Anthropogenic Global Warming Suffers Crushing Blow
Tags: global warming.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
In the form of hacked e mails and documents:
The UK-based Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU), at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, is reported to have {suffered} a security breach which has resulted in many confidential emails and files being uploaded to the internet.
A 61MB zip file containing information stolen from one of the world’s leading climate research {centers}, was posted onto an anonymous FTP server in Russia, accompanied by a note saying:
We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps.
We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents
In total it is believed that the unknown hacker accessed 1079 emails (some of which are marked as “Highly Confidential”) and over 3800 documents. A spokesman for the Climate Research Unit confirmed the hack to the BBC.
Some of the most embarrassing e-mails are attributed to Philip Jones, the Director of the CRU; Keith Briffa, his assistant; Michael E. Mann of the University of Virginia; Malcolm Hughes at the University of Arizona; and others. One such e-mail makes references to the famous “hockey-stick” graph published by Mann in the journal Nature:
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…
The defenders of AGW are saying that the e mails and documents are not representative of all the data; that they are being taken out of context; that they are being misinterpreted…but if you go through the links and read for yourself, I think you’ll conclude – as I have – that the AGW were deliberately lying at least as early as 1999 in the data they presented to buttress their case. Since then, its only gotten worse – they were hiding a decline in the rate of temperature increase in 1999…since then, temps have remained flat or gone down.
Temperatures do appear to have risen in the last third of the 20th century. From what I can gather, it seems that the rise was natural, cyclical and is now receding. The theory of antrhopogenic global warming was cooked up by alarmists to sell books and garner donations and grants – it became so large and entrenched over time that politicians decided to join in rather than oppose, it being easier to make noises about environmentalism and appropriate money than to go through the tedious process of actually finding out what is going on.
It has been the largest and most expensive hoax in human history and every person who was responsible for advancing it should be heavily fined in order to pay back the costs incurred – Al Gore, we’re especially looking at you.
UPDATE: Bishop Hill has a list running of the e mails and what they contain. Sample:
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Tim Osborn discusses how data are truncated to stop an apparent cooling trend showing up in the results (0939154709). Analysis of impact here. Wow!
Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
31 Responses to “Anthropogenic Global Warming Suffers Crushing Blow”
Caucus of Corruption
I don’t know if WattsUpWithThat was the first, or among the first to break this a couple days ago, but the last time I checked their post had garnered over 1,450 comments, which has to be some kind of blogosphere record. Several subsequent post have also covered various aspects of this topic, including a really cool (no pun intended) link to a website that has put all of the emails into a searchable database with a web engine interface.
In past discussions about global warming/climate change on this blog there has been a lot of outrage, either feigned or real, at the suggestion that any serious scientists would deliberately falsify data to, either further an agenda, or garner research grant money. In spite of the fact that I have always wanted to believe that science was governed by a higher level of integrity than, say, the financial sector, I’ve read enough over the last 5 or 6 years to convince me that the dishonesty on the Warmist side has been overwhelming. This latest news just confirms what many of us already knew. Now the real question is, will the mainstream media acknowledge it, ignore it, or deliberately cover it up? Trillions of dollars are riding on the answer.
I did a little searching around, and the only MSM mention I could find was this AP piece from yesterday. One only has to scan down the the Bishop Hill list to wonder how the AP could dismiss this with the following statement:
It has been the largest and most expensive hoax in human history and every person who was responsible for advancing it should be heavily fined in order to pay back the costs incurred – Al Gore, we’re especially looking at you.
He algwhor)should be arrested, tried in NEW YORK, and hung with KSM for treason.
It has been the largest and most expensive hoax in human history
neo, it has at least the potential to make Madoff’s numbers look like lunch money.
BTW, I don’t expect much in the way of response from our Libs on this. They tend to hide under a rock when their side is caught red-handed cheating.
markogenic:
i think the planetary point here?
humans are incredibly fallible
think of all the things…..
admittedly
global warming may or may not be real or caused by humans
(however it is hard to imagine that 2000-3000 years of humans burning everything in sight hasn’t had some effect)
anyway
so with that said
the real point?
humanoids are someday going to figure out they are not the center of this planet’s ecosystem
and the global warming debate is just one of many reference points that will bear this out
i realize you probably think that earth is your “tool” to use and plunder upon
but the program doesn’t work that way
long term survival of your species will be quite dependent on a more sustainable viewpoint
as you well know…the planet will survive just fine without homo sapiens
ack ack
Na Nu Na NU
(however it is hard to imagine that 2000-3000 years of humans burning everything in sight hasn’t had some effect)
anyway
WOW ……maybe that is why the ICE AGE ended.
but what started it??????
