fraud scientists you too will find your heads on the chopping block in the court of public opinion.
Bing anyone?
I just typed climate in their search box and guess what? Climategate came up in the first results. It seems they haven’t lost their integrity.
Truth will reign!
Interesting..
I just entered ‘climategate’ into Google, Yahoo and Bing
Google – 10.9 million hits
Yahoo – 4.7 million hits
Bing – 51 million hits
Only Bing recognises ‘climategate’ as a popup search term.
Maybe Bing’s inflating its figures?
Climategate
Let’s see:
a) subverting the peer review process
b) stacking the UN IPCC
c) obstruction of the Freedom of Information Act
d) breach of university and state ethics codes
… and we haven’t even talked about the data yet.
Climate Science – the new Ponzi scheme!
p.s. – Is this what Science is all about? Meet the new boss (science), same as the old boss (religion). When are they issuing funny hats to scientists?
“Google is a gatekeeper of global news …”
It’s known that Google is in bed with the CIA and NSA and you’re surprised that they’re censoring? Google is about a trustworthy as Microsoft which means not at all.
There’s another absurdity here that I’d like to point out- the entire concept of a positive feedback loop in the climate writ large is patently absurd. As L’Chatlier pointed out, complex systems tend toward equilibrium and disturbances to that equilibrium are met with forces that act to restore the equilibrium. The alternative is a system that is completely unstable and will destroy itself given the slightest disturbance, which will amplify with time uncontrollably. Now, there are systems such a nuclear reactors wherein the natural restoring forces can be overwhelmed given a large enough disturbance along with a disabling of the engineered safety mechanisms, but for the atmosphere of the planet, man has no capability of introducing such a perturbation, with the possible exception of a global thermonuclear war.
Man made climate change – another globalist lie, another manufactured “global crisis”, engineered to bring about one world government by the “intenational financiers”.
That’s what it’s all about, and that is all that it’s about. All the rest is diversion.
Tested Bing versus Google about 10 minutes ago (approx 5:50pm est). Google failed to show climategate as an option after typing “cli” or even the whole word. In comparison, Bing only required typing the three letters “cli”. Then about 5 minutes ago (5:55pm est) I happened to try it again, and Google now is equivalent to Bing. Typing just “cli” brings up climategate at the top of the list.
The only “tipping point” that is real in this whole AGW scare is that of “public opinion” – the views of the silent minority are about to be heard.
Time to start a “mexican wave” of noise directed at our elected officials to “give it up”.
To the 50m plus of you out there who have binged, googled or yahoood climate gate, now send an email to your duly elected representatvies. Tell them, “Dare to be Different”!
My test of Bing versus Google was invalid. Google only showed “climategate” because I had previously searched for that term. On a fresh browser Google is still not showing climategate at all unless the entire term is typed in. Sorry for the shoddy experiment,
#111 Ned: Now that’s how experiments are supposed to be run and reported! Well done!
Please consider. Are the Al Gores and the U.N.s of the world the real original leaders of climate environmentalist frenzy, or are they the chosen instrumentalists and lackeys? If all or nearly all Western governments and their all powerful string pullers decided to finally attempt enslavement of the common citizens in a system of all encompassing oppresive taxation and power control, would you expect these same governments to actually openly promote their conspiracy amongst the public? Or could these power central organizations actually enact their plans through the hire and monstrous payoff of certain individuals and entities including the U.N. and all the press/media, and then use the resulting phoney “evidence” and public “pressure” as the means “forcing” them, the original planners of the whole fraud, into acceptance of an issue which they, themselves planned from the first tiny malignant brainwave? Quite a neat trick it would be. Is it not just a bit strange that so many Western governments jumped aboard the climate bandwagon without even a hint of a question, or that every press/media promotes only one side of the story, up to now????
You say preposterous or unthinkable? Come now, the message in the Wizard of Oz is today as plain as it ever was. Behind every major event is a major plan, and behind every major plan may possibly be found a major devil.
If you think getting an honest article about climate published is difficult, try publishing an honest article about the Jewish policy of the Hitler government published. In many countries one goes to prison.
