Utter Disgust with Liberals and Conservatives

I'm becoming ever more disheartened with the CPC. They have become just another party of Ottawa hacks where winning a majority becomes the holy grail ... where any principle, any previous stand, and any greater idea is sacrificed on the altar of pure politics. In my opinion, Stephen Harper has led the CPC into this style of skulduggery simply because he's willing to do anything ... and I mean anything, to get that magic majority.

Nothing exemplifies this more than the CPC/Liberal blood bath over detainees in Afghanistan. Both sides are bashing each other while claiming to be better supporters of the troops, when frankly, both the Liberals and CPC can be categorized as limpid troop supporters.

Harper, who came into office with glowing rhetoric about not quitting in Afghanistan has sacrificed the mission for Quebec votes, while the Liberals have a long history of killing the military with pathetic budget support. The CPC too, have hardly increased support as a percentage of GDP, making Canada the pitiable, most miserly, most financially least worthy of NATO nations while committing our troops to one of the most dangerous regions and tasks in all of Afghanistan. In other words, our men and women have, as a percentage of national population, sacrificed more than any other ally in Afghanistan ... yet our country is the most pitiful in what it budgets overall for the military.

Sure, Harper and co. have provided our men and women in Afghanistan with increasingly better equipment, but to think, for a minute, that the Liberals wouldn't have done the same is to be a hopeless partisan hack ... and I know political hacks because I can hack away with the best of them.

So it is, that I have nothing but loathing for the Harper CPC and Liberals when it comes to our military ... they both, like most Canadian political parties before them view our soldiers as little more than political liabilities; a pain in the ass. As long as the boys and girls in camouflage make good photo-ops or vote getters, both the CPC and Liberals are all “Red Friday” ... but the moment these same brave men and women become vote losers they are quickly shuffled off into oblivion ... Harper's utter silence and utter lack of moral support for the mission is shameful. The moment the mission became a liability for attaining the holy grail, our brave leader has hardly uttered a peep about the mission (other than offering rambling, embarrassing, and confusing interviews south of the border).

At this point my fellow conservatives will come rushing in with excuse making ... something to do with that oh so nasty media. To which I say ... if you can't show strong vision and communicate it in the face of a hostile media, you might as well kiss your country goodbye. While men and women die for us in Afghanistan, my fellow conservatives worry about those meanies in the media ... how utterly weak.

The day that Harper vastly increases the military budget so we can at least match most of our NATO allies in budgetary commitment, I may change my tune. The day, our soldiers go into battle on a fleet of MRAPs, instead of death traps, I'll give Harper a nod. The day, we can field a tiny force of 2000 or so soldiers indefinitely in a low level conflict, without burning out the military both in humans and equipment, I'll say that our leaders truly support the troops in every material way possible.

But until that day, I have not one ounce of respect for the machinations and ways of that most despicable creature in all of Canada ... the Canadian Federal political hack.

Adrian has more:

The whole detainee affair, which I’ve largely ignored until now because as far as I’m concerned Canada has done more than it’s fair share of diligence, has spilled over into a partisan fighting match between the Liberals and Conservatives. It wouldn’t make much difference to me, except that the two have now taken to smear attacks on each other involving our military.

The Liberals accuse the Conservatives of using the troops as “props” in the blame game. The Prime Minister’s Office issued an email to the press slamming the Liberals for playing politics with the troops:

“In another Liberal blunder, Michael Ignatieff has issued a statement denouncing the Prime Minister for supporting the men and women of Canada’s Armed Forces.”

But that isn’t really accurate, is it? The Liberals haven’t been denouncing the Prime Minister for supporting the troops, a ridiculous statement to make, but for downplaying the detainee issue. Stephen Harper indeed did invite criticism by employing a tried and tested tactic of using military patriotism in order to deflect away negative attention.

Previous Post

Being an Environmental Bully Pays

Canada, of course, is familiar with her number one climate bully ... that cockroach of cockroaches ... David Suzuki:

Science is broken. Bloggers are paid to smear scientists, and rather than decry the intimidation and bullying, groups like the David Suzuki Foundation, New Scientist, the UN and Nature (the journal!) actively support it. DeSmogblog is run from a PR firm “Hoggan and Associates”, and Jim Hoggan is on the Suzuki Foundation board. Professional marketing types attack scientists for any mistake on any topic they may have ever made, for their funding, their religious beliefs, and they scorn their credentials (that’s rich, coming from PR graduates). If they can’t find “funding”, they imply it anyway. Who needs evidence?

Bigger Than Big Oil

Isn't it strange that warmists used to be so quick to blame "big oil" for fueling the "denier" movement:

Behind the scenes, large financial houses are moving in stealthily. In 2008, carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion and is projected to grow to become a $2-$10 trillion dollar market, or “The largest commodity traded world wide”. The largest. That’s bigger than oil, coal, gas, or iron.

JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, BNP Paribas, Barclays, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup, Credit Suisse are just a few financial houses calling for emissions trading schemes. (None of them seem to be calling for a tax?) Those who broker the trades are guaranteed to make money.

... the details.

A Small Tightly Controlled Conspiracy

People will be going to jail by the time this is all over because what we have is a clear attempt to defraud "us" of trillions of dollars in perhaps the biggest scam ever cooked up in the history of the world. It involves not only the theft of trillions of dollars, but a giant step towards global governance based on fraud.

I bet that Canada's top green asshat, one David Suzuki, didn't think for a moment when suggested that people be jailed, it'd be green cockroaches who may end up in the slammer:

The Code Got Warmer but did the Planet

Now we can't even be sure that planet has actually been warming:

Here’s the code. The programmer has written in helpful notes that us non-programmers can understand, like this one: “Apply a very artificial correction for decline”. You get the feeling this climate programmer didn’t like pushing the data around so blatantly. Note the technical comment: “fudge factor”.

; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,- 0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,’Oooops!’

The numbers in a row, in the [ ] brackets, are the numbers the data are to be altered by. If there were no adjustments, they’d all be zero. It’s obvious there is no attempt to treat all the data equally, or use a rigorous method to make adjustments. What could their reasons be?

... more.

The Thermometer that Says it All

Jail for Top Warmists

From Climate Realists:

Throughout history people, for various reasons, have perpetrated scientific hoaxes on the public. Here are a few examples:

Piltdown Man -- In 1912 Charles Dawson "discovered" the Piltdown fossils, a skull and jawbone that appeared to be half-man half-ape, in Sussex, England. They were hailed as the evolutionary "missing link" between apes and humans. 40 years later the fossil was exposed as a fake. In fact, the skull was constructed from a medieval human cranium attached to the jaw of an orangutan.

The Cardiff Giant -- A ten-foot "petrified man" was dug up on a small farm in Cardiff, New York, in October 1869. The "Cardiff Giant" became a huge news story and many Americans traveled to see it. It was revealed as the creation of New Yorker George Hull, who had paid for it to be carved out of stone.

The Spaghetti Tree -- In 1957, the BBC show Panorama broadcast a program about the spaghetti tree in Switzerland. It showed a family harvesting pasta that hung from the branches of the tree. After watching the program, hundreds of people phoned in asking how they could grow their own tree. It was revealed as an April Fools joke.

The Sokal Hoax -- In 1996, American physicist Alan Sokal submitted a paper loaded with nonsensical jargon to the journal Social Text, in which he argued that quantum gravity is a social and linguistic construct. When the journal published it, Sokal revealed that the paper was in fact a spoof.

The Secret of Immortality -- Johann Heinrich Cohausen, an 18th-century physician, wrote a treatise on the prolongation of life, entitled Hermippus redivivus. Among other secrets of longevity it claimed that life could be prolonged by taking an elixir produced by collecting the breath of young women in bottles. Cohausen admitted that it was a satire.

Man-made Global Warming -- In 2007 former Vice President Al Gore addressed Congress telling lawmakers that they need to adopt an immediate freeze on greenhouse gases in order to fight global warming. According to Gore, the star of the film An Inconvenient Truth, the science is settled. Carbon-dioxide emissions from cars, power plants, buildings and other sources are heating the Earth's atmosphere. If left unchecked, global warming could lead to a drastic change in the weather, sea levels and other aspects of the environment. These are the conclusions of a vast majority of scientists who study the issue.

But are they real scientific conclusions, or a hoax perpetrated on an unwary and poorly informed public? Recently someone hacked into the Emails of the world's top global warming proponents. Those Emails and other documents revealed that these grifters have been fabricating climate change data for years and using deception to hide any facts that might contradict their trumped up findings.

There are three primary revelations in the leaked Emails that could shed the light of truth on their deception: First is the realization that leaders in the climate change field have been discussing how they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws.

They have devised every possible excuse for concealing the data on which their findings were based, including the claim that much of the data had simply gotten "lost.” Some of the Emails advised scientists to delete large chunks of data. It is a felony to delete information after a freedom of information request has been issued.

The second revelation found within the leaked documents is that scientists have been manipulating data through their computer programs to point to their predetermined conclusion and manipulating global temperature data to show a large spike in warming.

Third is the way in which these flimflam artists have conspired to silence any member of the scientific community that questions their findings or their methods

In light of these incredible revelations, it becomes evident that the snake oil salesmen have been working overtime, not on behalf true scientific inquiry, but rather on behalf of a different cause; that of total domination of the world economy and the enslavement of humanity.


The former Chancellor Lord Lawson of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, called for an independent inquiry into the skulduggery revealed by the Email leaks: “Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with a whitewash of what has become the greatest scientific scandal of our age.”

Any and all legislation that limits access to fossil fuels and raises the cost of energy to combat a nonexistent global warming agenda must be stopped. Cap and Trade legislation cannot be allowed to move forward in Congress. Any treaty that comes out of the Copenhagen summit must not be ratified. Anyone who intentionally perpetrates the global warming hoax on the American people should be thoroughly discredited and thrown in jail.

You too, Al.

Climategate: The Mother of All of Repositories

Click, for the list.

One Paragraph That Says it All

Perfect:

I’ve spent 4 decades studying global climate change and as a scientist I am appalled at Krugman’s cavalier shrugging off the Hadley email scandal as ‘just the way scientists talk among themselves.’ That’s like saying it’s alright for politicians to be corrupt because that’s the way they are. Legitimate scientists do not doctor data, delete data they don’t like, hide data they don’t want seen, hijack the peer review process, personally attack other scientists whose views differ from theirs, send fraudulent data to the IPCC that is used to perpetuate the greatest hoax in the history science, provide false data to further legislation on climate change that will result in huge profits for corrupt lobbyists and politicians, and tell outright lies about scientific data.

... the context.

CO2 Consumed in New Energy Process

A process whereby CO2 is consumed, not produced, to make energy:

The world has taken a step closer to "clean coal," thanks to new technology that actually uses CO2 to make power generation more efficient.

The research by scientists at Columbia University means that millions of tons of CO2 could be prevented from entering the atmosphere and instead used to turn coal, biomass and municipal waste into cleaner fuel.

This remarkable double hit is based on a well-established process called "gasification" that is already used to clean "dirty" fuels by heating them with steam and turning them into a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide, known as syngas. In turn, that is then burned in power stations or used to create transport fuels.

But until now this process has demanded very large amounts of energy and water, and produced substantial CO2 emissions.

... keep reading.

Turning Intelligent Individuals Into Blathering Idiots

Let's Blow Up the Economy for THIS

Goldstein:

And based on stuff like this, politicians are going to blow up our economy and lower our standard of living to "fix" the climate?

Are they insane?

Yes Mr. Goldstein, each and every one of them, including Mr. Harper.

ht

Warmists Scramble to Make Climategate a "Social Issue"

The spin is now clear ... turn climategate into a social issue, where the fault in warmists is simply that they weren't nice people.

Trouble is warmees, we aren't buying it:

The furor over these documents is not about tone, colloquialisms or whether climatologists are nice people. The real issue is what the messages say about the way the much-ballyhooed scientific consensus on global warming was arrived at, and how a single view of warming and its causes is being enforced. The impression left by the correspondence among Messrs. Mann and Jones and others is that the climate-tracking game has been rigged from the start.

According to this privileged group, only those whose work has been published in select scientific journals, after having gone through the "peer-review" process, can be relied on to critique the science. And sure enough, any challenges from critics outside this clique are dismissed and disparaged.

David Warren Gets his Panties in a Knot

Oh My:

Perhaps it’s time we dusted off the plans for defending Canada from the United States. Perhaps we are already doing so — as I’ve learned from Mark Collins, who has been reviewing “highly secret” Canadian defence documents on his blog, The Torch.

The documents are from 1922. That may seem a long time ago, but as I am not aware of any later strategic thinking, on the threat of an American invasion, we will have to take them as “most current available.” As a writer of United Empire Loyalist ancestry, the invasion of 1812 remains fresh in memory, to say nothing of the Fenian raids, that contributed such urgency to our Confederation. And as a former boy scout, I think, “Be prepared.”

Feeling the Heat

That was easy:

Click

Cockroach Hunting

We sometimes forget, that the Iraq War was one big bug hunt:

Terrorism is not caused by a lack of freedom in the case of modern Jihadism, but simply by the recalcitrance of a large segment of the world's population (among which I proudly and vocally include myself) to refuse to submit to the barbarous idiocy that is Islam. They don't want to butcher us and convert our cities into funeral pyres because they are not free: they want to slaughter us and drape themselves with our viscera because we either deny or reject their childish, ghoulish caricature of a God.

As a hotbed of Islamic radicalism, Iraq was way down the list when the 'War on Terror' started. But as a strategic location for bringing the fight to the barbarians it could scarcely be bested. We in the West have seen some five thousand of our bravest and best die in this fight. What is sometimes overlooked is that we have extirpated perhaps 200,000 of the new Janissaries. I don't mean 'collateral damage' - regrettable if unavoidable civilian casualties. I mean real soldiers of Islam. We're wiping those cockroaches out by the bushel. We can sustain (albeit grievously) our level of losses. The barbarians cannot.

Panic in Ski Country

I'm often amazed how utterly duped and at the same time utterly uninformed ordinary global warming believers can be.

Take for instance, the ski resort owners who believe that simply by reducing CO2 we can increase ski seasons ... almost overnight, when in reality, even if every utterance made by Al Gore and the IPCC and those wonderful scientists at CRU is true, massive reductions in CO2 will take decades to have an effect on "ski season". Most resort owners will be in the Happy Sunset Manner by the time the wizards of warm have managed to budge plantary temperatures.

The world, truly, is populated by dullards:

SALT LAKE CITY — Ski resorts across the U.S. are using this Thanksgiving holiday weekend to jump start their winter seasons, but with every passing year comes a frightening realization: If global temperatures continue to rise, fewer and fewer resorts will be able to open for the traditional beginning of ski season.

Warmer temperatures at night are making it more difficult to make snow and the snow that falls naturally is melting earlier in the spring.

In few places is this a bigger concern than the American West, where skiing is one of the most lucrative segments of the tourism industry and often the only reason many people visit cash-strapped states like Utah during winter.

But even as world leaders descend on Copenhagen next month to figure out a way to reduce carbon emissions blamed in global warming, the industry is still grappling with leaders in some of their own ski-crazy states who refuse to concede that humans have any impact on climate change.

Afghan Baby Control

Get to the mullahs, you get to the people:

The message was simple. Babies are good, but not too many; wait two years before having another to give your wife’s body a chance to recover. Nothing in Islam expressly forbids birth control. But it does emphasize procreation, and mullahs, like leaders of other faiths, consider children to be blessings from God, and are usually the most determined opponents of having fewer of them.

It is an attitude that Afghanistan can no longer afford, in the view of the employees of the nonprofit group that runs the seminars, Marie Stopes International. The high birthrate places a heavy weight on a society where average per capita earnings are about $700 a year. It is also a risk to mothers. Afghanistan is second only to Sierra Leone in maternal mortality rates, which run as high as 8 percent in some areas.

This, however, is the money quote:

In Mazar-i-Sharif, it is one mullah at a time.


Mr. Massoom, the mullah trainer, put it most directly. “This is an Islamic country,” he said. “If the clerics support this, no one will oppose it.”

... keep reading.

Leave it to the Peers

I've lost count of how many green blog crawlers have passed through here arrogantly talking about "peer review" as if it was the Holy Grail of science, the alpha and omega of rational thought.

Did I mention, that each and every one of those greenies were also sitting on a big green post and rotating in the wind while they obediently spewed the "Real Climate" talking points. They are still running like starving rats to the empty food dish, but sooner or later some are bound to have that inevitable epiphany ... like a hockey stick to the back of the head.

I know it'll be hard for them to step off that post ... to suck up their utterly and completely lost pride ... but I'm sure that the more sane among them will be able to do just that ... hopefully:

The trouble with outsourcing your marbles to the peer-reviewed set is that, if you take away one single thing from the leaked documents, it’s that the global warm-mongers have wholly corrupted the “peer-review” process. When it comes to promoting the impending ecopalypse, the Climate Research Unit is the nerve-center of the operation. The “science” of the CRU dominates the “science” behind the UN’s IPCC, which dominates the “science” behind the Congressional cap-and-trade boondoggle, the upcoming Copenhagen shakindownen of the developed world, and the now routine phenomenon of leaders of advanced, prosperous societies talking like gibbering madmen escaped from the padded cell, whether it’s President Obama promising to end the rise of the oceans or the Prince of Wales saying we only have 96 months left to save the planet.

But don’t worry, it’s all “peer-reviewed.”

[...]

And that’s what Andrew Revkin did, week in, week out: He took the words out of Michael Mann’s mouth and served them up to impressionable readers of the New York Times and opportunist politicians around the world champing at the bit to inaugurate a vast global regulatory body to confiscate trillions of dollars of your hard-earned wealth in the cause of “saving the planet” from an imaginary crisis concocted by a few dozen thuggish ideologues. If you fall for this after the revelations of the last week, you’re as big a dupe as Begley or Revkin.

... keep reading the tree-ring circus.

... how's that green post feeling, greenies?

Science Scandal of the Century

Booker:

A week after my colleague James Delingpole, on his Telegraph blog, coined the term "Climategate" to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.

The reason why even the Guardian's George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Philip Jones, the CRU's director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports. Through its link to the Hadley Centre, part of the UK Met Office, which selects most of the IPCC's key scientific contributors, his global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely – not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it.

Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph which 10 years ago turned climate history on its head by showing that, after 1,000 years of decline, global temperatures have recently shot up to their highest level in recorded history.

Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Mediaeval Warm Period when temperatures were higher they are today, the graph became the central icon of the entire man-made global warming movement.

[...]

But the question which inevitably arises from this systematic refusal to release their data is – what is it that these scientists seem so anxious to hide? The second and most shocking revelation of the leaked documents is how they show the scientists trying to manipulate data through their tortuous computer programmes, always to point in only the one desired direction – to lower past temperatures and to "adjust" recent temperatures upwards, in order to convey the impression of an accelerated warming. This comes up so often (not least in the documents relating to computer data in the Harry Read Me file) that it becomes the most disturbing single element of the entire story. This is what Mr McIntyre caught Dr Hansen doing with his GISS temperature record last year (after which Hansen was forced to revise his record), and two further shocking examples have now come to light from Australia and New Zealand.

In each of these countries it has been possible for local scientists to compare the official temperature record with the original data on which it was supposedly based. In each case it is clear that the same trick has been played – to turn an essentially flat temperature chart into a graph which shows temperatures steadily rising. And in each case this manipulation was carried out under the influence of the CRU.

... keep reading.

Hard-Coding a Hockey Stick Carrier

Now ask yourself after going through some of the emails, when raw data was accidently "deleted" ... was it really an accident?

krygny Says:

November 25th, 2009 at 8:02 am

Wait just a second. Explain this to me like I’m 12. They didn’t even bother to fudge the data? They hard-coded a hockey stick carrier right into the program?!!

ESR says: Yes. Yes, that’s exactly what they did.

--

...of course, they now claim that crucial primary datasets were “accidentally” deleted.

After reading some of the emails about evading FOIA2000 requests…accidentally, my ass.

Yep ... It's All Just About Money

Bend over everyone ... there's a big green dildo just for you:

Well, here’s yet another thing the unconfirmable Obama “Climate Czarina” Carol Browner got around disclosing thanks to, and one more reason for being stuffed into, a position of influence through the backdoor of a phony job not subject to Senate confirmation, even while lording over Senate-confirmed constitutional officers:

She was on the board of one of the leading carbon offset trading companies, APX.

At least I sleep peacefully at night knowing that I'm not taking it up the ass without a fight ... unlike the green herd who is bending over willingly. After all, the opposite of sceptical is gullible ... real science is always sceptical ... while junk science is not ... how pathetic

Are They all Crazy?

It never was about the science was it ... it never was about saving the planet, was it ... it was always about power, control, and above all else, money:

I have just been leaked a copy of the top-secret and utterly-confidential Frontier Economic Modeling that Malcolm Turnbull withheld from the Partyroom – but shared with Labor.

Please find it here:

... the details.

The Top Ten Warmisms

1. The term “climate change” itself.

2. “Climate change denier”.

3. The appeal to peer-reviewed and published research.

4. Appeal to authority.

5. Unwillingness to debate.

6. A lack of common sense.

7. Use of climate models as truth.

8. Claims that climate models have been tested.

9. The claim that the IPCC is unbiased.

10. The claim that reducing CO2 emissions is the right thing to do anyway.

... the details.

How to Bitch-Slap a Warmist

Cabal of Weasels: The Video

The Discussion

Kiwi Climate Fraud?

This just keeps getting better and better:

The New Zealand Government’s chief climate advisory unit NIWA is under fire for allegedly massaging raw climate data to show a global warming trend that wasn’t there.

The scandal breaks as fears grow worldwide that corruption of climate science is not confined to just Britain’s CRU climate research centre.

In New Zealand’s case, the figures published on NIWA’s [the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric research] website suggest a strong warming trend in New Zealand over the past century:

... read the whole thing.

The Sharks Circle

A feeding frenzy to enjoy:

Earlier this morning, I had an opportunity to talk with Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), about a wide range of issues. We discussed the East Anglia CRU e-mails, but then moved to Gitmo, the terrorist trials in federal court, the health-care debate, and much more. Sen. Inhofe agreed with me that moving the Kerry-Boxer cap-and-trade bill to the spring meant that it was dead, and he says that Democrats have been listening to the groundswell of public opposition and have begun worrying about their jobs. Be sure to watch it all:

Video

SDA Summary

From SDA:

Editor's note: for as much attention as the emails have received - and they are damning - it's the computer code that is revealing the real story behind the climate models. It includes corrupted and incomplete data, data manufacture and manipulation. programming failure, and program bias. The details are too lengthy and complex to include in this round-up post, but no commentary on this scandal is complete without a thorough examination of what is being uncovered in the CRU computer code files and documentation.

A Great Summary of the Fraud

American Thinker:

As the evidence of climate fraud at the University of East Anglia’s prestigious Climactic Research Unit (CRU) continues to mount, those who’ve been caught green-handed continue to parry their due opprobrium and comeuppance, thanks primarily to a dead-silent mainstream media. But should the hubris and duplicity evident in the emails of those whose millennial temperature charts literally fuel the warming alarmism movement somehow fail to convince the world of the scam that’s been perpetrated upon it, certainly these revelations of the fraud cooked into the computer programs that create such charts will.

First -- Let’s briefly review a few pertinent details.

[...]

But here’s what’s undeniable: If a divergence exists between measured temperatures and those derived from dendrochronological data after (circa) 1960 then discarding only the post-1960 figures is disingenuous to say the least. The very existence of a divergence betrays a potential serious flaw in the process by which temperatures are reconstructed from tree-ring density. If it’s bogus beyond a set threshold, then any honest men of science would instinctively question its integrity prior to that boundary. And only the lowliest would apply a hack in order to produce a desired result.

And to do so without declaring as such in a footnote on every chart in every report in every study in every book in every classroom on every website that such a corrupt process is relied upon is not just a crime against science, it’s a crime against mankind.

Indeed, miners of the CRU folder have unearthed dozens of email threads and supporting documents revealing much to loathe about this cadre of hucksters and their vile intentions. This veritable goldmine has given us tales ranging from evidence destruction to spitting on the Freedom of Information Act on both sides of the Atlantic. But the now irrefutable evidence that alarmists have indeed been cooking the data for at least a decade may just be the most important strike in human history.

Our Soldier is Home

It's been a long 9 months, but our soldier (Junker) is home ... click.

When a Thousand Cuts Turn Into a Storm

A few journalists, and even politicians are now calling the IPCC claims about AGW what they have always been ... fraud:

This material has revealed what has been described as ‘Nixonian-style paranoid plotting’ by these scientists to defraud the public. Actually, I think it reveals something even worse.

What appears to be the case is that these scientists did not set out to mislead the world so much as try to force data which did not correspond to their ideology of anthropogenic global warming to support that ideology. For me, one of the most telling emails was this one from Phil Jones on the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

Bottom line - their is no way the MWP (whenever it was) was as warm globally as the last 20 years. There is also no way a whole decade in the LIA period was more than 1 deg C on a global basis cooler than the 1961-90 mean. This is all gut feeling, no science, but years of experience of dealing with global scales and varaibility. (My emphasis)

The AGW hoax is not going to end with a whimper, but with a crushing implosion.

Calling David Suzuki

... are you still for jailing climate fraudsters?

This is what they did — these climate “scientists” on whose unsupported word the world’s classe politique proposes to set up an unelected global government this December in Copenhagen, with vast and unprecedented powers to control all formerly free markets, to tax wealthy nations and all of their financial transactions, to regulate the economic and environmental affairs of all nations, and to confiscate and extinguish all patent and intellectual property rights.

The tiny, close-knit clique of climate scientists who invented and now drive the “global warming” fraud — for fraud is what we now know it to be — tampered with temperature data so assiduously that, on the recent admission of one of them, land temperatures since 1980 have risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures. 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.

Worse, these arrogant fraudsters — for fraudsters are what we now know them to be — have refused, for years and years and years, to reveal their data and their computer program listings. Now we know why: As a revealing 15,000-line document from the computer division at the Climate Research Unit shows, the programs and data are a hopeless, tangled mess. In effect, the global temperature trends have simply been made up. Unfortunately, the British researchers have been acting closely in league with their U.S. counterparts who compile the other terrestrial temperature dataset — the GISS/NCDC dataset. That dataset too contains numerous biases intended artificially to inflate the natural warming of the 20th century.

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.

... keep reading.

Climate Hack Roundup

Your one-stop summary:

Click & Click & Click

Two Canadian Heroes in WSJ

WSJ:

The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the U.K., I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone. . . . We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind."

So apparently wrote Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) and one of the world's leading climate scientists, in a 2005 email to "Mike." Judging by the email thread, this refers to Michael Mann, director of the Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Center. We found this nugget among the more than 3,000 emails and documents released last week after CRU's servers were hacked and messages among some of the world's most influential climatologists were published on the Internet.

The "two MMs" are almost certainly Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, two Canadians who have devoted years to seeking the raw data and codes used in climate graphs and models, then fact-checking the published conclusions—a painstaking task that strikes us as a public and scientific service. Mr. Jones did not return requests for comment and the university said it could not confirm that all the emails were authentic, though it acknowledged its servers were hacked.

A Good Time to Be Alive

As if the CRU implosion wasn't a moment to behold, now we've got the destruction of Acorn to look forward to ... via garbage in a dumpster:

Following the release by Breitbart's Big Government website of a video showing employees at ACORN's San Diego County office offering to assist in the transportation and exploitation of underage prostitutes from abroad, the Attorney General of California announced an investigation into ACORN's operations. Nights before the visit, ACORN dumped thousands of documents in a dumpster. Breitbart obtained them, says they are shocking evidence of ACORN's illegality and promises to release them bit by bit over time:

Cheers!

Dr. Ball

... they had control of the process ...



... there is no pleasure in I told you so ...

AGW Beck

The snowball grows:

AGW Data Not Worth a Tinker's Damn

You have really got to read this ... if your jaw doesn't hit the floor, your brain must be made of guano.

While you read, recall the arrogance of not only the top AGW pricks like Suzuki and Gore, but the arrogant fucking blog crawlers who mock the sceptics and troll sites to make supercilious comments hatched at Real Climate. Recall the utter confidence with which they pushed what is now bunk science.

A sample ... the following is warmist communication concerning some of the most critical data in the entire AGW debate:

My god people, have you just been skipping over everything I've posted from that HARRY_READ_ME.txt file!?!?

The data itself is a HUGE unknown, even to the researchers themselves as they attempt to decode what's gone before.

Sure, the emails indicate the possibility (and certainty in some cases) of fraud. That one file PROVES HOW UNRELIABLE THE DATA ITSELF IS!!

They "lost" the original data?? I believe it now. v2.10 was run with a ****ton of code that was undocumented, made no sense and was FULL of bugs. Is v3.0 better when half the data from 1980 on is SYNTHETIC?!? Or when it used the output from the buggy 2.10 version (which is all they had) to produce NEW data?!?!

This is a ****ing joke. The emails are FAR from the most damning thing in this. I can't wait for somebody familiar with the code to start going over it and seeing how many "So we'll just gloss over that entirely ;0)" instances exist.

... read the entire blow by blow account.

ht

By the way, thanks to whoever got this out ... you are a real modern day hero.

Climate Hubris

Truly, it's hard to find a more supercilious bunch:

The hundreds of e-mails being made public after someone hacked into Phil Jones’ Climatic Research Unit (CRU) computer system offer a revealing peek inside the IPCC machine. It will take some time before we know whether any illegal activity has been uncovered (e.g. hiding or destruction of data to avoid Freedom of Information Act inquiries).

Some commentators even think this is the beginning of the end for the IPCC. I doubt it.

The scientists at the center of this row are defending themselves. Phil Jones has claimed that some of the more alarming statements in his e-mails have been taken out of context. The semi-official response from RealClimate.org, a website whose roots can be traced to George Soros (which I’m sure is irrelevant), claims the whole episode is much ado about nothing.

At a minimum, some of these e-mails reveal an undercurrent of elitism that many of us have always claimed existed in the IPCC. These scientists look upon us skeptics with scorn. It is well known that the IPCC machine is made up of bureaucrats and scientists who think they know how the world should be run. The language contained in a draft of the latest climate treaty (meant to replace the Kyoto treaty) involves global governance and the most authoritarian means by which people’s energy use will be restricted and monitored by the government.

Even if this language does not survive in the treaty’s final form, it illustrates the kind of people we are dealing with. The IPCC folks jet around the world to all kinds of exotic locations for their UN-organized meetings where they eat the finest food. Their gigantic carbon footprints stomp around the planet as they deride poor Brazilian farmers who convert jungle into farmland simply to survive.

The Ugly Little Secret in Point Form

Bishop Hill gives us a nice outline of the ugly:

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)

... keep reading WUWT.

The Good'Ol Days of Climate Fascism

From Climate Depot comes a trip down memory lane:

NASA's James Hansen has called for trials of climate skeptics in 2008 for "high crimes against humanity.” Environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lashed out at skeptics of 2007 declaring “This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors”

In 2009, RFK, Jr. also called coal companies "criminal enterprises" and declared CEO's 'should be in jail... for all of eternity."

In June 2009, former Clinton Administration official Joe Romm defended a comment on his Climate Progress website warning skeptics would be strangled in their beds. "An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds," stated the remarks, which Romm defended by calling them "not a threat, but a prediction."

In 2006, the eco-magazine Grist called for Nuremberg-Style trials for skeptics.

In 2008, Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki called for government leaders skeptical of global warming to be thrown “into jail.” In 2007, The Weather Channel's climate expert called for withholding certification of skeptical meteorologists.

A 2008 report found that 'climate blasphemy' is replacing traditional religious blasphemy.

In addition, a July 2007 Senate report detailed how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation.

In 2007, then EPA Chief Vowed to Probe E-mail Threatening to 'Destroy' Career of Climate Skeptic and dissenters of warming fears have been called 'Climate Criminals' who are committing 'Terracide' (killing of Planet Earth)
(July 25, 2007)

In addition, in May 2009, Climate Depot Was Banned in Louisiana! See: State official sought to 'shut down' climate skeptic's testimony at hearing.

Below are many more examples of the threats, name calling and intimidation skeptics have faced in recent times.

November 12, 2007: UN official warns ignoring warming would be 'criminally irresponsible' Excerpt: The U.N.'s top climate official warned policymakers and scientists trying to hammer out a landmark report on climate change that ignoring the urgency of global warming would be "criminally irresponsible." Yvo de Boer's comments came at the opening of a weeklong conference that will complete a concise guide on the state of global warming and what can be done to stop the Earth from overheating.

September 29. 2007: VA State Climatologist skeptical of global warming loses job after clash with Governor: 'I was told that I could not speak in public' Excerpt: Michaels has argued that the climate is becoming warmer but that the consequences will not be as dire as others have predicted. Gov. Kaine had warned. Michaels not to use his official title in discussing his views. "I resigned as Virginia state climatologist because I was told that I could not speak in public on my area of expertise, global warming, as state climatologist," Michaels said in a statement this week provided by the libertarian Cato Institute, where he has been a fellow since 1992. "It was impossible to maintain academic freedom with this speech restriction." (LINK)

Skeptical State Climatologist in Oregon has title threatened by Governor (February 8, 2007) Excerpt: “[State Climatologist George Taylor] does not believe human activities are the main cause of global climate change...So the [Oregon] governor wants to take that title from Taylor and make it a position that he would appoint. In an exclusive interview with KGW-TV, Governor Ted Kulongoski confirmed he wants to take that title from Taylor.

Skeptical State Climatologist in Delaware silenced by Governor (May 2, 2007) Excerpt: Legates is a state climatologist in Delaware, and he teaches at the university. He`s not part of the mythical climate consensus. In fact, Legates believes that we oversimplify climate by just blaming greenhouse gases. One day he received a letter from the governor, saying his views do not concur with those of the administration, so if he wants to speak out, it must be as an individual, not as a state climatologist. So essentially, you can have the title of state climatologist unless he`s talking about his views on climate?

October 28, 2008: License to dissent: 'Internet should be nationalized as a public utility' to combat global warming skepticism - Australian Herald Sun - Excerpt: British journalism lecturer and warming alarmist Alex Lockwood says my blog is a menace to the planet. Skeptical bloggers like me need bringing into line, and Lockwood tells a journalism seminar of some options: There is clearly a need for research into the ways in which climate skepticism online is free to contest scientific fact. But there is enough here already to put forward some of the ideas in circulation. One of the founders of the Internet Vint Cerf, and lead for Google's Internet for Everyone project, made a recent suggestion that the Internet should be nationalized as a public utility. As tech policy blogger Jim Harper argues, “giving power over the Internet to well-heeled interests and self-interested politicians” is, and I quote, “a bad idea.” Or in the UK every new online publication could be required to register with the recently announced Internet watchdog...

November 5, 2008: UK Scientist: 'BBC SHUNNED ME FOR DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE' – UK Daily Express

Excerpt: FOR YEARS David Bellamy was one of the best known faces on TV. A respected botanist and the author of 35 books, he had presented around 400 programmes over the years and was appreciated by audiences for his boundless enthusiasm. Yet for more than 10 years he has been out of the limelight, shunned by bosses at the BBC where he made his name, as well as fellow scientists and environmentalists. His crime? Bellamy says he doesn't believe in man-made global warming. Here he reveals why – and the price he has paid for not toeing the orthodox line on climate change.

U.N. official says it's 'completely immoral' to doubt global warming fears (May 10, 2007)

Excerpt: UN special climate envoy Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland declared “it's completely immoral, even, to question” the UN's scientific “consensus."

Former US Vice President Al Gore compared global warming skeptics to people who 'believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona'

(June 20, 2006) Gore Refuses to Hear Skeptical Global Warming Views (Video)
UK environment secretary David Miliband said 'those who deny [climate change] are the flat-Earthers of the twenty-first century'

(October 6, 2006)Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics

(January 17, 2007) Excerpt: The Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming. This latest call to silence skeptics follows a year (2006) in which skeptics were compared to "Holocaust Deniers" and Nuremberg-style war crimes trials were advocated by several climate alarmists.
Barone: Warmists have 'a desire to kill heretics' -- Calls for capital punishment for 'global warming deniers' - DC Examiner - June 9, 2009

Strangle Skeptics in Bed! 'An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds' - June 5, 2009

People Should Go to Jail

From Canadian Free Press:

Someone hacked in to the files of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) based at the University of East Anglia. A very large file (61 mb) was downloaded and posted to the web. Phil Jones Director of the CRU has acknowledged the files are theirs. They contain papers, documents letters and emails. The latter are the most damaging and contain blunt information about the degree of manipulation of climate science in general and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in particular.

Climate science hijacked and corrupted by this small group of scientists
Dominant names involved are ones I have followed throughout my career including, Phil Jones, Benjamin Santer, Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, Jonathan Overpeck, Ken Briffa and Tom Wigley. I have watched climate science hijacked and corrupted by this small group of scientists. This small, elite, community was named by Professor Wegman in his report to the National Academy of Science (NAS).

I had the pleasure of meeting the founder of CRU Professor Hubert Lamb, considered the Father of Modern Climatology, on a couple of occasions. He also peer reviewed one of my early publications. I know he would be mortified with what was disclosed in the last couple of days.

Jones claims the files were obtained illegally as if that absolves the content. It doesn’t and it is enough to destroy all their careers. Jones gave a foretaste of his behavior in 2005. Warwick Hughes asked for the data and method he used for his claim of a 0.6°C temperature rise since the end of the nineteenth century. Jones responded, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” He has stonewalled ever since. The main reason was because it was used as a key argument in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Reports to convince the world humans caused rapid warming in the 20th century. The emails obtained are a frightening record of arrogance, and deception far beyond his 2005 effort.

Another glimpse into what the files and emails reveal was the report by Professor Deming. He wrote, “ With publication of an article in Science (in 1995) I gained sufficient credibility in the community of scientists working on climate change. They thought I was one of them someone who would pervert science in the service of social and political causes. So one of them let his guard down. A major person working in the area of climate change and global warming sent me an astonishing email that said. “We must get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” The person in question was Jonathan Overpeck and his even more revealing emails are part of those exposed by the hacker. It is now very clear that Deming’s charge was precise. They have perverted science in the service of social and political causes.

Professor Wegman showed how this “community of scientists” published together and peer reviewed each other’s work. I was always suspicious about why peer review was such a big deal. Now all my suspicions are confirmed. The emails reveal how they controlled the process, including manipulating some of the major journals like Science and Nature. We know the editor of the Journal of Climate, Andrew Weaver, was one of the “community”. They organized lists of reviewers when required making sure they gave the editor only favorable names. They threatened to isolate and marginalize one editor who they believed was recalcitrant.

Total Control
These people controlled the global weather data used by the IPCC through the joint Hadley and CRU and produced the HadCRUT data. They controlled the IPCC, especially crucial chapters and especially preparation of the Summary for PolicyMakers (SPM). Stephen Schneider was a prime mover there from the earliest reports to the most influential in 2001. They also had a left wing conduit to the New York Times. The emails between Andy Revkin and the community are very revealing and must place his journalistic integrity in serious jeopardy. Of course the IPCC Reports and especially the SPM Reports are the basis for Kyoto and the Copenhagen Accord, but now we know they are based on completely falsified and manipulated data and science. It is no longer a suspicion. Surely this is the death knell for the CRU, the IPCC, Kyoto and Copenhagen and the Carbon Credits shell game.

CO2 never was a problem and all the machinations and deceptions exposed by these files prove that it was the greatest deception in history, but nobody is laughing. It is a very sad day for science and especially my chosen area of climate science. As I expected now it is all exposed I find there is no pleasure in “I told you so.”

... source. (and the comments)

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".
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)

I used to say that AGW was dying the death of a thousand cuts ... it appears that somebody just stuck a pinapple grenade up its ass.

And speaking of somebody needing a kick in the ass, remember this little Jedi Knight prick:

Previous

These are Politicians; Not Scientists

Power Line has a great series of emails on display. While you read them, ask yourself ... would you trust any of the individuals involved with even your dirty underwear:

As far as I can tell from the email archive, Briffa never did respond to the plant scientist. Jones's email warning Briffa to be "very wary about responding to this person now having seen what McIntyre has put up" was written just three weeks ago. It, along with the rest of the email archive, makes an utter mockery of the alarmists' claim that the science of global warming is settled in their favor.