Hmmmm ill have to think about this…DOH!!
Mark, you really believe the motivation of “the largest and most expensive hoax in human history” has been “to sell books and garner donations and grants?” Seriously??
Let’s suppose for a moment that anthropogenic global warming is not real. Wide-scale industrial pollution of the environment is very real – including damage on an epic scale to ecological systems in China, Siberia and elsewhere, the destruction of mountains and valleys in the Appalachians, destruction of major forests and ecosystems in South America, significant acid rainfall damage far removed from the locales where airborne pollutants enter the atmosphere – the list doesn’t end.
I would contend that global warming alarmists, whether right or wrong, more than anything else want to preserve the natural ecosystems that are part of our natural heritage with the good earth. The sale of books, donations and research grants are very far down the list of motivations for most people who make up the green community. Many have harnessed their convictions to developing new green technologies. And considering the limitations of fossil-based energy (peak oil is here now) it would be plain stupid to eschew green technologies.
Just for kicks suppose that the 4.5+ billion-year age of the earth and Darwin’s model of biological evolution turned out to be mistaken as well. Would that be worthy of digging up old Darwin’s and Stephen Jay Gould’s bones and hanging them and their intellectual cohorts “with KSM” (thanks for that lovely idea, neocon1) as well? After all, the old-earth theory is infinitely more deeply entrenched than the anthropogenic global warming theory, has cost a lot more money, sold vastly more books and garnered magnitudes more research dollars over time. If spending research money on unproven ideas amounts to treason, then all of academia is in big trouble.
Fortunately most people are not so averse to honest investigation of phenomena, nor freak out at a tempest in a teapot such as this. Science and philosophy always have had, always will have, blowhards and egotists who cloud the debate by ethically shady methodology. Try as you might you cannot discredit the whole debate just because some people take the argument outside proper boundaries.
Shut up dennis, you idiot.
I see my prediction that our Libs wouldn’t touch this topic with a 10 foot pole was spot one except for Dennis and Bagni. Well, at least neither of them attempted to defend the falsification and manipulation of scientific data. Perhaps there is still a sliver of intellectual honesty on the Left.
dennis, comparing your supposed “hoax” scenario by Darwin and to that hoax by these supposed “climatologists” are like comparing apples to oranges.
Was there a world organization trying to impose tax policy and wealth distribution policy for evolution like there was for man-made climate change? Hardly…….
Modern lib looters have been humiliated by this revelation. There talking point of “do you believe that a conspiracy by these organizations to promote climate change” has been debunked. I would expect them to turn on the spin just like dennis did only they would be somewhat more “intelligent” about it.
keef, we stand overwhelmed by your logic and rhetorical prowess.
spook, falsification of data is always wrong. The larger arguments for changing human patterns of environmental abuse continue to be validated regardless the recklessness of individuals on any side of this issue. It isn’t a “Lib” thing – conservatism doesn’t get much more basic than taking care of our home planet.
Our “home” planet? Where’s our vacationing planet? Conservation is universal, not just a lib thing, and many great efforts are being made. What is just a lib thing is the trumped up hysteria over the earth ending in 10 years, because of the evil ways of man, and their zeal to tax and punish capitalism for it.
keef, we stand overwhelmed by your logic and rhetorical prowess.
Who’s “we,” moron? Got a mouse in your pocket?
The larger arguments for changing human patterns of environmental abuse continue to be validated regardless the recklessness of individuals on any side of this issue.
Dennis, I don’t disagree with that point, but the climate science debate has little, if anything to do with “human patterns of environmental abuse.” Human-caused global warming/climate change is, as neocon noted — a scam of epic proportions; and a scam that is in the process of being laid bare for all to see.
I can remember not that long ago when the view of the Chicago skyline from the Skyway Bridge was enveloped in a brown haze, much as the pictures you see today of China. As our economy advanced and grew, we reinvested much of our wealth to clean up our environment. China, India and the rest of the third world will do the same as their economic growth and wealth creation gives them the tools to do so. Severely damaging our economy in the midst of what is shaping up to be a serious depression will do NOTHING to affect climate, and will only serve to redistribute and/or destroy our wealth to the benefit of our two largest global competitors.
Our “home” planet? Where’s our vacationing planet?
He’s trying to sound intelligent, cluster. He probably uses other nonsensical terms, such as “each and every,” “any and all,” and “close proximity.” Probably calls an ATM an “ATM machine,” a PIN a “Pin number,” and a VIN a “VIN number.”
He’s just another stupid lib…
bagni and Dennis,
Yes, scientists would deliberately mislead in order to gain money and fame. We live in an age of lies and its no surprise that even those who are most closely pledged to a dispassionate look at the facts would fudge their numbers.
