The Great Deception -> Climategate: Leaked Emails Show It's A Lie

Climategate: Leaked Emails Show It's A Lie, AL & Globalists are BUSTED!!!!!!!!

Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 22 2009, 07:22 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Climatic Research Unit Hacked E Mails & Data (Download sites for zip file)
http://www.infowars.com/climatic-research-...d-e-mails-data/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone posted a list of all of the emails that is searchable here:
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx3q2arm_ek...player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4f98fBCfk...player_embedded

Alex Jones on Climategate: Hoax of all time a global Ponzi scheme
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2153PnMzSw...player_embedded

Other sources:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html

ClimateGate - Climate center's server hacked revealing documents and emails
http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Climate-Ch...ents-and-emails

QUOTE

The electronic break in itself has been verified by the director of the research unit, Professor Phil Jones. He told Britain�s Investigate magazine's TGIF Edition "It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails."

http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefi...ta-is-real.html

CLIMATE BOMBSHELL: Hacker leaks thousands of emails showing conspiracy to "hide" the real data on manmade climate change
http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/2009..._cru_hacked.htm

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 23 2009, 11:58 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	BUSTED! http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=145117.0 What is this really about? http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=4874 A GLOBAL CARBON TAX TO BE PAID DIRECTLY TO THE BANKERS WHO CREATED THE WHOLE FINANCIAL COLLAPSE! YOU SEE! THEY WANT WORLD GOVERNMENT WHERE THEY WILL CONTINUE TO RULE AND CONTROL THE POPULATION! THE GIG IS UP AL GORE & IPCC & UN & GLOBALIST ELITES & ALL THEIR MINIONS WHO HAVE SOLD OUT THEIR COUNTRIES!

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 23 2009, 11:59 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Read "Iron Mountain - A Blueprint for Tyranny" and watch the Video. They planned, many years ago, to use the environment as their scam to bring in the NEW WORLD ORDER, based on a false threat to all humanity: http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...hp?showtopic=14 This has been planned for over 50+ years. So don't tell me these aren't ALL LIES! THEY ARE! It's in their playbook (one of many they have)! This is pure manipulation and how they find adults who will sell their souls for these fake causes is beyond me. Those people are cowards and fools who have no integrity!

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 23 2009, 04:03 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Climate Change Bombshell: Dr. Tim Ball on the hacked CRU emails
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ydo2Mwnwpac

Intellectual Honesty and the Climate Change Debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8CVh2deXTI...player_embedded

QUOTE

Unsurprisingly, there has so far been deafening silence on this issue in the controlled corporate media, but in light of the upcoming Copenhagen Treaty talks, it is imperative that we have a true and open debate about climate change before we make potentially world-changing decisions based on this science.

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 23 2009, 04:04 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	IPCC Panel was a fake; just more minions being paid very well! http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=4075 Climate Expert: �Compromised� UN Scientists should be excluded from IPCC, Peer-Review Process http://www.prisonplanet.com/climate-expert...ew-process.html Many knew global warming was a scam very early on because we read the IPCC documents and about the individuals on their panel, most of whom weren't even scientists. WHAT A JOKE THESE PEOPLE ARE! LIES! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nobel Peace Prize - The lying IPCC goons rec'd it jointly with Al in 2007? NO, I DID NOT MAKE THIS UP! http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...topic=7597&st=0 Look at the winners here: (Does this look like the NWO incrementally? Look at why they are winning it) http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...7597&st=0&#last http://www.almaz.com/nobel/peace/peace.html Their dictionary doesn't read the same as mine on the definition of PEACE! This is such a joke! This is another UN affiliated arm that needs to be disbanded. They aren't professionals, they are liars who are there to promote the NWO agenda by fictionalizing the data to claim MAN HAS CAUSED GLOBAL WARMING. THIS IS A BIG FAT LIE! The real agenda is a NWO GLOBAL CARBON TAX, PURE AND SIMPLE to fund their GLOBAL GOVERNMENT!

