Global Warming Meltdown: Climategate!

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
Global Warming Meltdown: Climategate!


Alan Caruba
Warning Signs
November 22, 2009

For those of us ?skeptics? and ?deniers? who have been jumping up and down, pointing at the Sun, and saying, ?See, it?s the Sun that determines how warm or cool the Earth is. See it? Up there in the sky?? The truth about some of the scientists behind the global warming hoax has finally arrived.




Now that Hadley CRU and its conspirators have been exposed, there truly is no need to hold a December UN climate change conference in Copenhagen.


The hoax has its roots in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an instrument of the United Nations Environmental Program, for whom global warming was the open sesame to achieving a one-world-government by scaring nations into signing a treaty that would control their use of energy, the means of producing it, and require vast billions to be sent to less developed nations in exchange for ?emitting? greenhouse gases.

Energy is called ?the master resource? because, if you have lots of it, you can call your own shots. If you don?t, you are condemned to live in the dark and keeping people in the dark about the global warming hoax was essential.

For years the IPCC has been controlled by a handful of the worst liars in the world, utterly devoted to taking actual climate data and twisting it to confirm the assertion that the Earth was not only warming dramatically, but that humanity was in peril of rising oceans, melting glaciers and polar ice caps, more hurricanes, the die-off of countless animal species, and every other calamity that could possibly be attributed to ?global warming?, including acne.

So, around November 20, when some enterprising individual hacked into the computers of the University of East Anglia?s Climate Research Unit (CRU), making off with thousands of emails and documents that demonstrate the level of collusion and deception being practiced by its scientists.

It?s a climate hoax expose that some are calling the revelations a ?little blue dress? while others are comparing it to the Pentagon Papers. It has also been dubbed ?climategate.?

As James Delingpole wrote in the Telegraph, one of England?s leading newspapers, ?Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more? was revealed in the 61 megabites of confidential files released on the Internet for anyone to read.


?A d v e r t i s e m e n t
?The conspirators had a visceral hatred for scientists who challenged their phony statistics and climate data, but they also agonized over the difficulties of hiding a long established climate cycle such as the Medieval Warm Period. At one point it was left out of a graph that famously became known as ?the hockey stick? because it depicted a ludicrous sudden rise in warming, ignoring the previous natural cycle.

At the heart of the revelations were the intense efforts to ensure that no legitimate scientist, particularly those dissenting from the various IPCC reports, would be allowed to participate in the peer review process. Peer review is an essential element in science as it permits other scientists to examine and test the data being put forth to substantiate a new interpretation or discovery.

The IPCC reports were the basis by which popular media such as National Geographic, Time and Newsweek magazines could spread the lies about a dramatic ?global warming?, passing them off to an unsuspecting and scientifically illiterate general public. At the same time, the lies were integrated them into school curriculums and maintained by Hollywood celebrities, politicians and others, duped or deliberately ignorant.

To this day, otherwise legitimate news media outlets continue to trumpet and repeat absolute nonsense about ?global warming? like brain-dead parrots.

Now that Hadley CRU and its conspirators have been exposed, there truly is no need to hold a December UN climate change conference in Copenhagen; one in which nations would be required to put limits on ?greenhouse gas emissions? even though such gases, primarily carbon dioxide, have nothing to do with altering the Earth?s climate.

And that is why you are going to hear more about ?climate change? and far less about ?global warming.? Hidden in such discussions, intended to justify legislation and regulation, is that the Earth?s climate has always and will always change.

It is, for example, shameful and deceitful for the EPA to claim carbon dioxide is a ?pollutant? that should be regulated. The same applies to ?cap-and-trade? legislation with the same purpose.

Billions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted on studies of global warming and poured into agencies such as NASA that have lent credence to the global warming hoax.

?The U.S. taxpayer has much exposure here in the joint projects and collaborations which operated in reliance upon what the University of East Anglia?s Climate Research Unit was doing,? says Christopher C. Horner, a longtime global warming skeptic. ?There are U.S. taxpayer-funded offices and individuals involved in the machinations addressed in the emails, and in the emails themselves.?

