|
|
 |
|
| | Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak | | | Tuesday, December 8, 2009 (11:32 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN's negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol
• Read the 'Danish text'
• In pictures: Copenhagen day two
*
Comments (384)
* Buzz up!
* Digg it (188)
* John Vidal in Copenhagen
* guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 8 December 2009 14.09 GMT
* Article history
COP15: A Haitian delegation during second-day session at the Bella center in Copenhagen
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents. Photograph: Attila Kisbenedek/AFP/Getty Images
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.
The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.
The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.
The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.
The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".
A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:
• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";
• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.
Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.
"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.
Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."
Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."
The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.
Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15. | | | 9 Views | 0  Thumbs Up | 1 Comment |  |
|
|
| | Police caught on tape trying to recruit Plane Stupid protester as spy | | | Tuesday, December 8, 2009 (7:54 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
Climate change activist taped men who offered cash for information about group's members and activities
Listen to the tapes and read the transcripts
* Buzz up!
* Digg it
* Paul Lewis
* guardian.co.uk, Friday 24 April 2009 18.18 BST
* Article history
Tilly Gifford and Dan Glass with some of the recording equipment they used
Juliana Napier, Tilly Gifford and Dan Glass with some of the recording equipment they used. Photograph: Murdo Macleod
Undercover police are running a network of hundreds of informants inside protest organisations who secretly feed them intelligence in return for cash, according to evidence handed to the Guardian.
They claim to have infiltrated a number of environmental groups and said they are receiving information about leaders, tactics and plans of future demonstrations.
The dramatic disclosures are revealed in almost three hours of secretly recorded discussions between covert officers claiming to be from Strathclyde police, and an activist from the protest group Plane Stupid, whom the officers attempted to recruit as a paid spy after she had been released on bail following a demonstration at Aberdeen airport last month.
Matilda Gifford, 24, said she recorded the meetings in an attempt to expose how police seek to disrupt the legitimate activities of climate change activists. She met the officers twice; they said they were a detective constable and his assistant. During the taped discussions, the officers:
• Indicate that she could receive tens of thousands of pounds to pay off her student loans in return for information about individuals within Plane Stupid.
• Say they will not pay money direct into her bank account because that would leave an audit trail that would leave her compromised. They said the money would be tax-free, and added: "UK plc can afford more than 20 quid."
• Accept that she is a legitimate protester, but warn her that her activity could mean she will struggle to find employment in the future and result in a criminal record.
• Claim they have hundreds of informants feeding them information from protest organisations and "big groupings" from across the political spectrum.
• Explain that spying could assist her if she was arrested. "People would sell their soul to the devil," an officer said.
• Warn her that she could be jailed alongside "hard, evil" people if she received a custodial sentence.
The meetings took place in a Glasgow police station last month and in a supermarket cafe on Tuesday. Gifford used a mobile phone and device sewn into her waistcoat to record what they described as a "business proposal" that she should think of as a job.
They intimated that in return for updates on Plane Stupid's plans she could receive large sums of money in cash.
When lawyers acting for Plane Stupid contacted Strathclyde police this week to establish the identities of the detective constable, they were initially told by the human resources department there was no record of his name.
But when the Guardian contacted the force, they acknowledged officers had had meetings with Plane Stupid activists.
In a statement last night, assistant chief constable George Hamilton said the force had "a responsibility to gather intelligence", and such operations were conducted according to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA). The force would not comment on the identity of the officers.
"Officers from Strathclyde police have been in contact with a number of protesters who were involved with the Plane Stupid protests including Aberdeen airport," he said. "The purpose of this contact has been to ensure that any future protest activity is carried out within the law and in a manner which respects the rights of all concerned."
Gifford's lawyer, Patrick Campbell, said: "I have very considerable concerns about these events. There appears to be a covert operation that is running in some way with, or using, Strathclyde police's name. There appears to be a concerted effort to turn protesters to informants and possibly infiltrate peaceful protest movements.
He added: "The methods employed are disturbing, and more worrying yet is the lack of any clearly identifiable body responsible for this. These individuals seem to have some kind of police support or at the very least connections with the police – the access to police stations confirms that – but my concern is the lack of accountability and the threat to the individual and her right to protest."
Gifford intended to meet the officers for a third time on Thursday, taking a lawyer with her. But the officers did not appear at the rendezvous. However, she said she was later approached by the detective constable, who said he was disappointed in her. The man got into a car, leaving Gifford feeling shaken and intimidated.
She said last night that the initial approach from the officers was "an opportunity that fell out of the sky". She added: "Recording them seemed like the obvious thing to do. I was keen to find out what they had to offer, what they wanted to find out, and feed that back to the group in case other members of Plane Stupid were approached."
In a statement, Plane Stupid said: "Our civil liberties were invaded and our right to peaceful protest called into question simply to defend the interests of big business."
Listen to the tapes and read the transcripts | | | | 9 Views | 2 Thumbs Up | 1 Comment | |
|
|
| | Thought police muscle up in Britain | | | Tuesday, December 8, 2009 (7:49 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
* Hal G. P. Colebatch
* From: The Australian
* April 21, 2009 12:00AM
BRITAIN appears to be evolving into the first modern soft totalitarian state. As a sometime teacher of political science and international law, I do not use the term totalitarian loosely.
There are no concentration camps or gulags but there are thought police with unprecedented powers to dictate ways of thinking and sniff out heresy, and there can be harsh punishments for dissent.
Nikolai Bukharin claimed one of the Bolshevik Revolution's principal tasks was "to alter people's actual psychology". Britain is not Bolshevik, but a campaign to alter people's psychology and create a new Homo britannicus is under way without even a fig leaf of disguise.
The Government is pushing ahead with legislation that will criminalise politically incorrect jokes, with a maximum punishment of up to seven years' prison. The House of Lords tried to insert a free-speech amendment, but Justice Secretary Jack Straw knocked it out. It was Straw who previously called for a redefinition of Englishness and suggested the "global baggage of empire" was linked to soccer violence by "racist and xenophobic white males". He claimed the English "propensity for violence" was used to subjugate Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and that the English as a race were "potentially very aggressive".
Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
Related Coverage
* Sex case cop had links to school The Australian, 4 days ago
* New laws target fight club kids Daily Telegraph, 12 Nov 2009
* Teacher filmed slamming student's head Adelaide Now, 22 Sep 2009
* School firebomb attack hurts 10 Adelaide Now, 17 Sep 2009
* Woman teacher charged over sex with pupil Daily Telegraph, 11 Jul 2009
End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
In the past 10 years I have collected reports of many instances of draconian punishments, including the arrest and criminal prosecution of children, for thought-crimes and offences against political correctness.