FOAI2009.zip/uea-tyndall-shell-memo
SHELL INTERNATIONAL
Mick Kelly and Aeree Kim (CRU, ENV) met with Robert Kleiburg (Shell International’s climate change team) on July 4th primarily to discuss access to Shell information as part of Aeree’s PhD study (our initiative) and broader collaboration through postgrad. student project placements (their initiative), but Robert was also interested in plans for the Tyndall Centre (TC). What ensued was necessarily a rather speculative discussion with the following points emerging.
Shell International would give serious consideration to what I referred to in the meeting as a ‘strategic partnership’ with the TC, broadly equivalent to a ‘flagship alliance’ in the TC proposal. A strategic partnership would involve not only the provision of funding but some (limited but genuine) role in setting the research agenda etc.
Shell’s interest is not in basic science. Any work they support must have a clear and immediate relevance to ‘real-world’ activities. They are particularly interested in emissions trading and CDM.
Robert seemed to be more interested in supporting overseas (developing world) than home/EU studentships, presumably because of the credit abroad and their involvement in CDM. (It is just possible this impression was partially due to the focus on Aeree’s work in the overall discussion but I doubt it.) It seems likely that any support for studentships would be on a case by case basis according to the particular project in question.
Finally, we agreed that we would propose a topic to this year’s MSc intake as a placement with Shell and see if any student expressed interest. If this comes off we can run it under the TC banner if it would help.
I would suggest that Robert and his boss are invited to the TC launch at the very least (assuming it will be an invite type affair). Question is how can we and who should take this a step further. Maybe a meeting at Shell with business liaison person, Mike H if time and myself if time? I’d like to/am happy to stay involved through the next stage but then will probably have to back off.
We didn’t cover the new renewable energy foundation.
Mick Kelly
11 September 2000
Odd indeed, i thought it was us “deniers” who were being paid by the oil companies?
For those who are wondering why Copenhagen will go on and we WILL get stuck with an overarching Totalitarian World Government dictating the laws to be passed in each of our countries please read. the comment by DennisA (04:30:53) : at Watts Up. He shows the World Bank – UN – Global Warming connections and how the bankers will be making lots of money off the rest of us as they drive us into grinding poverty.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/28/telegraphs-booker-on-the-climategate-scandal/#comment-239680
It took 40 years for top paleontologists to prove that Charles Dawson’s Piltdown man was a fake.
The stakes are higher here, but with the help of the internet, Hansen, Jones, et al will be exposed as charlatans, perhaps in less than 10 years rather than 40.
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our government.
We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is the logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. .. ”
Edward L Bernays, 1928. Father of public relations, nephew of Sigmund Freud, author of the book, “Propaganda.”
His clients included Calvin Coolidge, the pork producers of America, and United Fruit (hence the term, “banana republic”).
Global warming is a hoax. Now it is exposed for the fraud it is. Humans are not causing this. Gore is getting rich, but I can do nothing about that except that I can expose him for the fraud he is. End of story. Now, go do something useful for a change for all the money we pay you scientists.
It seems agreed that less than 5% of CO2 emissions are anthropogenic, the rest being from natural sources.
The percentage rise in the average CO2 levels from c. 250ppm to c. 380 ppm is much larger than this 5% due to man. The explanation could be a very strong power-law or exponential relationsip. More likely, natural contributions have increased more than expected.
Presumably, natural factors could easily vary more than 5% annually, hiding or off-setting the anthropogeic component.
A 5% addition is much like a perturbation, and such contributions usually lead to small linear inremental outcomes: f=(1+e)^n=1+ne, for e<<1.
107. myth buster:
Amen. The other perpetuated myth is that green jobs will miraculously offset the jobs lost…LOL
59: anonymous
get a life. Your sources are tainted. This PR machine will be difficult to derail, and the sad part is, these exchanges won’t do a thing about the environment, only enrich and empower the greedy.