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 23 2009, 04:31 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Global Warming On Trial: Inhofe Calls For Investigation Of UN IPCC http://www.prisonplanet.com/global-warming...of-un-ipcc.html http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fus...92e126&Issue_id Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) has been telling us Global Warming is a hoax for many years. Now will the idiots on Capitol Hill listen? Will the idiot public listen, or will they continue believing the lies and then complain when they have to pay a GLOBAL CARBON TAX on everything they buy, eat, or breathe?????? http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=7595 WHY ISN'T THE WHOLE CONGRESS CALLING FOR AN INVESTIGATION? BECAUSE MOST OF THEM HAVE NO BACKBONE, AND HAVE SOLD OUT THEIR COUNTRY. THAT'S WHY!

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 23 2009, 06:03 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Phil Jones and Ben Santer respond to CEI and Pat Michaels attack on temperature data record http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.p...comment-on-cei/

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 23 2009, 09:19 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

University of East Anglia (Another dishonest globalist minion)

http://www.uea.ac.uk/

PRESS RELEASE from the University:
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/...news/CRU-update

QUOTE

Climatic Research Unit update - 17.45 November 23

It is a matter of concern that data, including personal information about individuals, appears to have been illegally taken from the university and elements published selectively on a number of websites.

The volume of material published and its piecemeal nature makes it impossible to confirm what proportion is genuine. We took immediate action to remove the server in question from operation and have involved the police in what we consider to be a criminal investigation.

The material published relates to the work of our globally-respected Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and other scientists around the world. CRU's published research is, and has always been, fully peer-reviewed by the relevant journals, and is one strand of research underpinning the strong consensus that human activity is affecting the world's climate in ways that are potentially dangerous.

CRU is one of a number of independent centres working in this important area and reaching similar conclusions. It will continue to engage fully in reasoned debate on its findings with individuals and groups that are willing to have their research and theories subjected to scrutiny by the international scientific community. The selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way.

The raw climate data which has been requested belongs to meteorological services around the globe and restrictions are in place which means that we are not in a position to release them. We are asking each service for their consent for their data to be published in future.

In addition to supporting the police in their enquiries, we will ourselves be conducting a review, with external support, into the circumstances surrounding the theft and publication of this information and any issues emerging from it.

SO, THIS IS PROOF THE EMAILS WERE HACKED OR POSSIBLY RELEASED BY A WHISTLEBLOWER! WHO KNOWS!

Attached Image (Click thumbnail to expand)

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 23 2009, 09:38 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Goddard Space Center (The other group that worked closely with the Univ & UN IPCC) http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/home/index.html

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 24 2009, 01:50 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	A SEARCHABLE DATABASE OF ALL OF THE EMAILS IS HERE: http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php BELOW WE WILL REVEAL SOME WE FIND THAT ARE OF PARTICULAR INTEREST OR INCRIMINATING AS LISTED BY A LONG NUMBER WITH THE EXTENSION .txt!

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 24 2009, 04:13 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Climategate: CRU Source Code Confirms AGW Fraud From Hacked Documents. MUST HEAR! http://www.infowars.com/climategate-cru-so...cked-documents/ More Discussion on this here: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?to...cseen#msg882297 http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=145857.0 THIS GUY IS A COMPUTER PROGRAMMER AND IS REVEIWING THE CODE INCLUDED IN THE EMAILS!

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 24 2009, 08:40 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

"these will be artificially adjusted" - Code in the Emails:
http://camirror.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/t...ially-adjusted/

QUOTE

2009 November 22
by stevemcintyre

The emails are only the start of this. The zip includes data and code. Reader Neal writes as follows (SM Note: Anthony reports below that he has verified these comments in the following location /documents/osborn-tree6/mann/oldprog
in the files maps12.pro maps15.pro maps24.pro):

People are talking about the emails being smoking guns but I find the remarks in the code and the code more of a smoking gun. The code is so hacked around to give predetermined results that it shows the bias of the coder. In other words make the code ignore inconvenient data to show what I want it to show. The code after a quick scan is quite a mess. Anyone with any pride would be to ashamed of to let it out public viewing. As examples bias take a look at the following remarks from the MANN code files:

function mkp2correlation,indts,depts,remts,t,filter=filter,refperiod=refperiod,$
datathresh=datathresh
;
; THIS WORKS WITH REMTS BEING A 2D ARRAY (nseries,ntime) OF MULTIPLE TIMESERIES
; WHOSE INFLUENCE IS TO BE REMOVED. UNFORTUNATELY THE IDL5.4 p_correlate
; FAILS WITH >1 SERIES TO HOLD CONSTANT, SO I HAVE TO REMOVE THEIR INFLUENCE
; FROM BOTH INDTS AND DEPTS USING MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION AND THEN USE THE
; USUAL correlate FUNCTION ON THE RESIDUALS.
;

pro maps12,yrstart,doinfill=doinfill
;
; Plots 24 yearly maps of calibrated (PCR-infilled or not) MXD reconstructions
; of growing season temperatures. Uses �corrected� MXD � but shouldn�t usually
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.
;