Horner, the author of ?Red Hot Lies?, said that the initial revelations ?give the appearance of a conspiracy to defraud, by parties working in taxpayer funded agencies collaborating on ways to misrepresent material on which an awful lot of taxpayer money rides.?

The climate, defined as long term trends, and the weather has nothing whatever to do with human activity and suggesting it does reveals the depth of contempt that people like Al Gore and his ilk have for humanity and those fleeced by purchasing ?carbon credits? or paying more for electricity when their utility does.

The East Anglia CRU charlatans have been exposed. Most certainly, the United Nations IPCC should be disbanded in disgrace. It belongs in a museum of hoaxes right beside the Piltdown Man and the Loch Ness Monster.
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
Climatic Research Unit Hacked E Mails & Data

Climatic Research Unit Hacked E Mails & Data

Climatic Research Unit Hacked E Mails & Data

Wikileaks
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Summary
This archive presents over 120Mb of emails, documents, computer code and models from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, written between 1996 and 2009.
The CRU has told the BBC that the files were obtained by a computer hacker 3-4 days ago.
This archive includes unreleased global temperature analysis computer source code that has been the subject of Freedom of Information Act requests.
The archive appears to be a collection of information put together by the CRU prior to a FoI redaction process.
<DL><DT>DOWNLOAD/VIEW FULL FILE FROM </DT><DD>fastest (Sweden), current site, slow (US), Finland, Netherlands, Poland, Tonga, Europe, SSL, Tor</DD></DL>RELATED: Hacked Emails Show Climate Science Ridden with Rancor
RELATED: Caught red-handed in a monumental fraud, disgraced Climategate scientists settle on a ludicrous defense
RELATED: E-mail leak turns up heat on global warming advocates
RELATED: Stolen e-mails reveal venomous feelings toward climate skeptics
RELATED: CLIMATE BOMBSHELL: Hacker leaks thousands of emails showing conspiracy to ?hide? the real data on manmade climate change
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
Where the Global Warming Hoax Was Born

Where the Global Warming Hoax Was Born

Where the Global Warming Hoax Was Born

?Global Warming? is, and always was, a policy for genocidal reduction of the world?s population. The preposterous claim that human-produced carbon dioxide will broil the Earth, melt the ice caps, and destroy human life, came out of a 1975 conference in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, organized by the influential anthropologist Margaret Mead, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), in 1974.

Mead?whose 1928 book on the sex life of South Pacific Islanders was later found to be a fraud?recruited like-minded anti-population hoaxsters to the cause: Sow enough fear of mancaused climate change to force global cutbacks in industrial activity and halt Third World development. Mead?s leading recruits at the 1975 conference were climate scare artist Stephen Schneider, population-freak biologist George Woodwell, and the current AAAS president John Holdren?all three of them disciples of Malthusian fanatic Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb.
Read entire article (PDF)
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
Search the CRU Climate Fraud Emails by Keyword

Search the CRU Climate Fraud Emails by Keyword

Search the CRU Climate Fraud Emails by Keyword

An Elegant Chaos
November 22, 2009
Editor?s note: The link below points to a page with a form to search the CRU emails by keyword.

On 20 November 2009, emails and other documents, apparently originating from with the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia.

If real, these emails contain some quite surprising and even disappointing insights into what has been happening within the climate change scientific establishment. Worryingly this same group of scientists are very influential in terms of economic and social policy formation around the subject of climate change.

As these emails are already in the public domain, I think it is important that people are able to look through them and judge for themselves. Until I am told otherwise I have no reason to think the text found on this site is true or false. As of today, Saturday 21 November, there have been no statements that I have seen doubting the authenticity of these texts. It is here just as a curiosity!

Read entire article
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
Climate Emails Stoke Debate

Climate Emails Stoke Debate

Climate Emails Stoke Debate
Scientists' Leaked Correspondence Illustrates Bitter Feud over Global Warming


By KEITH JOHNSON
The scientific community is buzzing over thousands of emails and documents -- posted on the Internet last week after being hacked from a prominent climate-change research center -- that some say raise ethical questions about a group of scientists who contend humans are responsible for global warming.