Countryside Restoration Trust chairman and columnist Robin Page said at a rally against the Government's anti-hunting laws in Gloucestershire in 2002: "If you are a black vegetarian Muslim asylum-seeking one-legged lesbian lorry driver, I want the same rights as you." Page was arrested, and after four months he received a letter saying no charges would be pressed, but that: "If further evidence comes to our attention whereby your involvement is implicated, we will seek to initiate proceedings." It took him five years to clear his name.
Page was at least an adult. In September 2006, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, Codie Stott, asked a teacher if she could sit with another group to do a science project as all the girls with her spoke only Urdu. The teacher's first response, according to Stott, was to scream at her: "It's racist, you're going to get done by the police!" Upset and terrified, the schoolgirl went outside to calm down. The teacher called the police and a few days later, presumably after officialdom had thought the matter over, she was arrested and taken to a police station, where she was fingerprinted and photographed. According to her mother, she was placed in a bare cell for 3 1/2 hours. She was questioned on suspicion of committing a racial public order offence and then released without charge. The school was said to be investigating what further action to take, not against the teacher, but against Stott. Headmaster Anthony Edkins reportedly said: "An allegation of a serious nature was made concerning a racially motivated remark. We aim to ensure a caring and tolerant attitude towards pupils of all ethnic backgrounds and will not stand for racism in any form."
A 10-year-old child was arrested and brought before a judge, for having allegedly called an 11-year-old boya "Paki" and "bin Laden" during a playground argument at a primary school (the other boy had called him a skunk and a Teletubby). When it reached the court the case had cost taxpayers pound stg. 25,000. The accused was so distressed that he had stopped attending school. The judge, Jonathan Finestein, said: "Have we really got to the stage where we are prosecuting 10-year-old boys because of political correctness? There are major crimes out there and the police don't bother to prosecute. This is nonsense."
Finestein was fiercely attacked by teaching union leaders, as in those witch-hunt trials where any who spoke in defence of an accused or pointed to defects in the prosecution were immediately targeted as witches and candidates for burning.
Hate-crime police investigated Basil Brush, a puppet fox on children's television, who had made a joke about Gypsies. The BBC confessed that Brush had behaved inappropriately and assured police that the episode would be banned.
A bishop was warned by the police for not having done enough to "celebrate diversity", the enforcing of which is now apparently a police function. A Christian home for retired clergy and religious workers lost a grant because it would not reveal to official snoopers how many of the residents were homosexual. That they had never been asked was taken as evidence of homophobia.
Muslim parents who objected to young children being given books advocating same-sex marriage and adoption at one school last year had their wishes respected and the offending material withdrawn. This year, Muslim and Christian parents at another school objecting to the same material have not only had their objections ignored but have been threatened with prosecution if they withdraw their children.
There have been innumerable cases in recent months of people in schools, hospitals and other institutions losing their jobs because of various religious scruples, often, as in the East Germany of yore, not shouted fanatically from the rooftops but betrayed in private conversations and reported to authorities. The crime of one nurse was to offer to pray for a patient, who did not complain but merely mentioned the matter to another nurse. A primary school receptionist, Jennie Cain, whose five-year-old daughter was told off for talking about Jesus in class, faces the sack for seeking support from her church. A private email from her to other members of the church asking for prayers fell into the hands of school authorities.
Permissiveness as well as draconianism can be deployed to destroy socially accepted norms and values. The Royal Navy, for instance, has installed a satanist chapel in a warship to accommodate the proclivities of a satanist crew member. "What would Nelson have said?" is a British newspaper cliche about navy scandals, but in this case seems a legitimate question. Satanist paraphernalia is also supplied to prison inmates who need it.
This campaign seems to come from unelected or quasi-governmental bodies controlling various institutions, which are more or less unanswerable to electors, more than it does directly from the Government, although the Government helps drive it and condones it in a fudged and deniable manner.
Any one of these incidents might be dismissed as an aberration, but taken together - and I have only mentioned a tiny sample; more are reported almost every day - they add up to a pretty clear picture.
Hal G. P. Colebatch's Blair's Britain was chosen as a book of the year by The Spectator in 1999 | | | | 5 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| | CLIMATEGATE: THE WHISTLE BLOWS FOR TRUTH | | | Saturday, December 5, 2009 (9:18 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | | by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley | November 30, 2009
The whistleblower deep in the basement of one of the ugly, modern tower-blocks of the dismal, windswept University of East Anglia could scarcely have timed it better.
In less than three weeks, the world’s governing class – its classe politique – would meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, to discuss a treaty to inflict an unelected and tyrannical global government on us, with vast and unprecedented powers to control all once-free world markets and to tax and regulate the world’s wealthier nations for its own enrichment: in short, to bring freedom, democracy, and prosperity to an instant end worldwide, at the stroke of a pen, on the pretext of addressing what is now known to be the non-problem of manmade “global warming”.
The unnamed hero of ‘Climategate’, after months of work gathering emails, computer code, and data, quietly sent a 61-megabyte compressed file from one of the university’s servers to an obscure public message-board on the internet, with a short covering note to the effect that the climate was too important to keep the material secret, and that the data from the University would be available for a short time only.
He had caught the world’s politico-scientific establishment green-handed. Yet his first attempts to reveal the highly-profitable fraud and systematic corruption at the very heart of the UN’s climate panel and among the scientists most prominent in influencing it’s prejudiced and absurdly doom-laden reports had failed. He had made the mistake of sending the data-file to the mainstream news media, which had also profited for decades by fostering the “global warming” scare, and by generally denying anyone who disagreed with the official viewpoint any platform.
The whistleblower’s data file revealed, for the first time, the innermost workings of the tiny international clique of climate scientists, centered on the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia, that has been the prime mover in telling the world that it is warming at an unprecedented rate, and that humankind is responsible.
REVEALED: THE ABJECT CORRUPTION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE
The gallant whistleblower now faces a police investigation at the instigation of the University authorities desperate to look after their own and to divert allegations of criminality elsewhere. His crime? He had revealed what many had long suspected:
- A tiny clique of politicized scientists, paid by unscientific politicians with whom they were financially and politically linked, were responsible for gathering and reporting data on temperatures from the palaeoclimate to today’s climate. The “Team”, as they called themselves, were bending and distorting scientific data to fit a nakedly political story-line profitable to themselves and congenial to the governments that, these days, pay the bills for 99% of all scientific research.
* The Climate Research Unit at East Anglia had profited to the tune of at least $20 million in “research” grants from the Team’s activities.
* The Team had tampered with the complex, bureaucratic processes of the UN’s climate panel, the IPCC, so as to exclude inconvenient scientific results from its four Assessment Reports, and to influence the panel’s conclusions for political rather than scientific reasons.