;
; Plots (1 at a time) yearly maps of calibrated (PCR-infilled or not) MXD
; reconstructions
; of growing season temperatures. Uses �corrected� MXD � but shouldn�t usually
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 25 2009, 12:25 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	HOLDREN (As in John P. Holdren. This is Obama's science czar who co-authored the book "Ecoscience" in 1977 which is being implemented.) Results: http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1066337021.txt http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1231166089.txt http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1231190304.txt http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1231254297.txt http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1231279297.txt http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1231350711.txt Obama�s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding �Climategate� scandal http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama%e2%80%99...9d-scandal.html http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17183 More on the Holdren goon & the disgusting book he co-authored "ECOSCIENCE": http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...830&st=25&#last http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=6918

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 02:07 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

941483736.txt - Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner is more concerned with the "Independence and Objectivity" of the IPCC: (HUM!)
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...e=941483736.txt

QUOTE

Bob in answering the questions posed of him by Sensenbrenner; particularly should Bob need to get back to you. Please note that this is confidential information.

The stated concern of Sensenbrenner is that the use of the SRES scenarios prior to their ratification might, in some way, jeopardize IPCC's "independence and objectivity". Sensenbrenner apparently uses as guidelines in making his judgement "IPCC's 'Principles' (as) approved in Vienna, Austria in October 1998" together with "June 11 and 28, 1999 letters" giving "Appendix A to the Principles, which is entitled 'Procedures for the Preparation, Review, Acceptance, Approval and Publication of IPCC Reports' (which was) approved ... in April 1999".

Sensenbrenner implies that these documents "raise concerns about the use of preliminary IPCC material by Dr. Wigley and the Pew Center on Global Climate Change for non-IPCC purposes, apparently without IPCC sanction". He considers that "these issues (are) significant because they relate directly to the integrity of the IPCC process".

NOTE: So once again they are being held to GUIDELINES. This is how they are able to distort truth, by omitting certain lines of discussion. THIS IS AN OLD GAME. Why not allow them to do research that considers ALL VIEWS that can get to the truth, rather than a rigid PREDETERMINED OUTCOME that they back into by manipulating data?

Who is Sensenbrenner? Look at what this man has voted for in Congress: (He is a minion!)
http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...hp?showtopic=94

It is the Congressmen - See later down that same page:

QUOTE

what Bob may be concerned about.
> >
> > I hope that "new" does not refer to the SRES scenarios. You may recall
> > that, when I was in CRU, I showed you, in confidence, a letter from F.
> > James Sensenbrenner, chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives
> > Committee on Science, criticizing IPCC for "allowing" me to use these
> > scenarios in my Pew Report.

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 02:29 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

1047485263.txt - "For those PhD's that don't get it" "Mafia Hit":
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1047485263.txt
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?to...cseen#msg883211
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=145932.0

QUOTE

My sense (being relatively new to this field compared to everyone else) is that within the neo- and mesoclimate research community there is a (relatively small?) group of people who don't or won't "get it" and there is nothing we can do about them aside from continuing to publish quality work in quality journals (or calling in a Mafia hit).

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 02:39 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

1254345174.txt - Talks about Health Bill, Cap and Trade, etc:
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1254345174.txt

QUOTE

long list of vitriolic attacks, diatribes, and threats I've received. Its part of the attack of the corporate-funded attack machine, i.e. its a direct and highly intended outcome of a highly orchestrated, heavily-funded corporate attack campaign. We saw it over the summer w/ the health insurance industry trying to defeat Obama's health plan, we'll see it now as the U.S. Senate moves on to focus on the cap & trade bill that passed congress this summer. It isn't coincidental that the original McIntyre and McKitrick E&E paper w/ press release came out the day before the� U.S. senate was considering the McCain Lieberman climate bill in '05. we're doing the best we can to expose this.

