|
Great articles discussing Climategate
Exposing the manufactured "science"
|
 |
|
Climategate Revelations but the Tip of
Giant Iceberg, says Atmospheric Scientist |
 |
Boxer wants to prosecute whistle blowers
instead of lying scientists
4 Dec 09 - She wants to spin it. She wants to call it
“email-theft-gate”, not
Climategate. Way to go, Babs. This shows your true colors.
See
Boxer wants to prosecute whistle blowers instead of lying scientists
Climate Change 'Fraud'
By John Ingham
2 Dec 09 - The scientific consensus that mankind has caused climate
change was rocked yesterday as a leading academic called it a “load
of hot air underpinned by fraud”.
See Climate Change 'Fraud'
|
Deliberate distortion of climate data By Alan Caruba "Who can trust the “science” produced by NASA and other U.S. agencies that have benefited from billions in grants directed at so-called climate, i.e. global warming research?" Deliberate distortion of climate data |
 |
Secrecy
in science is corrosive
27 Nov 09 - Why should taxpayers fund scientists who deliberately
delay, obfuscate and deny open access to their research?
See Secrecy
in science is corrosive
They don't give a s*** about the science
28 Nov 09 - (Excerpts) - "If you're wondering how the robot-like
march of the world's politicians towards Copenhagen can possibly
continue in the face of the scientific scandal dubbed "climategate,"
it's because Big Government, Big Business and Big Green don't
give a
s*** about "the science."
See They
don't give a s*** about the science
* * *
Climategate: five Aussie MPs resign in disgust over carbon tax
26 Nov 09 - "For the rapidly increasing number of us who
believe that
AGW is little more than a scheme by bullying
eco-fascists to deprive us
of our liberty, by big government to
spread its controlling tentacles into
every aspect our lives, and
scheming industrialists such as Al Gore to
enrich themselves through
carbon trading, this principled act by Australia’s Carbon Five is
fantastic news."
See
Climategate: five Aussie MPs resign in disgust over carbon tax
* * *
Hacked files reveal global warming is a deliberate
fraud
By Dr. Timothy Ball
21 Nov 09 – "Global Warming is often called a hoax. I disagree because a
hoax has a humorous intent to puncture pomposity. The argument that
global
warming is due to humans known as the anthropogenic global warming
theory
(AGW) is a deliberate fraud... the (hacked files) provide not
just a smoking
gun, but an entire battery of machine guns."
See
Hacked files reveal global warming is a deliberate fraud
* * *
Phil Jones has collected a staggering $22.6 million in grants
21 Nov 09 - According to
this article, Phil Jones, director of the University of
East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), says that he "can't
remember"
what he meant by "hiding the decline." I wonder if he
remembers the $22.6
million in grants. I wonder if he remembers only those things that the
IPCC wants him to remember.
See
Phil Jones has collected $22.6 million in grants
* * *
Investors
Business Daily Editorial: "Climate Con Job"
“These scientists, if they can still be called that, have
successfully
conned the world into believing that radical and costly
remediation
is needed to stop the planet from overheating. They have
needlessly
menaced people and taken taxpayer funds to perpetuate the
deception. They need to he held accountable.”
See entire article:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=513436
* * * |
Viscount Monckton: 'They Are Criminals"
“What have the mainstream news media said about the Climategate
affair?
Remarkably little. The few who have brought themselves to
comment, through gritted teeth, have said that all of this is a
storm
in a teacup, and that their friends in the University of East
Anglia
and elsewhere in the climatological community are good
people, really.
No, they’re not.
They’re criminals.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-hey-are-criminals-pj
m-exclusive/?print=1
* * * |
Wall Street
Journal editorial: "Global Warming with the Lid Off"
“Some of those mentioned in the emails have responded to our
requests
for comment by saying they must first chat with their
lawyers. Others have
offered legal threats and personal invective.
Still others have said nothing
at all. Those who have responded have
insisted that the emails reveal
nothing more than trivial data
discrepancies and procedural debates.