Bottom line: yes, we should pollute as little as possible because we are to be God’s good stewards of His creation…but leave off the Chicken Little nonsense and for pity’s sake start thinking.
The alarmists don’t want to help – as in all cases, they want to gain power and wealth for themselves. They want to stir a bitter pot and be the people who benefit from the resultant mess. People can be wicked – will you please drive that in to your heads! Only God can redeem and only those who throw themselves at His feet have even a ghost of a chance of getting it right.
Spook: Dennis, I don’t disagree with that point, but the climate science debate has little, if anything to do with “human patterns of environmental abuse.” Human-caused global warming/climate change is, as neocon noted — a scam of epic proportions; and a scam that is in the process of being laid bare for all to see.
I disagree with the main point. I also disagree that it (global warming — whatever “scam” is involved) is the main point. Rather, I think the main problem is that global warming has been portrayed as the main point.
Mark: Bottom line: yes, we should pollute as little as possible because we are to be God’s good stewards of His creation…but leave off the Chicken Little nonsense and for pity’s sake start thinking.
I’m guessing you aren’t inclined to expand upon that concept. But if you were, how would you expand on it? As I see it, the problem is that the “God’s good stewards of His creation” argument doesn’t really go anywhere. In fact, to say even that requires a very “liberal” interpretation of the facts.
Mark: Yes, scientists would deliberately mislead in order to gain money and fame.
Which scientists would that be — the contrarians or otherwise? After all, assuming you buy into the argument that,
“We live in an age of lies and its no surprise that even those who are most closely pledged to a dispassionate look at the facts would fudge their numbers”, shouldn’t that apply to all?
Which scientists would that be — the contrarians or otherwise?
Rico, you apparently missed the main point of the entire post — that scientists who are all (as far as I know) proponents of the theory of anthropogenic climate change, have, in emails and other documents dating back to 1999, colluded with each other to manipulate and falsify data and ridicule anyone who disagrees with them to further their agenda and gain billions of dollars in research grants. If you are aware of any such transgressions by any notable skeptics, please share.
spook,
Rico was once upon a time an entertaining, left of center gadfly…but he’s become ideologically rigid since Obama’s election. Its really rather sad.
Algore was just a washed-up politician with no one willing to provide coattails for him to ride, and all of a sudden he was “winning” the Ignoble Peace Prize, worth more than a million bucks, hauling in huge speaking fees, flying around in a fuel-guzzling private jet to lecture the Little People on using less energy, and, oh yeah, becoming a partner in one of the businesses which will make BILLIONS if the cap and trade scam gets passed.
He’s a big shot now, recently introduced at a speech as The President of the Planet.
And none of this is worth putting together and promoting a major worldwide scam? Oh, you naive little denny, you.
Not only will some of the elites make billions on this scam, and others mere millions, but it puts vast amounts of control of power into the hands of government. Or do you not think that the radical Left would stoop to trickery to achieve control of huge amounts of the US economy? No? Just close your eyes and think: “Universal Health Care”. There—I knew the pattern would start to make itself clear.
Its really rather sad.
It IS sad, Mark. I used to have some good discussions with rico, both on and off the blog. Now all he does is come here and throw sand in the gears.
Moderator’s note: same old litany of liberal crap, mostly off topic, deleted.
dennis – the real problem is that the radical left, in pushing the AGW theory, has damaged the legimate environmental & conservation movements.
good stewardship of God’s creation is a true conservative value.
Well, at least me now know why people like Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt and James Hanson have been saying for the last 10 years that the debate is over. It’s impossible to debate people who cheat and lie.
retiredspook says: November 23rd, 2009 at 12:25 pm ” It’s impossible to debate people who cheat and lie.”
_
then political “debates” would also be impossible!
spook
http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2006/fireandice/fireandice.asp
debating is NOT science.
Science is settled by undisputed repeatable facts.
AWG is pure hypothsis by a bunch of fuzzy headed libtards.
It will be laughed at one day in the future as the 20/21 century equivolent of the flat earth theory of yesteryear.
Spook: that scientists who are all (as far as I know) proponents of the theory of anthropogenic climate change, have, in emails and other documents dating back to 1999, colluded with each other to manipulate and falsify data and ridicule anyone who disagrees with them to further their agenda and gain billions of dollars in research grants.
I wouldn’t call that a dispassionate assessment of the situation. If one were truly dispassionate one would recognize that there are numerous dots which need to be connected before one could reasonably come to conclusions like collusion, manipulation and falsification of data. But I’m the one who is “ideologically rigid”. Yeah, sure.