NOTE: Don't be fooled. The Insurance company WROTE the healthcare bill, and are behind it. They are not attacking it (even though they do like to play both sides of things to confuse people and the media lies about it).

Mann's Dire Predictions link: (At bottom of page under Hidden Links):
http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/Dire...ions/index.html
http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html

Michael Mann's Bio:
http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/cv/cv.html

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 02:49 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

1019513684.txt - "more to do with energy and money, than natural science":
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...=1019513684.txt

QUOTE

Phil,

I can't quite see what all the fuss is about Watson - why should he be re-nominated anyway? Why should not an Indian scientist chair IPCC? One could argue the CC issue is more important for the South than for the North. Watson has perhaps thrown his weight about too much in the past. The science is well covered by Susan Solomon in WGI, so why not get an engineer/economist since many of the issues now raised by CC are more to do with energy and money, than natural science.

If the issue is that Exxon have lobbied and pressured Bush, then OK, this is regrettable but to be honest is anyone really surprised? All these decisions about IPCC chairs and co-chairs are deeply political (witness DEFRA's support of Martin Parry for getting the WGII nomination).

Mike

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 03:23 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Two Emails Reveal following:
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php
http://www.infowars.com/climatic-research-...d-e-mails-data/

1255553034.txt:

QUOTE

On Oct 14, 2009, at 5:57 PM, Tom Wigley wrote:
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> The Figure you sent is very deceptive. As an example, historical
>>> runs with PCM look as though they match observations -- but the
>>> match is a fluke. PCM has no indirect aerosol forcing and a low
>>> climate sensitivity -- compensating errors. In my (perhaps too
>>> harsh)
>>> view, there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model
>>> results by individual authors and by IPCC. This is why I still use
>>> results from MAGICC to compare with observed temperatures. At least
>>> here I can assess how sensitive matches are to sensitivity and
>>> forcing assumptions/uncertainties.
>>>
>>> Tom.

1079108576.txt

QUOTE

Models: no real finger print that distinguishes AGHG forcings from
>> others! Models using AGHG forcings predict warming is function of
>> latitude yet the Arctic is hardly warming (north of ~^65�N), and high
>> latitude Antarctic (excepting for the peninsula) is actually cooling
>> slightly.
>> Sooooo, you can say all you want that all the prestigious societies
>> and folks say it's AGHGs, but they've been bamboozled by a few of
>> elitist scientists.

Now, Richard, toss in large effects of land use changes and of black
>> soot forcing changing earth's albedo, and you now have additional
>> forcings which may be causing warming but can't be countered by
>> reducing AGHGs.
>>
>> Soooo, it still ain't all that easy to convince an audience that the
>> Singer's of this world aren't on to at least part of the problem.
>>
>> AND keep in mind that increased CO2 is good for us--more agriculture,
>> etc.

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 03:34 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

887057295.txt - "I 'faked up' column 5 .... to get the code working"
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php...e=887057295.txt

QUOTE

Of course, it is possible to get column 6 results by adding columns 2, 3, 4 and 5 as they now stand (and as they are in the version that you have). However, one cannot do this with the correct *raw* column 3, 4, and 5 output because of the nonlinear direct forcing effect.

It just happens that, in your version, I 'faked up' column 5 as the difference between column 6 and the sum of columns 2, 3 and 4. I did this simply to get the code working; but (as you now know) I never got around to fixing it up until now. In the latest version, column 6 is again equal to the sum of columns 2, 3, 4 and 5 because I scale columns 3, 4 and 5 to ensure that this is so.

IT IS VERY OBVIOUS THESE GUYS ARE USING A MODEL AND MANIPULATING IT TO ARRIVE AT THEIR PREDETERMINED OUTCOMES! THIS ISN'T SCIENCE. THIS IS A BASTARDIZATION OF SCIENCE! THESE PEOPLE NEED TO BE BROUGHT UP ON CHARGES, AND LOSE THEIR TENURES AT WHATEVER UNIVERITIES THEY WORK AT!

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 25 2009, 03:42 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Top Scientist To Resign Over Climategate: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=145951.0 We knew this wouldn't take long.