On the contrary, the conclusion an observer is likely to draw from the CRU archive is that the climate alarmists are making up the science as they go along and are fitting facts to reach a predetermined conclusion rather than objectively seeking after truth. What they are doing is politics, not science. When I was in law school, this story was told about accountants: A CEO is going to hire a new accountant and summons a series of candidates. He asks each applicant, "What is two plus two?" The first two candidates answer, "Four." They don't get the job. The third responds, "What do you want it to be?" He gets hired. The climate alarmists' attitude toward data appears to me much the same as that fictional accountant's attitude toward arithmetic.

... read the whole thing.

America: The New Superbower

Steyn:

My radio pal Hugh Hewitt said to me on the air the other day that Barack Obama “doesn’t know how to be president.” It was a low but effective crack and I didn’t pay it much heed. But, after musing on it over the last week or so, it seems to me frighteningly literally true. I don’t just mean social lapses like his latest cringe-making bow, this time to Their Imperial Majesties, the Emperor and Empress of Japan -- though that in itself is deeply weird: After the world superbower’s previous nose-to-toe prostration before the Saudi King, one assumed there’d be someone in the White House to point out tactfully that the citizen-executives of the American republic don’t bow to foreign monarchs. Along with his choreographic gaucherie goes his peculiar belief that all of human history is just a bit of colorful backstory in the Barack Obama biopic -- or as he put it in his video address on the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall:

“Few would have foreseen on that day that a united Germany would be led by a woman from Brandenburg or that their American ally would be led by a man of African descent.”

Tear down that wall . . . so they can get a better look at me!!! Is there no one in the White House grown-up enough to say, “Er, Mr. President, that’s really the kind of line you get someone else to say about you”? And maybe somebody could have pointed out that Nov. 9, 1989, isn’t about him but about millions of nobodies whose names are unknown, who lead dreary lives doing unglamorous jobs and going home to drab accommodations, but who at a critical moment in history decided they were no longer going to live in a prison state. They’re no big deal; they’re never going to land a photoshoot for Vanity Fair. But it’s their day, not yours. It’s not the narcissism, so much as the crassly parochial nature of it.

The 79 Billion Dollar Scam

From JoNova:

It’s unthinkable. Big Government has spent $79 billion on the climate industry, 3000 times more than Big Oil. Leading climate scientists won’t debate in public and won’t provide their data. What do they hide? When faced with freedom-of-information requests they say they’ve “lost” the original global temperature records. Thousands of scientists are rising in protest against the scare campaign. Meanwhile $126 billion turned over in carbon markets in 2008 and bankers get set to make billions.

The PDF

From the Comments @ WUWT

Of all the mails I went through this one starts to have the smell of a cover up.

Again, we don’t know if these mails are 100% accurate. A FOI request
will clear that up. In this case I would urge everyone to make a request for this mail under FOI.

The context ( I believe, CA is down so I can’t check) is the jesus paper. The jesus paper ( see bishop hill) was needed for chapter 6 of AR4. If you look at the mails in the July time frame you will see the authors of the chapter ( 6)
asking the authors of the paper if it will get published in time to be used
in the chapter. Its very clear they all knew about the deadline. Well, some very irregular things went on to insure that that paper could be referenced.

McIntyre got on the case after the publication of Ar4 and started to inquire about the paper and how it got referenced.

We are NOT talking about a science issue here. We are talking about scientists bending and breaking the rules of the IPCC to get a certain paper into the document. So, WRT scientific issues this is totally minor. its not about science. What it is about is the lengths these INDIVIDUALS will go to to persue their agenda. The document ( AR4) had a cutoff date. papers referenced must be published before a certain date. Say August 1, 2006.

Question: what do you do if there is a vital paper that won’t be published
until Sept 1 2006? what do you do?

1. write the chapter without the paper. follow the rules.
2. Mess about with the rules to get that paper in because dammit
this is important. screw the rules.

Now, I can surely sympathize with somebody “hacking” the rules of the IPCC
to be able to reference this paper. I understand their passion. I understand
that “it doesnt matter” in the end. its only one paper. its only one chapter.
So, it’s really just all about the character of the individuals.

Then comes the coverup. When McIntyre got on the trail of this, the person
who wrote this mail ( if its real) tell everybody to delete their mails.

One thing is clear throughout these 1003 mails. There is one individual
who consistently works to thwart the release of data and code. One individual who suggests that people delete files. One individual who says he would delete files before turning them over. One individual who convinced his FOI department to reject the requests.

One individual who said something to the effect ” why should I give you this data when all you want to do is find something wrong”

One individual who was happy one of his critics died.

There is also trouble in here for FOI officers.

WUWT

FOX: Is Climate Change Bunk?

Hackers broke into the servers at a prominent British climate research center and leaked years worth of e-mail messages onto the Web, including one with a mysterious reference to a plan to "hide the decline" in data about temperatures.

The Internet is abuzz about the leaked data from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (commonly called Hadley CRU), which has acknowledged the leak of 61MB of confidential data.

Climate change skeptics describe the leaked data as a "smoking gun," evidence of collusion among climatologists and manipulation of data to support the widely held view that climate change is caused by the actions of mankind. The files were reportedly released on a Russian file-serve by an anonymous poster calling himself "FOIA."

And, the UK Telegraph:

If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)

When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:

Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

So Much for "Peer Review"

One of the things most often talked about by greenies is that sceptics don't have "peer-reviewed" work to counter Warmist "peer reviewed" work. I've always argued that "peer review" is easily manipulated and simply a basic clearly process; that the real checking of published works comes after publicaton.

It always struck me as strange that all of a sudden the warmist community was making so much of "peer review".

Now we know why; it was part of the scam all along and designed to give credence to warmist science while making the sceptic side seem like quackery. "Peer-review" became part of the propoganda, not part of the science.

Get a load of the following exchange as found in the recently leaked documents:

“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”

Source

If Hacking is a Science

... then science wins ... always:

Breaking News Story: CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released[...]

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@xxxxx.xxx, mhughes@xxxx.xxx
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxx.xx.xx,t.osborn@xxxx.xxx



Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow.
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps
to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from
1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual
land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land
N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999
for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with
data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) xxxxx
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) xxxx
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@xxxx.xxx
NR4 7TJ
UK

... or is our "hacker", simply a whistle-blower.

WUWT
SDA

update: And from the "holy shit" file:

From 1123163394.txt]

[xxxxxxx] has an invited talk in my session. I invited him, because he was working w/ Stott et al, and so I assume he was legit, and not associated with the contrarians. But if he’s associated w/ the Dutch group, he may actually be a problem. Do you have additional information about him and what he has been up to?

[and from the same - though not related (now cleaning coffee from my k/b)]


There is an issue coming up in IPCC. Every curve needs error bars, and having them is all that matters. It seems irrelevant whether they are right or how they are used.

Update 2: Even Big Oil figures nicely

“2. Shell’s interest is not in basic science. Any work they support must have a clear and immediate relevance to ‘real-world’ activities. They are particularly interested in emissions trading and CDM.”

