Posts Tagged ‘climategate’

The State run media, and man made climate change…

February 21, 2010

See Nothing, Hear Nothing, Report Nothing

Glacier? What glacier?

“Avoid the term ‘global warming,'” advises New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. “I prefer the term ‘global weirding,’ because that is what actually happens as global temperatures rise and the climate changes.”

Friedman, who proves that anyone can be a climatologist, goes on to explain that with global warming, “The weather gets weird. The hots are expected to get hotter, the wets wetter, the dries drier and the most violent storms more numerous. The fact that it has snowed like crazy in Washington — while it has rained at the Winter Olympics in Canada, while Australia is having a record 13-year drought — is right in line with what every major study on climate change predicts: The weather will get weird; some areas will get more precipitation than ever; others will become drier than ever.”

No matter what happens, blame global warming.

But as Friedman and other dogmatists peddle their propaganda, the case for man-made global warming is collapsing like a weak roof in a Beltway blizzard. In fact, we might call it “man made-up” climate change.

Phil Jones, the former director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and a central figure in the ClimateGate scandal, now admits that for the past 15 years, there has been no “statistically significant” warming. Furthermore, he says the warming trend that began in 1975 is not unlike two previous periods since 1850, and the Medieval Warm Period could have been a global phenomenon similar to the latter three. Yet Jones, who said he has had trouble “keeping track” of information supporting the infamous hockey stick graph, is still a believer in man-made global warming and he calls the last 15 years a blip in a long-term trend.

Meanwhile, John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and a former lead author on the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is also questioning his faith. “The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” he said. Christy’s doubts, like those of other researchers, stem from problems with thousands of weather stations used to collect temperature data. Urbanization and changes in land use, equipment relocation and other factors have compromised the data. “The popular data sets show a lot of warming,” he said, “but the apparent temperature rise was actually caused by local factors affecting the weather stations, such as land development.”

These are truly stunning admissions, coming as they do from “the consensus,” and cast grave doubt on what we have long been told is “settled science.” For their part, U.S. media outlets have reported exhaustively on these developments… scratch that. No, they haven’t. As Noel Sheppard of NewsBusters notes, “Despite the seriousness of these revelations, much as what happened when the ClimateGate scandal first broke, with the exception of Fox News — and a lone report by CNN — America’s media have almost totally boycotted this amazing story.”

Similar revelations regarding data manipulation by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) have surfaced with little or no fanfare.

Many of these same media outlets, however, found plenty of time to cover the “news” that Tiger Woods has broken his silence, or the fact that Hollywood director Kevin Smith was kicked off a plane for being too fat. As of Tuesday, CNN had reported it 14 times. Light on substance and, er, heavy on fragrance.

SOURCE

Facts Are Stubborn Things

December 19, 2009

Reporting here earlier on climategate, and faux science we now have a wrap up to be enjoyed. Let’s just “hope & pray” that Iran’s nuclear scientist are as incompetent as the algore worshipers are…

The ice in the Arctic isn’t melting nearly as fast as the hype surrounding the theory of anthropogenic global warming. After years of predicting the end of the world while simultaneously touting themselves as its saviors, the envirofascists are now getting caught in their lies and even turning on each other as the truth comes to light.

According to its wonderfully entitled article, “Inconvenient truth for Al Gore as his North Pole sums don’t add up,” the UK Times reported that Al Gore told his Copenhagen audience that “the latest research” predicts the Arctic ice will melt within five years. Dr. Mallowski, upon whose work Gore based his claim, wasted no time in correcting the wayward former vice-president, stating that Gore had used old numbers tossed about in conversation several years ago. Several other scientists chimed in, adding that they consider Mallowski’s numbers, even if quoted accurately, to be “extreme.”

Envirofascists are also falling flat on their faces closer to home. At a recent convening of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, two of President Obama’s top polar bears proved that the climate science is far from settled. John Holdren, the pretentiously titled Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the Office of Science and Technology (a.k.a. the “Science Czar”), told the committee that global temperatures could cause ocean levels to rise by six or more feet by the end of the century. Jane Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, however, told the committee that sea levels could rise by 3.5 feet. Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) was quick to point out both the discrepancy and the folly of acting on conflicting figures arrived at by so-called experts batting for the same team.

But the debate is far from over. As snow falls during the first weeks of the Australian summer, the World Meteorological Organization is predicting that 2010 is going to be the hottest for the world — ever. That’s the great thing about this debate … there’s always more speculation to keep the argument going.

SOURCE

Climate Gate: As the world turns..? This is some soap opera!

December 13, 2009

The faux science called man made Global Warming is being blown apart as scandal after scandal, as well as lie after lie becomes exposed to the light of day. Anthony, over at The Liberty Sphere assembled a rather astonishing array of evidence, much of it from another WordPress Blog, Watts Up With That.