The correspondence between dozens of climate-change researchers, including many in the U.S., illustrates bitter feelings among those who believe human activities cause global warming toward rivals who argue that the link between humans and climate change remains uncertain.

MoreDownload the emails and documents (The file is over 60 MB) .
Some emails also refer to efforts by scientists who believe man is causing global warming to exclude contrary views from important scientific publications.

"This is horrible," said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. "This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn't questionable practice, this is unethical."

In all, more than 1,000 emails and more than 2,000 other documents were stolen Thursday from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K. The identity of the hackers isn't certain, but the files were posted on a Russian file-sharing server late Thursday, and university officials confirmed over the weekend that their computer had been attacked and said the documents appeared to be genuine.

"The selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way," the university said.

Journal Communitydiscuss..? Any group with such a single-minded view (whether they are believers in global warming, global warming rejectionists, liberals, conservatives, whatever) bears close watching and a certain amount of skepticism. ?
.? George Rebovich.
Most climate scientists today argue that the earth's temperature is rising, and nearly all of those agree that human activity is likely to be a prime or at least significant cause. But a vocal minority dispute one or both of those views.

A partial review of the hacked material suggests there was an effort at East Anglia, which houses an important center of global climate research, to shut out dissenters and their points of view.

In the emails, which date to 1996, researchers in the U.S. and the U.K. repeatedly take issue with climate research at odds with their own findings. In some cases, they discuss ways to rebut what they call "disinformation" using new articles in scientific journals or popular Web sites.

The emails include discussions of apparent efforts to make sure that reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that monitors climate science, include their own views and exclude others. In addition, emails show that climate scientists declined to make their data available to scientists whose views they disagreed with.

The IPCC couldn't be reached for comment Sunday.

In one email, Benjamin Santer from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif., wrote to the director of the climate-study center that he was "tempted to beat" up Mr. Michaels. Mr. Santer couldn't be reached for comment Sunday.

In another, Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics' research was unwelcome: We "will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday.

The emails were published less than a month before the opening of a major climate-change summit in Copenhagen.

Representatives of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a large professional organization, expressed concern that the hacked emails would weaken global resolve to curb greenhouse-gas emissions. The association believes "that climate change is real, it is related to human activities, and the need to counteract its impacts is now urgent," said Ginger Pinholster, an association spokeswoman. She added that the association's journal, Science, evaluates papers solely on scientific merit.

John Christy, a scientist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville attacked in the emails for asking that an IPCC report include dissenting viewpoints, said, "It's disconcerting to realize that legislative actions this nation is preparing to take, and which will cost trillions of dollars, are based upon a view of climate that has not been completely scientifically tested."

Mojib Latif, a climate researcher at Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences, said he found it hard to believe that climate scientists were trying to squelch dissent. Mr. Latif, who believes in man-made global warming but who has co-authored a paper ascribing current cooling to temporary natural trends, said, "I simply can't believe that there is a kind of mafia that is trying to inhibit critical papers from being published."


P1-AS629A_Hacke_NS_20091122210814.gif
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
Media Missing the Plot on ?Climate Gate?: It?s the Fraud, Stupid!

Media Missing the Plot on ?Climate Gate?: It?s the Fraud, Stupid!

Media Missing the Plot on ?Climate Gate?: It?s the Fraud, Stupid!


To the credit of the New York Times, Associated Press and Washington Post ? reliable outlets for promoting global warming alarmism, protecting those who craft it and marginalizing those who point out its weaknesses and excesses ? they all ran stories in the past 48 hours addressing the documents somehow obtained from the computers of a UK university serving as the warming movement and industry?s Mother Ship. My great surprise is even greater because these outlets have demonstrated a pattern of only giving ink to embarrassing controversies after a week or so, once it appears that damage control is needed and the alarmists have gotten their story straight.

I documented this pattern in a book published one year ago this month, subtly titled ?Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed [1].? The title says it all, including all that surely seems to have been affirmed by the documents posted, by ?anonymous? on a Russian server and otherwise covering his tracks.

