ClimateGate

If you pay attention to the new media or blogs, you've probably heard about this already (initially posted on 2Cents here), but I wanted to give a much more comprehensive picture of how the 'climate change' hoax/fraud has developed and exploded.

The nutshell is this:

1. The data were manipulated to hide a decline in recent temperatures, meaning that we cannot be sure that the paleoclimatological record shows that the recent warming was in any way unusual. This is separate from the issue of whether or not it has been warming or cooling, which is a distraction from what Climategate tells us.

2. There was a concerted effort to subvert the peer-review process of journals that might publish "skeptical" articles (and thereby undermine the "consensus" argument).

3. There was an organized attempt to circumvent or obstruct the legal requirements of the UK's Freedom of Information Act 2000, which appears on its face to rise to the level of criminality.

Now, for the details.

The main group of 'scientists' who supplied the U.N.'s climate change panel with their 'evidence' for global warming have been utterly demolished as reputable sources of reliable information.  Hundreds of e-mails and documents were leaked that reveal a blatant attempt to conceal and cherry pick data to support the theory that global warming is caused by humanity for purely political reasons.

One example is a study of tree rings on the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia.  Apparently, 252 core samples were taken, but the outcome of the study only used 12 of them, the only ones that supported the global warming crock of crap.  But, based on these cherry picked findings, the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia and numerous peer-reviewed studies passed this off as proof of global warming, and the IPCC panel at the U.N. relied heavily on this data in its recent statements about the need for vast and sweeping global climate change legislation.  By preventing the release of the raw research data, the CRU was able to push their cherry picked data without any reasonable fact checking, thus the idea of a 'consensus' was deliberately and fraudulently propagated.  Now that the heat is really on, the CRU admits that they actually threw out much of that data for fear that they would be forced to reveal it.

There were some who complained that the leaked e-mails and documents were not proof of anything other than legitimate discussion, but take a look for yourself at a couple of them:

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.

And...

… Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years 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. …

And...

Just sent loads of station data to Scott. Make sure he documents everything better this time ! And don't leave stuff lying around on ftp sites – you never know who is trawling them. The two [climate skeptics] MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone. Does your similar act in the US force you to respond to enquiries within 20 days? – our does ! The UK works on precedents, so the first request will test it.

We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind. Tom Wigley has sent me a worried email when he heard about it – thought people could ask him for his model code. He has retired officially from UEA so he can hide behind that. IPR should be relevant here, but I can see me getting into an argument with someone at UEA who'll say we must adhere to it !

I don't know about you, but the context appears pretty clear to me.  That lame defense was simply an empty and desperate grasp at nothing.  Also causing problems for the context defense is the fact that the climate models that were used for these studies had hard-coded evidence of the fraud:

This May Be the Nail in the Coffin to Global Warming Junk Science—
Renowned statistician and software engineer Eric S. Raymond (ESR) says the global warming "hockey stick" graph data was "hard-coded" or purposefully "fudged."

Dr. Michael Mann, who co-authored the famous graph of temperature trends dubbed the "hockey stick graph," was implicated in Climategate this week. Mann's controversial work has been challenged in the past.

Today, Reboot Congress reported this stunning news- that the "hockey stick" was fudged.
On his blog Eric Raymond (ESR) comments:

krygny Says: 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.

Read some of this programmer's comments here.  It's a real trip, especially considering how many politicians are making global policy based on this fraud.

So, not only has the CRU been thoroughly discredited, but the entire peer-review process itself is now suspect, and legitimate scientists -- not political hacks like the CRU, but real scientists -- are finally demanding answers.

Another aspect of this scandal is the illegal outright refusal to release documents after Freedom of Information Act requests were properly made.  One of the guilty parties now being sued: NASA.

Today, on behalf of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, I filed three Notices of Intent to File Suit against NASA and its Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), for those bodies' refusal – for nearly three years – to provide documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act.

The information sought is directly relevant to the exploding "ClimateGate" scandal revealing document destruction, coordinated efforts in the U.S. and UK to avoid complying with both countries' freedom of information laws, and apparent and widespread intent to defraud at the highest levels of international climate science bodies. Numerous informed commenters had alleged such behavior for years, all of which appears to be affirmed by leaked emails, computer codes and other data from the Climatic Research Unit of the UK's East Anglia University.

So, how does this all link in with America?  Well, let's start at the top - Barack Obama's so-called 'science czar' -- a guy who endorses forced abortions and sterilizations to achieve population control, and who sounded the alarm bell about global cooling before sounding the alarm bell about global warming -- is apparently personally involved in the fraud.

This whole thing is rotten to the core, and it goes to the highest levels around the world.

Despite all this, Barack Obama still plans to attend the Copenhagen climate change conference, push for global climate change legislation -- which really means the rape of wealthy nations and the redistribution of their wealth to poor nations -- and sign the U.S. up for whatever punitive taxation the world will cook up for us.  Remember the first rule of politics: follow the money.  There's a boatload of money to be taken from U.S. taxpayers, and this fraud was one of the biggest and most effective ways to get it.  Unfortunately for us, Barack Obama is on the side of the global America-haters who want to take us down a notch by destroying our economy to prop up the rest of the world.

Now that the truth is out, the war is on, and some believe that this is an issue that can potentially (finally!) drive a wedge between the mainstream media and the American public because of the borderline criminal negligence the MSM showed in helping hide the truth (another link here).  I sincerely hope so.  The destruction or discrediting of the old mainstream media would be one of the best things that could happen to this country because it would mean real, reliable organizations would rise up to provide the actual news, actual reporting, and actual truth that the media now refuses to do.  Ignorance is one of the most expensive weaknesses in this country right now, and the media's perpetuation of ignorance on climate change is very close to costing America untold billions of dollars in the form of global climate change legislation.  Let's hope the American people have awakened just in time to stop it.

This is one of the biggest scandals in history, partly because there are so many who are actively involved and trying to hide it.  The bottom line is that the fundamental premise of man-caused climate change has now been proven as the hoax/fraud that conservatives have been suggesting for years.  There are two major takeaways from this, I think.  First, that anyone and everyone involved with this should be named, discredited, humiliated, and banned from their respective fields, and criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  The world has never seen a bigger case of fraud, and it rises to the highest levels of global government.  As such, it will only happen if the people DEMAND justice.  If you're as cynical and practical as I am, you'll settle for the naming and humiliation of those involved.  The second takeaway is perhaps more important: the American people should now demand an immediate halt on anything and everything that encroaches on freedom in the name of being 'green'.  There is no reason for it now, especially if it increases taxes or regulation.  While global justice is an unrealistic goal, I think we can certainly kill the so-called 'green' movement, at least in large part, but it will take action - phone calls, e-mails, and boldness to point out this fraud on the national, state, and local levels.

I'll pass along more details and commentary as developments warrant.

There's my two cents.



Related Reading:
Bill Clinton: Global warming could make some places cooler
Global warming scandal spreads to Middle Earth