Update 3: The wonderful objectivity of scientists ... these guys are full-bore warmist political hacks ... not scientists. Any read of these mails makes it clear that above all else the warmist scientists involved in this leak have the unbiased capabilities of Daily Kos:

“I hope you’re not right about the lack of warming lasting
till about 2020. I’d rather hoped to see the earlier Met Office
press release with Doug’s paper that said something like -
half the years to 2014 would exceed the warmest year currently on record, 1998! Still a way to go before 2014.

I seem to be getting an email a week from skeptics saying
where’s the warming gone. I know the warming is on the decadal
scale, but it would be nice to wear their smug grins away.”

Oh sweet:

From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: IPCC & FOI
Date: Thu May 29 11:04:11 2008

Mike,

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t
have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!
Cheers
Phil

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone
School of Environmental Sciences Fax
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email
NR4 7TJ
UK

Even Europe is Slowly Waking Up

... to the fact that not all things climate are as they seem:

Climatologists use their computer models to draw temperature curves that continue well into the future. They predict that the average global temperature will increase by about three degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century, unless humanity manages to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, no one really knows what exactly the world climate will look like in the not-so-distant future, that is, in 2015, 2030 or 2050.

This is because it is not just human influence but natural factors that affect the Earth's climate. For instance, currents in the world's oceans are subject to certain cycles, as is solar activity. Major volcanic eruptions can also curb rising temperatures in the medium term. The eruption of Mount Pinatubo in June 1991, for example, caused world temperatures to drop by an average of 0.5 degrees Celsius, thereby prolonging a cooler climate phase that had begun in the late 1980s.

But the Mount Pinatubo eruption happened too long ago to be related to the current slowdown in global warming. So what is behind this more recent phenomenon?

4.8 Trillion in Interest

Now here's an interest payment to be proud of:

Here's a new way to think about the U.S. government's epic borrowing: More than half of the $9 trillion in debt that Uncle Sam is expected to build up over the next decade will be interest.

More than half. In fact, $4.8 trillion.

If that's hard to grasp, here's another way to look at why that's a problem.

In 2015 alone, the estimated interest due - $533 billion - is equal to a third of the federal income taxes expected to be paid that year, said Charles Konigsberg, chief budget counsel of the Concord Coalition, a deficit watchdog group.

On the bright side - such as it is - the record levels of debt issued lately have paid for stimulus and other rescue programs that prevented the economy from falling off a cliff. And the money was borrowed at very low rates.

... just think what the interest payment will be when inflation kicks in and interest charges rise.

Fort Hood Eye Witness

Say It

Previous

Nullius in Verba

There was a time once, not that long ago, when to be a skeptic was to be a scientist:

I’ve done it, I’ve finally solved the dilemma of how to refer to scientists who actively promote a crisis due to carbon, but can’t provide the evidence that carbon causes major warming. Not Team-AGW, not alarmist, A far better one has come to me.

Once upon a time, a scientist and a skeptic used to be one and the same thing. Actually, it still is. The motto of The Royal Society — the longest lived scientific association in the world, is Nullius in Verba — “On no one’s word” (take no one’s word for it). The Climate Industry marketing has tried to turn “skeptic” into a dirty word. So in perfect symmetry, if we are Skeptical Scientists, they are obviously:

... keep reading.

WSJ on one of the dreaded Apostates ... click.

Canada's Own Fascist

They can't lay this Canadian POS in the ground soon enough ... what's with the aging billionaire progressives so intent on their transnational wet dream that they are willing to so utterly ignore reality and history's many lessons.

One of Strong's idols by the way ... is Mao ... arguably the greatest mass murderer in the history of our species:

More so than most people who assert that The End Is Near, however, Mr. Strong gives humanity a provisional way out. Reform democracy, he says, by - more or less - getting rid of it. Although he doesn't say this as candidly as he could have, his exact words leave little doubt: "Our concepts of ballot-box democracy may need to be modified to produce strong governments capable of making difficult decisions." This is not a new argument. In one historic usage, it was deployed to celebrate fascism - because ballot-box democracy couldn't make trains run on time.

ht

The Thinking Man's Thinking Man

image: Newsweek moves off the scales and beyond parody.

... 2 klicks down?

... several million degrees?

... ok Al

... blink

... clearly inventing the internet took it out of him ... poor man.

ht & ht

Pushing Back

Perfect ...

Although we often think of those outside our borders as the enemy, the insurgents in Afghanistan who plant IED’s in the hopes of killing our soldiers, or the foreign jihadis who fight a religious war against the west, some of the most effective enemies exist right here within our borders. These people refer to themselves as anti-war activists, or anti-racists, or social justice activists; but really their goals are all very similar. They are people like Naomi Klein, socialist anarchists who use any means necessary to undermine our success as a nation, and the prominence of western civilization’s accomplishments.

Harsha Walia, one of these “feminist, anti racist, migrant justice, Palestine solidarity, Indigenous self-determination, anti capitalist, anti poverty” activists, penned a piece about Remembrance Day in the Vancouver Sun. Only it wasn’t about Remembrance Day, which she writes is symbolic of those who are “most eager to create a steady flow of the dead to remember”, but about all of the other days of the year that should be memorialized for those who have suffered and died due to human and corporate greed, our military wars and occupations, our man-made poverty and, let us not forget, that ubiquitous environmental devastation.

... keep reading.

What a German Hissy-Fit Looks Like

... this little Europhile tantrum is about climate change ... imagine the state of dear Christian's underwear were America to bomb his cities into rubble once again.

Even The Big O gets plastered in this one:

If the rest of the world were to follow the US example in their approach to fossil fuels, the oceans would not only heat up, but would probably soon begin to boil. American CO2 emissions per capita are about twice as high as those in comparable industrialized nations and many times greater than those of the developing world. The climate change bill that is currently making its way through Congress does not go nearly far enough -- and that is Obama's fault. The bill proposed reducing CO2 emissions by a ridiculous 4 percent relative to 1990 levels, by 2020. Climate researchers believe that reductions of 40 percent or more are required.

The bill has since been watered down even more -- by exactly the kind of lobbying interests which the new US president had promised to overcome. Obama has neglected to communicate the importance of climate change to his fellow citizens by speaking about it in a major speech or in his much-loved "town hall" meetings. And he has left it to the Europeans to take the lead.

For Christian's whole rant ... click.

How to Spin

There are many courageous Afghans ... but not this one:

In fact, at the presentation she was asked what would prevent the Taliban from taking over after a NATO/UN withdrawal. Instead of answering the question, she proceeded into a long speech about how terrible the situation is right now. So I put up my hand and demanded she answer the question. This led to a long, angry exchange between the two of us that lasted about 10 minutes, at which point I was told to shut up by the "antiwar" organizers of the event.

Considering that Malalai Joya, rabble.ca, stopwar.ca, and Simon & Schuster have a book to sell, we're going to be hearing a lot from the "bravest woman in Afghanistan" over the next little while ...

... keep reading.

Juno

... more.