* The Team had conspired in an attempt to redefine what is and is not peer-reviewed science for the sake of excluding results that did not fit what they and the politicians with whom they were closely linked wanted the UN’s climate panel to report.
* They had tampered with their own data so as to conceal inconsistencies and errors.
* They had emailed one another about using a “trick” for the sake of concealing a “decline” in temperatures in the paleoclimate.
* They had expressed dismay at the fact that, contrary to all of their predictions, global temperatures had not risen in any statistically-significant sense for 15 years, and had been falling for nine years. They had admitted that their inability to explain it was “a travesty”. This internal doubt was in contrast to their public statements that the present decade is the warmest ever, and that “global warming” science is settled.
* They had interfered with the process of peer-review itself by leaning on journals to get their friends rather than independent scientists to review their papers.
* They had successfully leaned on friendly journal editors to reject papers reporting results inconsistent with their political viewpoint.
* They had campaigned for the removal of a learned journal’s editor, solely because he did not share their willingness to debase and corrupt science for political purposes.
* They had mounted a venomous public campaign of disinformation and denigration of their scientific opponents via a website that they had expensively created.
* Contrary to all the rules of open, verifiable science, the Team had committed the criminal offense of conspiracy to conceal and then to destroy computer codes and data that had been legitimately requested by an external researcher who had very good reason to doubt that their “research” was either honest or competent.
THE NATURE ‘TRICK’ TO ‘HIDE THE DECLINE’ IN TEMPERATURES
Among the most revealing of the emails released to the world by the whistleblower was one dated November 1999. In that email, Professor “Phil” Jones of the CRU wrote to Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes, the authors of the infamous “hockey stick” graph that falsely abolished the medieval warm period:
Almost immediately after the news of Climategate broke, Professor Jones told Investigative Magazine’s TGIF Edition that he “had no idea” what he might have meant by the words “hide the decline”. He said:
“They’re talking about the instrumental data which is unaltered – but they’re talking about proxy data going further back in time, a thousand years, and it’s just about how you add on the last few years, because when you get proxy data you sample things like tree rings and ice cores, and they don’t always have the last few years. So one way is to add on the instrumental data for the last few years.”
A few hours later, the science hate-crime website created by the Team cobbled together a jumbled, snivelingly self-serving, and entirely different pretext:
“The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998) Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction [the ‘hockey-stick’ graph of pre-instrumental temperatures over the past 1000 years in the Northern Hemisphere], and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s [another prominent member of the Team] maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem” … and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al. in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post-1960 part of their reconstruction, and so, while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens.”
Enter Steve McIntyre, the one who had first realized that the UN’s climate panel in 2001 had used a corrupt graph that had falsely abolished the medieval warm period with the aim of pretending that today’s global temperatures are unprecedented in at least 1000 years. Later that day his website, www.climateaudit.org, revealed the truth about the conspirators’ “trick”.
In order to smooth a data series over a given time period, one must pad it with artificial data beyond the endpoint of the real series. However, when Mann, Bradley, and Hughes plotted instrumental data against their reconstructions based on the varying widths of tree-rings from ancient trees, their favourite form of proxy or pre-instrumental reconstructed temperature, no smoothing method could conceal the fact that after 1960 the tree-ring data series trended downward, while the instrumental series trended upward. This was the Team’s “divergence”:
“So Mann’s solution [‘Mike’s Nature trick’] was to use the instrumental record for padding [both the proxy and the instrumental data series], which changes the smoothed series to point upwards.”
Accordingly, though the author of the original email had said that the “trick” was to add instrumental measurements for years beyond available proxy data, his conspirators at the science-hate website admitted it was actually a replacement of proxy data owing to a known but unexplained post-1960 “divergence” between the proxy data and the instrumental data. In fact, it was a fabrication.
The next day, in a statement issued by the University of East Anglia’s press office, Professor Jones fumblingly tried to recover the position:
“The word ‘trick’ was used here colloquially as in a clever thing to do. It is ludicrous to suggest that it refers to anything untoward.”
As we shall see, Professor Jones was not telling the truth.
BREAKING THE BROKEN CODE: DISSECTING THE DODGY DATA
The “Documents” folder in the enormous data-file released by the whistleblower contains many segments of computer program code used by Jones and the Team in contriving the Climate Research Unit’s global temperature series. The data-file also contained a 15,000-line commentary by programmers concerned that the code and the data used by the Team were suspect, were fabricated, and were not fit for their purpose.
Looking at the seldom-tidy code, the sheer number of programs which subject the raw data to various degrees of filtering, processing, and tampering is disconcerting. Some of these alterations were blatant and unacceptable, notably those which removed proxy data that correlate poorly with measured regional temperature, or even replaced proxy data altogether with measured data to conceal a discrepancy between what the proxy data actually showed and what the Team wanted it to show.
The Team’s programmers even admitted, in comments within the code, that they were artificially adjusting or “correcting” the proxy data from tree-rings. In Fortran, the high-level computer language long in use at universities for programming, a programmer’s comment is usually preceded by the statement “REM” for “remark”, indicating that the text on the line following the word “REM” should be ignored by the compiler program that translates the Fortran code that humans can understand into executable machine language that the computer can understand.
One of the commonest remarks included in the program fragments disclosed by the whistleblower is as follows:
“These will be artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures.”
There could scarcely be a plainer admission that the data are being regularly, routinely, materially tampered with, for the sake of making it appear that the proxy data are sufficiently reliable to appear close to the instrumental temperatures.
This is no mere debating point. The UN’s climate panel had issued specific warnings against using proxy data (MXD) from tree-rings, because warmer weather is not the only reason why tree-rings become wider in some years than in others. There are at least two other prominent reasons, both of which can – and do – distort the tree-ring data beyond the point where they are useful as indicators of (or proxies for) pre-instrumental temperatures. First, the tree-rings become wider whenever the weather becomes wetter. Secondly, and of still greater concern, the tree-rings widen when there is more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. And there is 40% more CO2 in the atmosphere today than there was in 1750.
Yet, as McIntyre and McKitrick had established originally in 2003, and had published in a leading journal in 2005, the majority of the data on the basis of which Mann, Bradley and Hughes, and later other members of the Team, had attempted to pretend that there had been no medieval warm period were tree-ring series. Take out the suspect tree-ring series, together with just one other rogue series, and all the remaining data series establish beyond reasonable doubt that the Middle Ages were truly, materially, and globally warmer than the present.
Scientists with programming knowledge have already begun to examine the computer code that Professor Jones and his colleagues had attempted to hide for so long. Here is Marc Sheppard’s selection of three examples of the tortuous sequences of deliberate data tampering that are evident within the program code. | | | | 9 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| | HACKED CLIMATE GATE EMAILS. SUMMARY | | | | Saturday, December 5, 2009 (8:43 AM) | | Climate cuttings 33
If you are interested in more on global warming material, check out Caspar and the Jesus Paper and The Yamal Implosion, or check out the forthcoming book.
General reaction seems to be that the CRUgate emails are genuine, but with the caveat that there could be some less reliable stuff slipped in.
In the circumstances, here are some summaries of the CRUgate files. I’ll update these as and when I can. The refs are the email number.
* Phil Jones writes to University of Hull to try to stop sceptic Sonia Boehmer Christiansen using her Hull affiliation. Graham F Haughton of Hull University says its easier to push greenery there now SB-C has retired.(1256765544)
* Michael Mann discusses how to destroy a journal that has published sceptic papers.(1047388489)
* Tim Osborn discusses how data are truncated to stop an apparent cooling trend showing up in the results (0939154709). Analysis of impact here. Wow!
* Phil Jones describes the death of sceptic, John Daly, as “cheering news”.(1075403821)
* Phil Jones encourages colleagues to delete information subject to FoI request.(1212063122)
* Phil Jones says he has use Mann’s “Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series”…to hide the decline”. Real Climate says “hiding” was an unfortunate turn of phrase.(0942777075)
* Letter to The Times from climate scientists was drafted with the help of Greenpeace.(0872202064)
* Mann thinks he will contact BBC’s Richard Black to find out why another BBC journalist was allowed to publish a vaguely sceptical article.(1255352257)
* Kevin Trenberth says they can’t account for the lack of recent warming and that it is a travesty that they can’t.(1255352257)
* Tom Wigley says that Lindzen and Choi’s paper is crap.(1257532857)
* Tom Wigley says that von Storch is partly to blame for sceptic papers getting published at Climate Research. Says he encourages the publication of crap science. Says they should tell publisher that the journal is being used for misinformation. Says that whether this is true or not doesn’t matter. Says they need to get editorial board to resign. Says they need to get rid of von Storch too. (1051190249)
* Ben Santer says (presumably jokingly!) he’s “tempted, very tempted, to beat the crap” out of sceptic Pat Michaels. (1255100876)
* Mann tells Jones that it would be nice to ‘”contain” the putative Medieval Warm Period’. (1054736277)
* Tom Wigley tells Jones that the land warming since 1980 has been twice the ocean warming and that this might be used by sceptics as evidence for urban heat islands.(1257546975)
* Tom Wigley say that Keith Briffa has got himself into a mess over the Yamal chronology (although also says it’s insignificant. Wonders how Briffa explains McIntyre’s sensitivity test on Yamal and how he explains the use of a less-well replicated chronology over a better one. Wonders if he can. Says data withholding issue is hot potato, since many “good” scientists condemn it.(1254756944)
* Briffa is funding Russian dendro Shiyatov, who asks him to send money to personal bank account so as to avoid tax, thereby retaining money for research.(0826209667)
* Kevin Trenberth says climatologists are nowhere near knowing where the energy goes or what the effect of clouds is. Says nowhere balancing the energy budget. Geoengineering is not possible.(1255523796)
* Mann discusses tactics for screening and delaying postings at Real Climate.(1139521913)
* Tom Wigley discusses how to deal with the advent of FoI law in UK. Jones says use IPR argument to hold onto code. Says data is covered by agreements with outsiders and that CRU will be “hiding behind them”.(1106338806)
* Overpeck has no recollection of saying that he wanted to “get rid of the Medieval Warm Period”. Thinks he may have been quoted out of context.(1206628118)
* Mann launches RealClimate to the scientific community.(1102687002)
* Santer complaining about FoI requests from McIntyre. Says he expects support of Lawrence Livermore Lab management. Jones says that once support staff at CRU realised the kind of people the scientists were dealing with they became very supportive. Says the VC [vice chancellor] knows what is going on (in one case).(1228330629)
* Rob Wilson concerned about upsetting Mann in a manuscript. Says he needs to word things diplomatically.(1140554230)
* Briffa says he is sick to death of Mann claiming his reconstruction is tropical because it has a few poorly temp sensitive tropical proxies. Says he should regress these against something else like the “increasing trend of self-opinionated verbiage” he produces. Ed Cook agrees with problems.(1024334440)
* Overpeck tells Team to write emails as if they would be made public. Discussion of what to do with McIntyre finding an error in Kaufman paper. Kaufman’s admits error and wants to correct. Appears interested in Climate Audit findings.(1252164302)
* Jones calls Pielke Snr a prat.(1233249393)
* Santer says he will no longer publish in Royal Met Soc journals if they enforce intermediate data being made available. Jones has complained to head of Royal Met Soc about new editor of Weather [why?data?] and has threatened to resign from RMS.(1237496573)
* Reaction to McIntyre’s 2005 paper in GRL. Mann has challenged GRL editor-in-chief over the publication. Mann is concerned about the connections of the paper’s editor James Saiers with U Virginia [does he mean Pat Michaels?]. Tom Wigley says that if Saiers is a sceptic they should go through official GRL channels to get him ousted. (1106322460) [Note to readers - Saiers was subsequently ousted]
* Later on Mann refers to the leak at GRL being plugged.(1132094873)
* Jones says he’s found a way around releasing AR4 review comments to David Holland.(1210367056)
* Wigley says Keenan’s fraud accusation against Wang is correct. (1188557698)
* Jones calls for Wahl and Ammann to try to change the received date on their alleged refutation of McIntyre [presumably so it can get into AR4](1189722851)
* Mann tells Jones that he is on board and that they are working towards a common goal.(0926010576)
* Mann sends calibration residuals for MBH99 to Osborn. Says they are pretty red, and that they shouldn’t be passed on to others, this being the kind of dirty laundry they don’t want in the hands of those who might distort it.(1059664704)
* Prior to AR3 Briffa talks of pressure to produce a tidy picture of “apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data”. [This appears to be the politics leading the science] Briffa says it was just as warm a thousand years ago.(0938018124)
* Jones says that UK climate organisations are coordinating themselves to resist FoI. They got advice from the Information Commissioner [!](1219239172)
* Mann tells Revkin that McIntyre is not to be trusted.(1254259645)
* Revkin quotes von Storch as saying it is time to toss the Hockey Stick . This back in 2004.(1096382684)
* Funkhouser says he’s pulled every trick up his sleeve to milk his Kyrgistan series. Doesn’t think it’s productive to juggle the chronology statistics any more than he has.(0843161829)
* Wigley discusses fixing an issue with sea surface temperatures in the context of making the results look both warmer but still plausible. (1254108338)
* Jones says he and Kevin will keep some papers out of the next IPCC report.(1089318616)
* Tom Wigley tells Mann that a figure Schmidt put together to refute Monckton is deceptive and that the match it shows of instrumental to model predictions is a fluke. Says there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model output by authors and IPCC.(1255553034)
* Grant Foster putting together a critical comment on a sceptic paper. Asks for help for names of possible reviewers. Jones replies with a list of people, telling Foster they know what to say about the paper and the comment without any prompting.(1249503274)
* David Parker discussing the possibility of changing the reference period for global temperature index. Thinks this shouldn’t be done because it confuses people and because it will make things look less warm.(1105019698)
* Briffa discusses an sceptic article review with Ed Cook. Says that confidentially he needs to put together a case to reject it (1054756929)
* Ben Santer, referring to McIntyre says he hopes Mr “I’m not entirely there in the head” will not be at the AGU.(1233249393)
* Jones tells Mann that he is sending station data. Says that if McIntyre requests it under FoI he will delete it rather than hand it over. Says he will hide behind data protection laws. Says Rutherford screwed up big time by creating an FTP directory for Osborn. Says Wigley worried he will have to release his model code. Also discuss AR4 draft. Mann says paleoclimate chapter will be contentious but that the author team has the right personalities to deal with sceptics.(1107454306)
| | | | 16 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| | CIA Operated Aerial Spraying Plane Carrying "Mutated" Virus Shot Down in China | | | Friday, December 4, 2009 (1:16 PM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
Reports circulating in the Kremlin today are stating that a US government contracted airplane piloted by American CIA agents and carrying a cargo of a "mutated"swine flu virus intended for aerial spraying was shot down at China's Shanghai Pudong airport by a saboteur team of what are believed to be Israeli Mossad soldiers seeking to prevent an American attack upon one of their Central Asian bases located in the Central Asian Nation of Kyrgyzstan.
According to Chinese media reports on this incident the stricken Zimbabwean MD-ll plane, owned by the CIA linked Avient Aviation company operated by a former British military officer named Andrew Smith and registered in the UK, killed 3 American CIA agents and injured 4 other personal who are reported to be from United States, Indonesia, Belgium and Zimbabwe.
Most interesting to note in these reports on the victims of this plane shootdown is that the Indonesian man currently being treated for his injuries has ‘confessed’ to Chinese secret police forces that he is a technician employed by the United States Navy at their mysterious Naval Medical Research Unit No. 2 (NAMRU-2) located in Indonesia that Indonesian Defense Minister Juwono Sudarsono had previously called for the closing of “because its operations were too secretive and were incompatible with Indonesia’s security interests.”
Even more interesting to note about this US Navy secret bio-weapons base in Indonesia (the World’s largest Muslim Nation) was its establishment in cooperation with the Rockefeller Institute, especially with it being the main center for the Americans Viral Diseases Program (VDP) they describe as the research of “epidemiologic and laboratory research on viral hemorrhagic fevers, influenza, encephalitis, and rickettsioses” and the head of this institute, David Rockefeller, long calling for a massive reduction in our World’s population.
And to the agenda currently underway to radically change our World through the mass death of its population we need look no further for its explanation than David Rockefeller’s own words he spoke before the secretive Trilateral Commission in June, 1991, when he said:
“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries.”
To the United States employing planes to spread a mutated swine flu virus around the World we have further reports from China, and as we can read:
“June 26 Suspicious aircrafts were forced to land. A US operated AN-124 changed its call sign from civillian to military which then triggered a response from the IAF upon entering Pakistani air space, the plane was forced to land in Mumbai while the second one was forced down by Nigerian figther jets that also arrested the crew.
According to reports China (China’s People’s Liberation Army Air Force) contacted the Indian and Nigerian intelligence officials about the presence of these US operated Ukranian aircrafts amidst growing concern that the United States were spreading “biological agents” in the Earth’s atmosphere also which some Chinese officals believed to be a attempt to mass genocide via the spread of h1n1 swine flu.
The strange thing about these reports and arrests as well as the forcing down of the planes were that these aircrafts were carrying “waste disposal” systems that could spray up to 45000kg or 100pounds of aerial type mist from sophisticated network of nano pipes that led throughout the trailing edges of the wings thereby dispersing whatever was in these tanks through a mist.”
Reports of these US planes over Ukraine have been reported as well, and as we can further read:
“Authorities in the town of Kiev, Ukraine denied any spraying of “aerosolized medication” by aircraft over the city. This after it was reported that light aircrafts were seen flying over the forest market area that sprayed a aerosol substance to fight h1n1 or swine flu.
5 Sources confirms this and the local newspapers of Kiev also received hundreds of phone calls from residents and business owners close to the area the planes were spraying the suspicious substance. Not only that but local businesses and retailers were “advised” to stay indoors during the day by the local authorities.
As if that is not enough, the government authorities also pushed the radio stations in Kiev to deny the reports. Online on forums, websites and blogs reports came in about eye witness accounts that confirms this. There was also reports of helicopters spraying aerosols over Kiev, Lviv, Ternopil and throughout Ukraine.”
Most disturbing of the effects of the spraying of this mutated swine flu virus over the Ukraine is the devastating toll it has taken on the people of that country, and as we can read:
“Almost 40 000 people got infected since yesterday in the Ukraine by what we still call the “Ukraine plague” but doctors have said recently that this is a stronger case of h1n1 or swine flu that has mutated and has that affect on the lungs where it destroys the lungs and fills it with blood.”
But, to the most horrible outcome of this mutated swine flu virus is the World Health Organization now reporting that it is killing people in France, Norway, Brazil, China, Japan, Mexico, Ukraine, and the United States as the death toll from this Global Pandemic is now reported to be nearing 8,000 and China now reporting that this deadly disease has now crossed over into dogs.
Important to also note in these reports is that the US spray plane shot down in China was reported to be targeting a secret Israeli base located in the Central Asian Nation of Kyrgyzstan, which many Ashkenazi Jews (Ashkenazi Jews make up approximately 80% of Jews Worldwide) consider their ‘spiritual homeland’ after their long exile their under Soviet Communist rule, and where Russian Intelligence Analysts report the Israelis are nearing the end of their decades long deciphering of the ancient Epic of Manas manuscript (with close to half a million lines the Epic of Manas is twenty times longer than Homer’s Odyssey and Iliad combined) that they believe contains our World’s oldest warning to our present age and which (coincidentally?) agrees with the ancient Mayan peoples that the year of 2012 will see the ending of our present age.
To the final outcome of these events it is not in our knowing; other than to state the obvious, that the truths of these things are continued to be ignored, even scoffed at, by the very people whose extermination has been longed planned by these monsters and is now being carried out, and who still have no idea whatsoever how truly easy it has become for them to be controlled by their propaganda masters.