“Yet all of these nonresponses manage to underscore what may be the
most revealing truth: That these scientists feel the public doesn't
have a
right to know the basis for their climate-change predictions,
even as their
governments prepare staggeringly expensive legislation
in response to them. “
See entire article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704888404574547730924988354.html?mod=WSJ_hp_
mostpop_read
* * * |
Ian Murray:
"Three Things You Absolutely Must Know About Climategate"
“First, the scientists discuss manipulating data to get their
preferred results.
The most prominently featured scientists are paleoclimatologists, who
reconstruct historical temperatures and who
were responsible for a series
of reconstructions that seemed to show
a sharp rise in temperatures well
above historical variation in
recent decades.
“Secondly,
scientists on several occasions discussed methods of subverting
the
scientific peer review process to ensure that skeptical papers had
no
access to publication.
“Finally, the
scientists worked to circumvent the Freedom of Information
process
of the United Kingdom.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/three-things-you-absolutely-must-know-about-climategate/?prin
t=1
* * * |
Wall Street
Journal article by Keith Johnson:
"Climate Emails Stoke Debate"
“Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center,
suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State
University
that skeptics' research was unwelcome: We "will
keep them out
somehow -- even if we have to redefine what
the peer-review
literature is!" Neither man could be reached
for comment Sunday. “
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html
[May have to be entered manually]
* * * |
Another article
in Wall Street Journal
by Keith Johnson and Gautam Naik:
"Lawmakers Probe Climate Emails"
“Sen. James Inhofe (R., Okla.), an outspoken critic of the view
that
humans are causing global warming, said that in light of the
emails,
he will call for an investigation into the state of climate
science
if the Senate Committee on Environment and Public
Works doesn't act
soon.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125902685372961609.html
* * * |
From the
amusing blogger for the Wall Street Journal,
James Taranto:
"Settled Science?"
“(Michael) Mann, who directs Penn State's Earth System Science
Center, said the e-mails reflected the sort of "vigorous debate"
researchers
engage in before reaching scientific conclusions. "
“This is downright Orwellian. What the Post describes is not a
vigorous
debate but an attempt to suppress debate--to politicize the
process of
scientific inquiry so that it yields a predetermined
result. This does not,
in itself, prove the global warmists wrong.
But it raises a glaring question:
If they have the facts on their
side, why do they need to resort to tactics
of suppression and
intimidation?”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704779704574552533758682774.html
* * * |
And this one "You've Taken the Words Out of My Mouth"
http://online.wsj.com/article/best_of_the_web_today.html#printMode
* * * |
Canadian climate scientist Tim Ball and Judi McLeod on the involvement of President Obama's science advisor: "Obama's Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding 'Climategate' scandal" [H/t Marc Morano - Climate Depot] http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17183
* * * |
Washington
Times article by Stephen Dinan
"Browner says hacked e-mails don't change anything"
(Carol Browner is former director of the EPA and President
Obama's
energy and environment advisor)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/25/climate-czar-says-e-mails-dont-change-anyt
hing//print/
* * * |
"Climategate:
some comments by Prof. S. Fred Singer"
on the blog for the
Institute for Economic Affairs:
http://blog.iea.org.uk/?p=954.
* * * |
Prof. Singer's
televised debate with Robert Watson,
former the head of the IPCC
and a science advisor to Al Gore, please see
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_daily_politics/8374523.stm
[H/t Richard Wellings] [SEPP comment: Watson's claim that the data
cannot
be released because it does not belong to the CRU is
stunning. After billions
in taxpayer money spent, the public cannot
review the data because it is
proprietary? It may be far cheaper to
buy the data first before spending an
additional pound in buying
electricity to run the computer models that use
data that has not
been independently reviewed.]
* * * |
American
Thinker: Excellent review of key issues:
"CRU's Source Code: Climategate Uncovered"
by Marc Sheppard [H/t Joe D'Aleo -- ICECAP]