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 25 2009, 03:59 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	0889554019.txt - Golden Economic Age- Endgame Movie Proof http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=145929.0

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 25 2009, 04:04 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Unearthed Files Include �Rules� for Mass Mind Control Campaign http://www.infowars.com/unearthed-files-in...ntrol-campaign/ http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=145945.0 Rules of the Game: http://www.futerra.co.uk/downloads/RulesOfTheGame.pdf

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 04:22 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Climategate: The Fix Is In
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1109/tracinski112409.php3

QUOTE

By Robert Tracinski

In early October, I linked to a breaking story about evidence of corruption in the basic temperature records maintained by key scientific advocates of the theory of man-made global warming. Global warming "skeptics" had unearthed evidence that scientists at the Climatic Research Unit at Britain's University of East Anglia had cherry-picked data to manufacture a "hockey stick" graph showing a dramatic�but illusory�runaway warming trend in the late 20th century.

But now newer and much broader evidence has emerged that breaks this scandal wide open. Pundits have already named it "Climategate."

A hacker�or more likely a disillusioned insider�has gathered thousands of e-mails and data from the CRU and made them available on the Web. Officials at the CRU have verified the breach of their system and acknowledged that the e-mails appear to be genuine.

The CRU has already called in the police to investigate the hacker, but those resources are misdirected. The cops should be investigating the CRU itself.

The e-mails show, among many other things, private admissions of doubt or scientific weakness in the global warming theory. In acknowledging that global temperatures have actually declined for the past decade, one scientist asks, "where the heck is global warming?... 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." They still can't account for it; see a new article in Der Spiegel: "Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out." I don't know where these people got their scientific education, but where I come from, if your theory can't predict or explain the observed facts, it's wrong.

In another e-mail, a prominent global warming alarmist admits to using a statistical "trick" to "hide the decline" in temperatures. The "trick" consists of selectively mixing two different kinds of data�temperature "proxies" from tree rings and actual thermometer measurements�in a way designed to produce a graph of global temperatures that ends the way the global warming establishment wants it to: with an upward "hockey stick" slope.

Confirming the earlier scandal about cherry-picked data, the e-mails show CRU scientists conspiring to evade legal requests under the Freedom of Information Act for their underlying data. It's a basic rule of science that you don't just get to report your results and ask other people to take you on faith. You also have to report your data and your specific method of analysis, so that others can check it and, yes, even criticize it. Yet that is precisely what the CRU scientists have refused.

But what stands out most in this cache of e-mails is extensive evidence of the hijacking of "peer review" to enforce global warming dogma. Peer review is the practice of subjecting scientific papers to review by other scientists with relevant expertise before they are published in professional journals. The idea is to weed out research with obvious flaws or weak arguments, but there is a clear danger that such a process will simply reinforce groupthink. If it is corrupted, peer review can be a mechanism for an entrenched establishment to exclude legitimate challenges by simply refusing to give critics a hearing.

And that is precisely what we find in this case.

In response to an article challenging global warming that was published in the journal Climate Research, CRU head Phil Jones complains that the journal needs to "rid themselves of this troublesome editor." Pennsylvania State University professor Michael Mann replies:

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.

Note the circular logic. Skepticism about global warming is wrong because it is not supported by scientific articles in "legitimate peer-reviewed journals." But if a journal actually publishes such an article, then it is by definition not "legitimate."

You can also see from these e-mails the panic among top global warming alarmists at any dissent appearing in the scientific literature. When another article by a skeptic was published in Geophysical Research Letters, Mann complains, "It's one thing to lose Climate Research. We can't afford to lose GRL." Another CRU scientist, Tom Wigley, suggests that they target another troublesome editor: "If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU [American Geophysical Union] channels to get him ousted." That's exactly what they did, and a later e-mail boasts that "The GRL leak may have been plugged up now with new editorial leadership there."

Not content to block out all dissent from scientific journals, the CRU scientists also conspired to secure friendly reviewers who could be counted on to rubber-stamp their own work. Phil Jones suggests such a list to Kevin Trenberth, with the assurance that "All of them know the sorts of things to say without any prompting."