Assuming the warming recorded in the last 100 years is real (not certain with poor records and the heat island effect) it is clear that the AGW crowd can only try to prove that CO2 is the driver based on 2 things:
1) Temps have never been this high before (limited to the last several thousand years)
2) CO2 has never been this high before (again limited to the last several thousand years)
Of course their weak coorelation = causation claim is kind of messed up from 1900-1970 but thats for them to ignore *** … they want 4 data points, temp and CO2 from 100 years ago and temp and CO2 today … both are higher so CO2 must be the cause … science is so easy
Having current temps be “the highest” in thousands of years is very important to their cause so they had to eliminate the Medieval Warm Period …
this has always been an exercise in cheery picking the start and end points …
*** CO2 was relatively flat from 1900-1930 while temps rose dramtically and CO2 rose dramtically from 1930 – 1970 while temps plunged … kind of the opposite of the AGW theory
Climategate,an inconvenient truth
We all know that Earth had global warming and cooling events long before man existed. And some of these events wiped out species and habitats allowing us humans to come to the fore. A natural event of warming can be set off by an increase in volcanic activity,solar activity even meteor or earthquake activity and vast forest fires. But in nature it takes usually 800 years before that warming THEN starts to release CO2 and Methane gases which are called greenhouse gases because they trap infra red heat into our atmosphere. This time CO2/Methane and N02 are increasing when the earth’s temperature is only slightly increasing (and according to climate skeptics is going down). The Sun is going into a Solar Minimum between 2011 to 2050 and it would be much cooler if it wasn’t for global warming. The Argos project http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/where they take daily temperatures in the Ocean say the earth’s ocean temps are increasing. The arguments on this blog have to get back to Science not the childish Black/white, left wing/right wing “I found one gauge near a furnace” arguments. I agree their should be a full investigation into the Emails and if any of those Scientists and journals are found to be printing lies in Journals they should never work again. The Science in Global warming comes from Oceans,Land,Air and space studies and from thousands of scientists not just three or four people at East Anglia. And I am sure some are left wing most are moderates and some are right wing. It’s amazing to see Americans pay the highest health care costs in the world to private companies with billionaire CEO’s, they go to War based on Lies to secure Oil and pump billions into private companies such as Halliburton and Blackwater, watch their corporate lobbied government hand trillions to the privately owned banks and expect their politicians to be interested in them when they barely vote. And its all the left wings fault.
@srj911
What does health care have to do with this?
Or Haliburton or Blackwater?
Global warming has been occurring since the 13th century and its remained pretty constant. I’m dealing with people trying to get Carbon Offsets for managing a forest properly near where I live, the whole thing is a scheme. Selling carbon credits for clearing forests which have already been clear-cut and making money off it. I’m all for managing forests, but the idea that there will significant long term additional carbon storage is a joke. Who’s getting rich off this scam?
@2, carl unger
check out the nipcc’s report…
http://www.nipccreport.org/
“In “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC),” coauthors Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dr. Craig Idso and 35 contributors and reviewers present an authoritative and detailed rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on which the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress rely for their regulatory proposals.”
i haven’t read all the way through the thread yet, so if someone has already posted this, apologies.
Global Warming good.
Global Cooling bad.
Too bad we can’t do squat to influence which way it goes!
Alright, so here’s where I’m at. I’ve read for years now all sides of this and many other debates, and this happens to be my first ever public forum posting. I hope all posters here pat themselves on the back for being so informative/level-headed/intellectual that they pulled me from my lurking recesses. Now, on to my only real question.
Given all of the pressing issues, namely that something needs to be done to bring this to a larger audience (in a way that leaves open the [at this point] somewhat unthinkable possibility of reversing decades of planning by the powers that would-like-to-be), how does it transition from internet commenting and frivolously writing congressmen to actual change?
This, I feel, is really the most important collective decision that needs to be discussed. I’ll tell you from the start that I don’t think this is a ‘oh you stupid left wingers’ or ‘that Obama sure is a bad man’ conversation. It was mentioned above by ONE person that it doesn’t matter if it’s a Republican or Democrat in office right now (I’m paraphrasing), because this point would have come to pass regardless of who won the 2008 election. This is something much bigger than all of that. So, like the aforementioned commenter noted, there somehow has to be a transformational shift in ‘We the People’s minds. Your average American these days is apathetic, at best, when an issue of something bigger than their immediate life is brought up. And I’m giving credit enough to said American by granting that they can comprehend all of these allegations and their associated implications.
So I suppose the question I really have is.. can the majority of you commenting say realistically that you don’t define yourselves in the issues of party politics? That the issues of today are not because of Obama, nor are they because of George W, nor any single leader/congress to be in control at points before them? These are examples of the questions I find most troubling when attempting to theorize methods for revolutionary acts to take place, and they are predicated daily by all of the mass media outlets previously mentioned, INCLUDING Fox News. I only raise this point because throughout most of the reading on Climategate and whatnot for the last little while, I find this daunting trend of the standard Conservative/Republican Fox News mouthpieces being almost heralded as defenders of some sort of journalistic ideology that, frankly, is not the case. Mass media is mass media at this point, as is big government as it exists today (the primary parties), etc.