One can only hope that they awaken before all is lost for them, the facts suggest they won’t. | | | | 16 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| | Climategate Outrage Explodes As Carbon Tax Agenda Collapses | | | Friday, December 4, 2009 (9:52 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
Warmists attempt to burn climategate crooks in sneaky damage limitation exercise, but the scandal is still boiling over
Climategate Outrage Explodes As Carbon Tax Agenda Collapses 021209top
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Outrage surrounding the climategate scandal is increasing as desperate apologists for the crooks caught manipulating data to “hide the decline” in global warming attempt to distance themselves from the perpetrators, burning a few scientists to save the larger carbon tax gravy train in a cynical damage limitation exercise.
The potential for the climategate scandal to derail the gargantuan agenda to exploit fraudulent fearmongering about global warming in order to ram through a new carbon tax is growing after the ringleader of the scam, Phil Jones, the head of the Climactic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, temporarily stepped down pending an investigation.
In addition, Michael Mann, a professor in the meteorology department at Penn State University, whose emails were included in the climategate leak, is also the subject of an investigation into his work.
The UK Met office was also forced to go on the offensive and issue a statement which highlighted the 2007 IPCC report as evidence that their data was solid, despite the fact that the very scientists involved in the climategate scandal engaged in intimidation tactics and academic witch hunts to ensure data which they politically disagreed with was blocked from appearing in the IPCC report, as well as manipulating data that appeared in the IPCC report to “hide the decline” in global warming.
The subject will also be aired in a hearing today convened by the U.S. Congress’s select committee on global warming. Warmist advocates are set to testify but they will undoubtedly be grilled by skeptics, so expect sparks to fly.
Meanwhile, warmists like Lord Stern are admitting that climategate could jeopardize a deal at Copenhagen on CO2 emissions that was already in doubt before the scandal broke.
The climategate apologists seem to have settled on two approaches in dealing with the crisis that the scandal represents. On the one hand, a majority have simply sought to downplay the whole issue as if the fact that the very scientists who produced the foundational data for the contention that global warming is man-made were caught manipulating the evidence is no big deal. This has largely backfired, with even the usually obedient establishment media acknowledging that the story has huge consequences.
For example, a CBS News report today concedes that, “The leaked files show that prominent scientists were so wedded to theories of man-made global warming that they ridiculed dissenters who asked for copies of their data, plotted how to keep researchers who reached different conclusions from publishing, and concealed apparently buggy computer code from being disclosed under the Freedom of Information law.”
This accurate description is a far cry from how the apologists have tried to frame the whole issue as mere “rancor” between scientists. In addition, citing the notion that the emails were obtained illegally by a hacker in an attempt to somehow absolve the scientists of any suspicion has also evaporated as a defense, since it is now widely accepted that the data was not hacked, but rather leaked from the inside.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
Climategate Outrage Explodes As Carbon Tax Agenda Collapses 121109banner2
A new tactic on behalf of warmists is to accept that Jones, Mann et al are guilty of malfeasance but then glibly claim that the debate is still over on global warming. Fellow warmists are distancing themselves from the climategate crooks in an apparent effort to burn just a handful of scientists, thereby using damage limitation to prevent the scandal from curtailing the wider global warming agenda.
Declan McCullagh summarizes how global warming advocates are busy trying to extricate the climategate crooks from the UN IPCC agenda, despite the fact that they produced the data that the IPCC used in its 2007 report.
“Some mainstream academics working in the area have distanced themselves from Mann, Jones, and other researchers whose correspondence has drawn allegations of impropriety. Aynsley Kellow, a professor at the University of Tasmania who was an expert reviewer for a U.N. global warming report, told ABC Radio there was evidence of a “willingness to manipulate raw data to suit predetermined results, you’ve got a resistance to any notion of transparency, an active resistance to freedom of information requests or quite reasonable requests from scientists to have a look at data so that it can be verified.”
“Hans von Storch, director of the Director of Institute for Coastal Research who was assailed by Mann in one e-mail message, calls the CRU axis a “cartel” and suggests that Jones and others avoid reviewing papers. A colleague, Eduardo Zorita, went further and said Mann and his allies “should be barred” from future United Nations proceedings and warned that “the scientific debate has been in many instances hijacked to advance other agendas.”
Watch out for a biased investigation to amount to nothing more than a slap on the wrists for people like Jones and Mann, while still refusing to acknowledge that “consensus” presumptions about global warming have been challenged as a result of climategate.
Since the investigation into Jones and the CRU will likely be conducted by Lord Rees of the Royal Society, who is a staunch warmist, it will undoubtedly be a complete whitewash. Indeed, a source cited by the Telegraph’s James Delingpole says that the British government and the foreign office has already made it clear to the University of East Anglia and Rees that they will need to “keep a lid on everything lest it destabilises Copenhagen.”
This is precisely why we need to keep the pressure up and never let climategate slip away quietly by allowing the establishment to exonerate the crooks involved and the true significance of the whole issue.
A major new salvo has arrived in the form of Lord Monckton’s comprehensive report on climategate, which needs to go viral in the days before next week’s Copenhagen summit at which elitists will attempt to push through binding agreements on CO2 emissions that will bankrupt economies and lead to more poverty and devastation that any warming of the earth, be it natural or man-made, could ever accomplish.
Prison Planet.tv Members Can Watch Fall Of The Republic Right Now Online - Don't Miss Out! Get Your Subscription Today! | | | | 8 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| | Gargantuan Industry Of Climate Alarmism Exposed By ClimateGate | | | Friday, December 4, 2009 (9:30 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
"Scientific Consensus", rather than skepticism, is driven by profit and big business
Steve Watson,
Infowars.net
Wednesday, Dec 2, 2009
TwitThis
StumbleUpon Related Content
The leaking of thousands of emails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit has shined a light on an industry of climate change alarmism, highlighting the hypocritical claims of corporate cronyism on behalf of proponents of the anthropological global warming theory (AGW).
A common accusation made by AGW theorists, or "the consensus" as they like to be known, is that dissenting groups are only interested in the financial kickbacks they can secure from big oil companies.
For example, in 2008, ExxonMobil donated around $7 million, less then 0.01% of it's annual profits, to a selection of think tanks and institutes. Among these donations was a combined $125,000 to the National Center for Policy Analysis and the Heritage Institute, right of centre public policy groups that have questioned the "consensus" on climate change.
The NCPA website states: "NCPA scholars believe that while the causes and consequences of the earth's current warming trend is still unknown, the cost of actions to substantially reduce CO2 emissions would be quite high and result in economic decline, accelerated environmental destruction, and do little or nothing to prevent global warming regardless of its cause."
The London Guardian and other left leaning mainstream media outlets have pounced on Exxon's small donations to such groups, reporting it as detestable corporate funding of "climate change denial".