So it's no surprise when another e-mail refers to an attempt to keep inconvenient scientific findings out of a UN report: "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. K and I will keep them out somehow�even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" Think of all of this the next time you hear someone invoke the authority of peer review�or of the UN's IPCC reports�as backing for claims about global warming.

This scandal goes beyond scientific journals and into other media used to promote the global warming dogma. For example, RealClimate.org has been billed as an objective website at which global warming activists and skeptics can engage in an impartial debate. But in the CRU e-mails, the global warming establishment boasts that RealClimate is in their pocket.

I wanted you guys to know that you're free to use RC in any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you'd like us to include.

Think of RC as a resource that is at your disposal. We'll use our best discretion to make sure the skeptics don't get to use the RC comments as a megaphone.

And anyone doubting that the mainstream media is in on it, too, should check out New York Times reporter Andrew Revkin's toadying apologia for the CRU e-mails, masquerading as a news report.

The picture that emerges is simple. In any discussion of global warming, either in the scientific literature or in the mainstream media, the outcome is always predetermined. Just as the temperature graphs produced by the CRU are always tricked out to show an upward-sloping "hockey stick," every discussion of global warming has to conclude that the warming is happening and that humans are responsible. And any data or scientific paper that tends to disprove that conclusion is smeared as "unscientific" precisely because it threatens the established dogma.

For more than a decade, we've been told that there is a scientific "consensus" that humans are causing global warming, that "the debate is over" and all "legitimate" scientists acknowledge the truth of global warming. Now we know what this "consensus" really means. What it means is: the fix is in.

This is an enormous case of organized scientific fraud, but it is not just scientific fraud. It is also a criminal act. Suborned by billions of taxpayer dollars devoted to climate research, dozens of prominent scientists have established a criminal racket in which they seek government money�Phil Jones has raked in a total of $13.7 million, about $25 million, in grants from the British government�which they use to falsify data and defraud the taxpayers. It's the most insidious kind of fraud: a fraud in which the culprits are lauded as public heroes. Judging from this cache of e-mails, they even manage to tell themselves that their manipulation of the data is a noble lie intended to protect a bigger truth and prevent it from being "confused" by inconvenient facts and uncontrolled criticism.

The damage here goes far beyond the loss of a few billions of taxpayer dollars on bogus scientific research. The real cost of this scam is the trillions of dollars of wealth that will be destroyed if a fraudulent theory is used to justify legislation that starves the global economy of its cheapest and most abundant sources of energy.

This is the scandal of the century. It needs to be thoroughly investigated�and the culprits need to be brought to justice.

JWR contributor Robert Tracinski

jofortruth	Posted: Nov 25 2009, 04:27 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 31,450 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Hide The Decline - Climategate (Michael Mann - Lead guy in the fraud beside Al Gore) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEiLgbBGKVk

jofortruth

Posted: Nov 25 2009, 06:33 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 31,450
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

CLIMATEGATE! Fox RIPS Global Warming Advocate! 1000's of Emails / Documents Reveal FRAUD!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHATItyOsdY

About time someone in the Mainstream Media covered this. However, I'm still not a fan of FOX because of their past refusal to cover the real news, and for lying to us. Now they have no choice because they are losing credibility and ratings!

So, who was the very bad liar on this video? Daniel Weiss from the Center for American Progress:
http://www.americanprogress.org/experts/WeissDaniel.html

QUOTE

Daniel J. Weiss is a Senior Fellow and the Director of Climate Strategy at American Progress, where he leads the Center's clean energy and climate advocacy campaign.

This is a tip that the Center for American Progress is NOT TRUSTWORTHY, if they have people like this idiot representing them! This guy was pretty pathetic. Anyone with half a brain could see what he was doing during this interview: 1) talking points 2) ignore the question 3) don't dare address whether the question of global warming was settled (which it isn't) 4) always blame it on something else (oh, it's the hacked emails that we don't even know are authentic) blah blah blah blah blah. THIS GUY IS A JOKE!

2008 Marketing Brochure: (Now we know where a lot of the legislation being pushed through Congress is coming from - THESE PEOPLE)
http://www.americanprogress.org/aboutus/ma...ochure_2008.pdf

0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)

0 Members:

« Next Oldest | Environment/Global Warming/Storms/Bio-Terror/Chemtrails/Weather Modification | Next Newest »

Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Sign-up Now