Since this affirms, not ?reveals?, the scandal that so many have been explaining is the global warming industry, it also raises the issue of how can each of these media outlets still miss the plot? Well, they are doing so in a fashion so uniform, and in the face of such outrageous exposition of the scandal that is unfolding, that I conclude it is nonetheless yet another exercise in damage-control.

The emails, let alone the data still being combed over by the pointy-heads, plainly affirm everything I wrote, in detail, about the scams being run by the booming industry of Big Academia and Big Science suckling at the teat of the ?global warming? panic they are also fostering.


I was by no means without company, but I did name and go into detail about all of the stars of this alleged correspondence, and how they are engaging in everything these documents appear to confirm. None of them lawyered up to challenge what I wrote. I suspect, however, that each and every one has retained counsel in the past few days, and not because they plan on suing anyone. They ? rightly in my opinion ? fear legal consequence as a result of what has been revealed. And not for writing nasty emails about people who disagree with them.

Yet the media have defined the story down, focusing on sideshow issues such as conspiring or hateful commentary about those who cause problems for the authors. Think of the wisdom of that approach: whose emails do not somewhere include such things? Surely this will also be proved with more emails stolen from skeptics? computers, dispatching the story with an ?everybody does it? narrative that entirely elides the meaning of the far more important admissions. Heck, Greenpeace used to peddle emails taken from my trash to the press, and got the Guardian and others to excerpt sections, out of context, with phony context padded around them and without calling me before running their ?story?. That?s how they roll. They?ve no room for outrage. Still, that poses no resemblance to what?s going on now.

How it is possible that these media outlets? regular ?issue? reporters do not recognize the import of the fraud admitted to in the emails which, broadly, have been acknowledged as genuine?

Incidentally, also note how all of these outlets emphasize as fact, up front, that these documents, codes, data and emails are the product of ?hackers? (this has grown from ?a hacker? when the story first ran, though no outlet has offered any explanation for that change let alone evidence of the hacking). They simply accept that the University of East Anglia?s computers were hacked, on the word of people who are shown by what was hacked to be liars and charlatans and who have an interest in making the story be something other than the substance of the material.

I do not know if the computers were hacked. I do know that there is just as much reason to suspect that the documents were posted by someone on the inside who still possesses a conscience, a ?whistleblower?. Remember that this incident occurred after the most recent and audacious twist in the university?s Climatic Research Unit refusal of access to basic raw data and other material necessary to validate their claims serving as the basis for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol (and Kyoto II), ?cap-and-trade?, and so on. This was a four-year campaign to hide material ? a campaign whose tactics were also admitted to in the alleged emails now made public.

After running out of excuses, in September CRU?s Phil Jones simply claimed that he had lost the data so, sorry, no, no one can check it. Implausible beyond comprehension. And if the emails are real and any indication of the way this group operates, deeply dishonest.

Soon thereafter someone went and downloaded material that, again if real, says enough, you are scandalizing and perverting ?science?. This shall stop. Someone took it upon themselves to enforce a UK freedom of information act that its targets allegedly and apparently admit to subverting.

No matter how many stories seek to distract you with the shiny objects of prurient dialogue between sniveling, petulant and nasty global warming alarmists, that isn?t the story. The story is the exposition . Not the revelation, in fact, but merely the revelation of their affirmation of it.

I?m told by a cable news producer that, across the board, the green pressure groups, the supposedly ?Concerned Scientists? (the even have a Union!), all of them are refusing to come out and speak to the issue. That could be because they understand that what is out is described by the material?s anonymous source as ?a random sample.? There could be many more shoes to drop. Why hitch your organization further to the anchor threatening to sink a $7 billion per year (that?s just federal taxpayer-funding) industry? Live to fight another day. There will always be a new Man-as-agent-of-doom theory attracting college kids, Statists and wealthy elites.

This cannot simply be a three-day story about titillating emails. The edge seems to have been turned up on information proving everything we have been saying, often in great detail if to no media interest, for years. Kyoto II, ?cap-and-trade? and EPA must all be stayed, at least so far as the U.S. is concerned, until the truth is outed and admitted to.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top