However, when it comes to the funding of AGW proponents, the figures are infinitely greater, many of the sources take their money directly from our pockets, and yet the Guardian and its ilk, conveniently, remain completely silent.
The leaked emails from the Hadley centre reveal that (now former) CRU chief Phil Jones has received 55 endowments since 1990 from agencies ranging from the U.S. Department of Energy to NATO, worth a total of £13,718,547, or approximately $22.6 million.
$19 million alone came between the years 2000 and 2006.
Massaging the scientific data, hiding a decline in temperatures, hijacking the peer-review system and blackballing dissenting scientific opinion does not look good for Jones in the context of such financial gain.
Another document leaked from the CRU, titled potential-funding.doc, lists sources of potential funding and shows that the scientists considered pressing "energy agencies" that specifically deal in new technology to reduce carbon emissions.
Three agencies listed as potential sources of funding are UK based Carbon Trust, the Northern Energy Initiative, and the Energy Saving Trust. Renewables North West, an American company promoting the expansion of solar, wind, and geothermal energy, is listed as a fourth potential benefactor.
Of course, all these potential financial backers have a vested interest in maintaining the conception that human-induced global warming is a reality backed by science.
In an article entitled Climategate: Follow the Money, columnist Bret Stephens at the Wall Street Journal points out that the funding of climate skeptics is a drop in the ocean compared to the huge industry that human-driven climate change science has spawned.
"The European Commission's most recent appropriation for climate research comes to nearly $3 billion, and that's not counting funds from the EU's member governments. In the U.S., the House intends to spend $1.3 billion on NASA's climate efforts, $400 million on NOAA's, and another $300 million for the National Science Foundation. American states also have a piece of the action, with California—apparently not feeling bankrupt enough—devoting $600 million to their own climate initiative. In Australia, alarmists have their own Department of Climate Change at their funding disposal." Stephens writes.
"And all this is only a fraction of the $94 billion that HSBC estimates has been spent globally this year on what it calls 'green stimulus'—largely ethanol and other alternative energy schemes—of the kind from which Al Gore and his partners at Kleiner Perkins hope to profit handsomely."
Billions of dollars in grants for one research institute or university does not go unnoticed by the rest, and there is a valid point to be considered in the notion that this is where the "scientific consensus" has it's roots.
"Today these groups form a kind of ecosystem of their own." comments Stephens.
Al Gore, the first carbon billionaire, has proven that he is only interested in solutions to environmental problems that line his pockets. The industry beneath him depends on anthropological global warming like the dot com industry depended on the internet he claims to have invented.
If you follow the money it becomes clear that it is the "consensus" that is being driven by gargantuan financial backing, not the skeptics, as climate change alarmists would have everyone believe. | | | | 5 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| | Climategate Crooks Recast Themselves As The Victims | | | Friday, December 4, 2009 (9:27 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
Despite the far likelier case that the emails were leaked from the inside, and were not illegally obtained by criminal hackers
Climategate Crooks Recast Themselves As The Victims 031209top2
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, December 3, 2009
In a pathetic effort to make the climategate scandal go away, the crooks involved in manipulating data to “hide the decline” in global warming are recasting themselves as the victims of the whole affair, attempting to shift the blame to criminal hackers who stole data, when all the evidence suggests the CRU emails were leaked from the inside.
Of course, the only real criminals are those who were caught fraudulently massaging climate data in order to comply with the United Nations’ agenda for a global carbon tax, a world government and complete takeover of the global economy.
One of the principle climategate suspects, Penn State University meteorology professor Michael Mann, currently under investigation by his own university in what will probably amount to little more than a whitewash, tries to absolve himself by claiming he and his colleagues are being targeted in an interview with AccuWeather.com’s Katie Fehlinger.
“I think it is unfortunate that some scientists out there are using this situation to settle personal scores, to settle a vendetta,” Mann said, claiming that the emails had been “taken out of context”.
“Phil Jones is a very honest scientist,” Mann said. “He was probably talking about getting rid of measurements that they didn’t consider reliable,” said Mann in response to emails between him and Jones that discuss deleting information.
In reality, as Lord Monckton has documented, “Contrary to all the rules of open, verifiable science, the Team had committed the criminal offense of conspiracy to conceal and then to destroy computer codes and data that had been legitimately requested by an external researcher who had very good reason to doubt that their “research” was either honest or competent.”
Additionally, scientists also “discussed ways of dodging Freedom of Information Act requests to release temperature data,” reports the Daily Mail.
The emails show that scientists relied on cronyism and cosying up to FOIA officials to prevent them from being forced to release data.
“When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by the requests,’ the email says. “It took a couple of half-hour sessions to convince them otherwise.”
“Once they became aware of the types of people we were dealing with, everyone at UEA became very supportive. I’ve got to know the FOI person quite well and the chief librarian – who deals with appeals.”
Mann’s characterization of this issue as that Jones was “getting rid of measurements that they didn’t consider reliable” is completely inconsistent with the known facts.
Despite his haughty manner in dismissing the gravity of the scandal, other climate scientists are quickly abandoning Mann.
Eduardo Zorita, scientist at the Institute for Coastal Research, is calling for Mann, Jones and others to be banned from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) process for the review and publication of climate change data.
“The scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore,” said Zorita.
Marc Morano, climate change skeptic and executive editor of ClimateDepot.com, agrees.
“Mann has been dogged for years about his scientific work. Climategate exposes his glaring weaknesses as a scientist,” he said in an e-mail to AccuWeather.com.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
Climategate Crooks Recast Themselves As The Victims 121109banner2
Meanwhile, climategate ringleader Phil Jones of the Climate Research Unit, the CRU scientist who infamously wrote about the need to “hide the decline” in global warming in one of the leaked emails, was escorted by plain clothes officers to a police station near his home yesterday.
Unfortunately, officers were only questioning Jones as the ‘victim of a crime’ rather than for his role in producing manipulated data that is being used to bankrupt national economies and launch larcenous and fraudulent tax scams upon the populations of developed countries, as well as his efforts to engage in academic witch hunts by blocking data he politically disagreed with from appearing in IPCC reports.
“Sources said the interview concerned the theft of emails from the university and alleged death threats since the contents of the emails were released, adding he was being treated as a ‘victim of crime’ rather than a suspect in any criminal investigation,” reports the Daily Mail.
How Jones is a victim of a crime is beyond explanation since it’s widely acknowledged that the CRU emails were most probably leaked from an inside source and were not obtained illegally from the outside by a hacker with a criminal vendetta.
BBC weather forecaster Paul Hudson was forwarded the exact same CRU emails five weeks before it was reported that hackers had obtained them and posted them on the Internet.
“The e-mails released on the internet as a result of CRU being hacked into are identical to the ones I was forwarded and read at the time and so, as far as l can see, they are authentic.” Hudson stated.