After nearly a month and counting since the story broke on the biggest scandal in scientific history, a major daily newspaper has finally undertaken a thorough examination of the evidence in the Climategate scandal.

(AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Granted, the newspaper in question is not in the United States but the U.K.  And still, even after a month the television news broadcasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC continue to ignore the story.

The London Daily Mail published their findings of a special investigation into Climategate.  And, the news isn’t good for the scientific community, the United Nations, or anyone else who attempts to peddle the hoax of ‘global warming’ or its snake-oil cures.

Perhaps the most damning of the findings of the Daily Mail’s investigation is the following admission by Professor Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado’s environmental studies:

‘These emails open up the possibility that big scientific questions we’ve regarded as settled may need another look.

‘They reveal that some of these scientists saw themselves not as neutral investigators but as warriors engaged in battle with the so-called sceptics.

‘They have lost a lot of credibility and as far as their being leading spokespeople on this issue of huge public importance, there is no going back.’

Just as damning as the admission that the scientists on the front lines of the ‘global warming’ propaganda have lost all credibility is the data showing that temperatures during the era known as ‘the Medieval warm period,’ which lasted roughly from 1000 to 1300 B.C., were much warmer than global temperatures today–a full 400-700 years before humans began pumping out those ‘deadly greenhouse gases.’

~snip~

Full Article

Please follow the links, and comment as you would. The shear economic impact upon the entire world should these maniac’s agenda come about should be enough to wake up anyone, anywhere.

The Climate has changed: In Wyoming, we call it winter…

December 3, 2009

Funny how that happens year after year. In any case we now have “Climate gate.”

The Climate Has Changed

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

The case for man-made global warming took a major hit last week when 62 megabytes of data, including e-mail messages and model codes (searchable here), were stolen from the UK’s University of East Anglia and then made public. The new information tells us much that we already suspected — warming scaremongers are cooking the books and suppressing dissent in order to push their agenda.

These aren’t just any scientists, either. They have been influential in driving the hype, including with the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which issued a report in 2007 declaring that the end is near if massive shackles aren’t put on the economies of nations such as the U.S. Phil Jones, director of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, Keith Briffa also of CRU and Michael Mann of Penn State University — the creator of the debunked “hockey stick” graph — are some of the key players.

One of the most enlightening e-mails discusses whether the work of academic skeptics should be included in that IPCC report (which won the Committee and Al Gore a Nobel Peace Prize, by the way). Jones wrote to Mann, “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!” Trenberth is head of the Climate Analysis Section at the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research.

The pair also discussed how they could pressure scientific journals to maintain the party line. Mann suggested that, for one, the journal “Climate Research” should be targeted. “Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal.” (Sounds a bit like White House adviser David Axelrod’s assessment of Fox News: “[Fox is] really not news — it’s pushing a point of view. And the bigger thing is that other news organizations … ought not to treat them that way, and we’re not going to treat them that way.”)

Of course, the definition of science is challenging hypotheses, not stifling dissent; following the evidence, not contriving it to fit.

But stifling and contriving are exactly what warmists are doing. In another e-mail, Jones wrote, “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 [sic] from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” So the goal is to “hide the decline”?

Scientist Mick Kelly wrote to Jones about manipulating data to hide the fact that the planet is actually cooling: “I’ll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I give the talk again, as that’s trending down as a result of the end effects and the recent coldish years.”

Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research wrote to Mann complaining of cold weather and admitting, “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.”

Perhaps they can’t account for cooling because their code for creating the models is geared toward making the earth appear warmer. In fact, the code may be more damning than the e-mails. One line of code features, for example, a variable called “fudge factor,” which allows these scientists to put in whatever they want to create the desired outcome in the computer models.

Australian geologist Ian Plimer, a global warming skeptic, summed it up: The e-mails “show that data was massaged, numbers were fudged, diagrams were biased, there was destruction of data after freedom of information requests, and there was refusal to submit taxpayer-funded data for independent examination.” Other than that, the science was accurate!

Considering that everything from the Kyoto Protocol to Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Boxer in Congress, to EPA regulations to the Copenhagen conference are based on this faulty, fudged and fictitious data, policy makers should, at minimum, re-evaluate their plans. Certainly, the world’s economy should not take a hit for nothing but lies.

UPDATE: The Washington Post, no doubt in an effort to be “fair and balanced,” published three letters to the editor in response to an editorial about this climate scandal. Two of the letters were in opposition to the Post’s defense of the warmists. Trouble is, the second letter was from none other than Michael Mann, and he linked to RealClimate.org so readers could be bombarded with more warming propaganda. The Post didn’t bother to note that Mann is being investigated for his role in the scandal.

UPDATE 2 (Tuesday afternoon): The Associated Press reports, “Britain’s University of East Anglia says [Phil Jones] the director of its prestigious Climatic Research Unit is stepping down pending an investigation into allegations that he overstated the case for man-made climate change.”

SOURCE


%d bloggers like this: