4
   

ClimateGate: Global Warming Melt-Down

 
 
Reply Mon 23 Nov, 2009 10:02 am
Almost can't believe there's nothing on this on A2K (so far)... The following should do for starters:

http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2009/11/global-warming-meltdown-climategate.html

Quote:

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.

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.

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.


  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 4 • Views: 4,640 • Replies: 56
No top replies

 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Nov, 2009 10:04 am
In split parts on YouTube...

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 1 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TqqWJugXzs

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 2 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5rGpDMN8lw

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 3 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzFL6Ixe_bo

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 4 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQy2rT_dvU

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 5 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dzIMXGI6k8

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 6 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GjOgQN1Jco

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 7 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHI2GfbfrYw

The Great Global Warming Swindle (Part 8 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7N9benJh3Lw

The Great Global Warming Swindle - Credits (Part 9 of 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_1ifP-ri58
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Nov, 2009 10:35 am

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-hackers-leaked-emails

Quote:


Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientists

Hundreds of emails and documents exchanged between world's leading climate scientists stolen by hackers and leaked online.

Hundreds of private emails and documents allegedly exchanged between some of the world's leading climate scientists during the past 13 years have been stolen by hackers and leaked online, it emerged today.

The computer files were apparently accessed earlier this week from servers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, a world-renowned centre focused on the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.

Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege they provide "smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in manipulating data to support the widely held view that climate change is real, and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind....

0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Nov, 2009 10:38 am
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/climategate-the-very-ugly-side-of-climate-science/

Quote:

When we think about “scientists,” most of us probably envision people toiling away in the lab or the field, accumulating and analyzing data in order to test theories, leaving their personal biases at home, scrupulously considering any confounding data or theories and willfully distancing themselves from the political implications of their research.

How quaint.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Nov, 2009 01:35 pm
@gungasnake,
Its a sad commentary buit true. However, Im not aware of many geologists whove jumped on the Gore bandwagon no matter what their politicval stripe.
REMEMBER THOUGH THE CLIMATE IS WARMING, ITS JUST DAMN WEIRD TO CONNECT HUMAN ACTIVITIES TO IT>

Gores thing is like the rooster telling us that hes in charge of the sunrise.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 01:40 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Gores thing is like the rooster telling us that hes in charge of the sunrise.
Definitely. A perfect comparison.

Climate is controlled by the pattern of continents and mountains, which in turn control ocean currents and distribution or lack of shallow seas. The main external contributor is the sun affecting the range of smaller climate systems that the previously mentioned can produce. As you would expect, these factors take at least hundreds if not thousands of years to change. In the case of continents and mountains, the biggies of the world, they change at the same pace you grow nails, or in other words, take millions of years to change.

Weather systems are not understood but because it is a function of the things that climate is also a function of, the climate and weather have become intermingled. To separate climate and weather : Firstly, the planet has many minor climates and an overall world climate pattern; Secondly, these minor climates, depending on their factors, have variation in annual patterns that we call weather. Weather cycles are not understood in the long term. Is a flood a 100 year flood or a 1,000 year flood ? It is totally dependant on record keeping. Records with increasing unreliabilty only go back roughly to the end of the Little Ice Age. The British Navy ship's logs record weather and Napoleons scientists followed him on campaing recording weather. 150 years ago roughly there was an attempt at world wide record keeping which meant weather stations grew in increasing numbers. These are flawed because they record the min and max temps then they assume the mid point is also the average temp. Recently, 30 years ago, satellite data has been accurately measuring the worlds temps. 30 years is nothing. Ever heard of a 100 year flood ? The last 10 years have been getting cooler, or as the Global Warming Thuggees like to say, negative warming. Anyway, they are measuring weather. Refer back to the start for the things that control climate.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 07:33 am
Media ignore climate scandal:

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-ignore-climate-science-scandal/
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 07:36 am
Viscount Monckton on Climategate: ‘They Are Criminals...

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-they-are-criminals-pjm-exclusive/

Quote:
...Finally, these huckstering snake-oil salesmen and “global warming” profiteers " for that is what they are " have written to each other encouraging the destruction of data that had been lawfully requested under the Freedom of Information Act in the UK by scientists who wanted to check whether their global temperature record had been properly compiled. And that procurement of data destruction, as they are about to find out to their cost, is a criminal offense. They are not merely bad scientists " they are crooks. And crooks who have perpetrated their crimes at the expense of British and U.S. taxpayers....

0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 10:44 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
REMEMBER THOUGH THE CLIMATE IS WARMING, ITS JUST DAMN WEIRD TO CONNECT HUMAN ACTIVITIES TO IT

I also think it's reasonable to say that human activities are "contributing" to the warming, but it's unclear to me to what extent that contribution represents in the scheme of things. Even though I've asked that question before, nobody has been able to give me a reasonably concise answer along with an explanation of the answer.
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 12:44 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
REMEMBER THOUGH THE CLIMATE IS WARMING...