Following the publication of a 9th October article Hudson wrote for the BBC entitled “whatever happened to global warming?”, in which he questioned the science behind the theory of human induced warming, the BBC correspondent was discussed within emails to which several of the CRU climatologists were privy, including Kevin Trenberth, Michael Mann, Tom Wigley and Phil Jones.
Hudson’s article, which pointed out that there had been no increase in global temperatures since 1998, spurred Kevin Trenberth, one of the leading authors of the IPCC report on climate change to make the following comment within the private emails to his colleagues:
“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
Hudson received the emails because he “was copied in to them at the time,” he wrote on his blog, meaning that the CRU scientists were sending some of the emails to people with no affiliation to their organization long before they were supposedly “hacked”.
In addition, the portrayal of the individual(s) who hacked the rest of the data as some kind of amoral criminal with a vendetta against warmist scientists is completely contradicted by the nature of what happened.
As Robert Graham, CEO with the consultancy Errata Security, notes, “Judging from the data posted, the hack was done either by an insider or by someone inside the climate community who was familiar with the debate.”
Whenever this type of incident occurs, “80 percent of the time it’s an insider,” Graham said.
The far likelier scenario is that someone on the inside with a conscience got fed up with Jones, Mann et al fraudulently manipulating data to fit their agenda, and either personally or in collusion with hackers, decided to leak the information so as to expose the criminality that the climategate crooks were engaging in.
The portrayal of Jones, Mann and their cronies as the victims of some untoward crime is just the latest effort on behalf of the warmist establishment to whitewash and neutralize the climategate scandal, in a desperate effort to make it disappear from the headlines in time for next week’s Copenhagen summit.
Watch the interview with Mann below in which he patronizingly tries to neutralize the climategate scandal by labeling it a “distraction,” despite the fact that even other warmist climate scientists are now calling for him to be barred from producing climate data. | | | | 5 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| | Bombshell UN Documents Outline Plan To Use Climategate Crooks In “End Run” Around National Sovereignty | | | Friday, December 4, 2009 (9:24 AM)
(I'm feeling awake) | |
Strategy papers call for United Nations to boss economies and erect world government under pretext of environmentalism
Bombshell UN Documents Outline Plan To Use Climategate Crooks In End Run Around National Sovereignty 011209top2
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Shocking newly uncovered UN strategy documents reveal how elitists are recruiting members of academia from all over the globe in an effort to hide the “end-run” around national sovereignty that their agenda represents, emphasizing how the climategate crooks who were recently caught manipulating scientific data in order to “hide the decline” in global warming are working with the United Nations in the pursuit of a world government justified by the global warming fraud that they are helping to perpetrate.
One of the planning papers, entitled “The UNEP That We Want,” was produced by a specially selected group of influential environmental bureaucrats and delivered to the UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner.
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the regulatory body that established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the politicized organization that has attempted to slam the lid shut on global warming skepticism by claiming it is the supreme authority, despite the fact that scientists used by the IPCC were caught manipulating data and conspiring to hide evidence of global cooling during the climategate scandal.
The IPCC has attempted to deny the gravitas of climategate by claiming that it has no bearing on their conclusions about global warming, despite the fact that scientists at the University of East Anglia used intimidation and academic witch hunts to ensure that data they didn’t agree with politically was blocked from appearing in the IPCC’s fourth assessment report, which was published in 2007.
Participants who contributed to the first UNEP document included Janos Pasztor, currently head of the team pushing U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s unprecedented Seal the Deal lobbying campaign to pressure U.N. member governments into signing a new environmental agreement at Copenhagen, Dominic Waughray, currently head of environmental initiatives at the World Economic Forum; and Maria Ivanova, and Bulgarian academic Maria Ivanova, director of the Global Economic Governance Project at the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy.
The first document is very similar to a second UNEP paper entitled, “Proposed Medium Term Strategy 2010-2013.”
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
Bombshell UN Documents Outline Plan To Use Climategate Crooks In End Run Around National Sovereignty 121109banner2
The documents outline a program of implementing a global system of governance based around environmental regulations and laws, stressing the agenda for the “evolutionary nature of strengthening international environmental governance.”
The aim of elevating UNEP’s influence to a position where it dictates rules to nation states, rather than nation states being the supervisors of UNEP as is currently the case, is advocated.
The documents discuss recruiting academia to further the power of UNEP, noteworthy in light of the recent climategate scandal where scientists at major universities were caught hiding evidence of global cooling.
“As the Swiss paper puts it, UNEP “should pioneer a new style of work. This requires going beyond a narrow interpretation of UNEP’s stakeholders as comprising its member states — or even the world’s governments — and recruiting a far wider community of support, in civil society, the academic world and the private sector.” At the same time the paper warns that these groups need to be “harnessed to the UNEP mission without appearing to make an end-run around the member governments,” summarizes Fox News’ George Russell.
This passage is fairly damning, as the UN is all but admitting that the program does represent an “end-run around member governments,” and that they have to do their best to hide the fact. That academics should be “harnessed to the UNEP mission” and not harnessed to producing unbiased scientific data about global warming also reveals how the climate change issue has been hijacked to serve the requirements of a global elite hell-bent on world government.
The first document also calls for an “Environmental Bretton Woods for the 21st Century,” where the environmental agenda is inextricably linked with the economy and the UN’s role is to have command over the economies of national governments.
The goals included in the four-year strategy paper include “efforts at local, national and global levels” to raise “sufficient finance to meet environmental challenges, including climate change,” which translates as using the problem of global warming to raise money for the operation of the global government structure which is being called for in the planning papers.
The goals enshrined in the documents, a counterpart to the globally binding agreement the UN is seeking to achieve in Copenhagen next month, are “certain to remain a UNEP rallying cry long after the Copenhagen meeting is over — and while the other brainstorming ideas that went into the new four-year strategy, not to mention the strategy itself, go into effect,” writes Russell.
This document represents yet another smoking gun proving that the climate cult movement is all about expanding the power of a dictatorial, unelected global government, diluting powers of nation states, seizing control of the global economy, eviscerating the middle class with a raft of new regulations and laws, and shutting down industry with impossible CO2 reduction mandates, while erecting environmentalism, which is really a thin veil for global fascism, as the new universal religion.
This has nothing to do with saving the earth and, as the climategate scandal has illustrated, nothing to do with the real science – but everything to do with a relatively small clique of globalists running roughshod over humanity itself in pursuit of their malthusian control freak agenda.
Prison Planet.tv Members Can Watch Fall Of The Republic Right Now Online - Don't Miss Out! Get Your Subscription Today! | | | | 6 Views | 0 Thumbs Up | 0 Comments | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