The real problem is that a ‘boy who cried wolf’ mentality has accompanied this general malaise of the populace, and with good reason. For anything real to occur with regards to stopping huge events from taking place that would greatly alter the course of not just our nation, but the nations of the world, there has to be consensus among the beginning planners of said revolution that favoritism and finger pointing from within are both unnecessary and damaging to a public face. Read that to say: if something is actually going to be done, we cannot align ourselves with any organization/outlet that has publicly shamed itself and reduced its credibility in any way. The obvious answer, then, is that everything needs to be formulated from scratch, yes? So let’s start figuring this out. How? Where do we start? Let’s start upping the proverbial ante and putting something real on the ground other than eloquent yet unheard truths that our forefathers would have started working to repair long ago.
Fwiw, when this story broke, I felt as though the Berlin wall had come down all over again.
DaveP;
What’s the difference between public ignorance and public apathy?
I don’t know, and I don’t care!
BTW, don’t be quite so condescending and dismissive in your lumping of Fox in with the rest of the mass media on this subject … since it’s the ONLY network covering it. One is MUCH better than zero. Especially when it has the runaway highest ratings.
ABSOLUTE UNDENIABLE PHOTOGRAPHIC PROOF:
http://i48.tinypic.com/2qjhms6.jpg
MORE PROOF (needs proof reading):
ABSOLUTE PROOF. These are posts I put on another website
[below is regarding an article discussing the lack of "climategate"
and "climate gate" in auto suggest despite the fact that both terms
were searched for more than "climate change" in the past week]
29 11 2009
Joe (04:03:54) : Your comment is awaiting moderation
After I type in all of these letters: “CLIMATE GATE” it suggests
“climate gates” something different.
when i type “climateg” all the way to “climategate” IT SUGGESTS
NOTHING!
29 11 2009
Joe (04:08:20) : Your comment is awaiting moderation
BTW the results on google for “climategate” have GONE DOWN to
6,690,000. IT USED TO GIVE >12,000,000.
When a story breaks the reuslts normally INCREASE for at least hte
first month. But in under a weak the numbers have decreased by over
half.
I wish them edia covered things. It disgusts me.
29 11 2009
Joe (04:11:53) : Your comment is awaiting moderation
OMG “climate gate” (two words) gives even less.
RUNDOWN:
“climategate” and “climate gate” both gave over 12 million results at
first.
NOW:
“climategate” : 6,690,000
“climate gate”: 6,180,000
TO SHOW THAT THIS IS ABSURD AND DIRECT CENSORSHIP
“climate wall” yields: 32,600,000 !!!!!!!!!!!!
WHAT WHAT??? Google you bastards.
29 11 2009
Joe (04:14:36) : Your comment is awaiting moderation
Also more proof of tampering “climate gate” is yielding less than
“cliamtegate”. climate gate should always yield more as it SHOULD
result in all sites with the word “climategate” (thaks to google’s
algorithm) BUT also any websites taht have the words “climate” and
“gate” in them.
THIS IS DISGUSTING
Climategate / AGW / Obama are
“Bankruptcy that you can believe in!”
BC, in post #30, very articulately states the frustration those of us in the Church of AGW have with you Cro-Magnon non-believers. The Science is in, the debate is over, haven’t you heard? This was proclaimed by our Messiah and Savior, Al Gore, in his Nobel-prize-winning movie. BC knows it, and in my opinion, he should be offered a position in the Church as a reward for his faith and fealty!
In the Church of AGW, Al Gore, is of course, the highest and most exalted deity. But Michael Mann, Jim Hansen, and others are the High Priests of the Faith.
Those of us who have faith in AGW know that unless we all surrender our money, our rights, and our self-determination to the Church of AGW, the earth and humans along with it will be destroyed totally within 10 years. Al Gore has been proclaiming this for almost 20 years now, and we believe him.
BC, your steadfast adherence to the Church of AGW dogma, even in the face of determined attacks by those armed with facts, proves you are a valuable member. I nominate you for higher office in the Church! Will you accept? Please contact Al Gore immediately and tell him you will accept!