Wrong. Viscount Monckton notes:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-they-are-criminals-pjm-exclusive/

Quote:
One of the thousands of emails recently circulated by a whistleblower at the University of East Anglia, where one of the world’s four global-temperature datasets is compiled, reveals that data were altered so as to prevent a recent decline in temperature from showing in the record. In fact, there has been no statistically significant “global warming” for 15 years " and there has been rapid and significant cooling for nine years.


All anecdotal evidence is consistent with that, particularly the last two summers and the fact that nobody's seen more than a tiny handful of sunspots over the last two years.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 02:26 pm
@rosborne979,
I still remember your Niagra Falls/bucket of water analogy. In fact, I've used it myself.
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 02:48 pm
@rosborne979,
I've an indirect answer from a highly complex mathematical model I worked on at one point, and even so only on order of magnitude: under 1%, perhaps even under 1 per thousand of whatever planetary warming is underway. All other "anthropogenic warming" is cargo cult science or fraud.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 03:39 pm
@gungasnake,
The good Viscount is dead wrong. The climate is warming by statistically masurable amounts since the late Middle Ages and the Ice sheet CO2 is rising , as is ocean acidity which is a measure of buffering of excess CO2. Several precession, wobble cycles and drag cycles are adding together to be the force behind the recent (700-1100 yr) warm-up. The very recent sunspot activity decline will, noi doubt reverse that for some time as did the vulcanism of Pinatubo and Chimbaratzo and one other.
The thing that I disagree with is the ability to distinguish human factors when the actual natural sources of CO2 are waaay in excess of human contributions. Richard Alley at Penn State is the mot (in my book) objective researcher.

Monckton has been a haranguing douche bag whose entire light on strage has been based upon one or two pieces of evidence and a whole lot of misrepresentation of his own.

The Anthropogenic climate guys arent the only bullshit artists. This whole field is just a smelly battle ground loaded with industrial interests, political interests and even University careeer peddling.

Most geologists are quietly gathering evidence that shows the relationship between this climate event and the previous "Wurm" events of the late Pleistocene and Holocene.




georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 03:58 pm
@farmerman,
I generally agree with you.

The remarkable element in this thing is the near hysteria that grips the large numbers of AGW fanatics and their determination to displace a very large part of the world's economy in pursuit of their highly suspect theories, and even more suspect remedies.

It is also amusing to watch the Europeans (excepting of course the very sensible French) struggling to cling to their earlier "committments" to quickly shut down their, relatively larger than ours, nuclear power establishments. Now, with very little fanfare the Swedes are building a large new nuclear plant near Malme and the German government is trying to wriggle out of its own promises too. However the largely childless citizens of that increasingly geriatric nation cling to the fantasy that they can make it with windmills. After the investment of billions in public funds they get only about 12 % of their power from wind turbines and the capacity factors (actual power produced as a % of maximum capacity) they have achieved are only about 25% - hardly better than the machines of a decade ago,
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 04:08 pm
@georgeob1,
ya cant drive a market response, you can only lure it. In PA, were in a huge panic to write ordinances for wind turbine generators when most of PA (according to the SDOE) isnt even marginally desirable for wind power.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 04:14 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:
I still remember your Niagra Falls/bucket of water analogy. In fact, I've used it myself.

Wow, nice to know I'm leaving an impression Smile

I wish more people appreciated the relevance of that analogy.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 04:19 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
The climate is warming by statistically masurable amounts since the late Middle Ages
When you say warming, you mean if we ignore the cooling. What happened to the Mini Ice Age ?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 04:25 pm
@gungasnake,
Short term climate changes are much less meaningful than the following:
http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/6058/carbondioxidekz6.jpg
There is a very strong cycle of warming and cooling which has taken place on this planet over the last several hundred thousand years. That cycle is currently happening and is unlikely to change due to any human activity.

Even if we humans are contributing to the current (natural) warming trend, the inevitable result is going to be rapid crash just after we hit our peak. I've created other threads on this which explain why I think the oceanic thermohaline currents are primarily responsible for the sudden changes after the temperature peaks.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 05:04 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
I wish more people appreciated the relevance of that analogy.
So what is your analog-thingy ? I didnt see it the first time around.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2009 05:45 pm
@rosborne979,
nifty diagram. Obviously ice core CO2 and O16/O18 ratios. My little cousin, ho teaches at Wyoming U has been studying the dissilution of the Northern Isohaline lines. It shows the dissilution brought on by melting of polar ice. This could result in a quick return to frigid climates in higher latitudes by shutting down the various streams that impinge on the lower northern latitudes. Southern Ireland is about as far north as Labrador yet enjoys a climate more like Seattle.
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » ClimateGate: Global Warming Melt-Down
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/09/2020 at 05:13:25