144 Comments

1. Gernot:

It’s about time someone brought a little reality to this sham. We are supposed to believe what we are being told, instead of believing what we see for ourselves. Al Gore needs to be in jail rather than receiving awards for his phony science. The man is, and always was an ignorant charlatan. Only an ignorant liberal would get his science from an idiot who failed divinity school.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:01 am 2. Bob from Virginia:

Better tell NOAA the good news that global warming is not happening. While your at it did anyone notice where the jolly green giant hide all the glaciers since they obviously did not melt.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:07 am 3. Professor Guvinoff:

Conspiracies cannot advance science, but they can corrupt it.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:08 am 4. Pedrosito:

Charlie this is big news that will be totally ignored by MSM. Thanks for someone at pajamas writing lucid commentary. Except for you and Victor Hansen this site is becoming another waste land.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:25 am 5. Charlie Martin:

Pedro, mi amigo, that’s high praise. Thanks.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:34 am 6. Rob Crawford:

“While your at it did anyone notice where the jolly green giant hide all the glaciers since they obviously did not melt.”

Some glaciers have receded. Some have advanced. That you’re aware of one and not the other should make you suspicious.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:36 am 7. tdiinva:

Corrupted data to run on corrupted models = corrupted results.

This will result in a tectonic shift in the Global Warming debate in the scientific world if not the AlGore driven world of the MSM. It will take years to sort through all the climate studies that have be published in the last twenty years.

There are probably similar problems with Hanson’s GISS data base. We already know that he manipulated the data to show the 90’s to be warmer then the 30’s and that he “statistically” corrected data to make the pre-1960 data look cooler and the post-1980 data look warmer.

Global warming science is indeed a scientific hoax of epic proportions.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:49 am 8. Talnik:

“Thursday, November 17″ ???

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:09 am 9. Sebastian Shaw:

To all the Global Warming believers: If you indeed believe it is happening, sell all of your material things & give the rest to Uncle Sam. Buy a one way ticket to Antarctica & only wear a very slim bathing suit. Live by your beliefs. Of course, your beliefs lead to death since Global Warming is based on nihilism & Communism. Otherwise, you’re nothing more than petty blowhard hypocrites.

This fraud has been going on longer than Global Warming itself. The fraud began in the 1970’s when reporters hyped about Global Cooling & our world freezing to death. However, they wanted the same thing: Communism. And that’s their real goal. Communism.

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:11 am 10. CPT. Charles:

Ah nope, it’s very real:

http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2009/11/hadleycru-says-leaked-data-is-real.html

[Canceling ALL passwords might be a 'clue'.]

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:17 am 11. Sallie:

Great news..hope it is all true and in black and white to show the public.

Some people are just dumb, i.e., the public, to pay attention to a moron like Gore. Will Gore have to give back the millions he has made on his corruption of the truth?
“He Lied to us. He played on our fears.” hahahaha

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:36 am 12. Charlie Martin:

“Thursday, November 17″ ???

Oh, man, I’m an old hippie, I’m not into linear time.

yeah, sorry. TUESDAY 17 November is correct.

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:49 am 13. anton:

Well we can hope this slows down the Cap and Tax bill in D.C. It might just be enough to put a shred of backbone into the pols thatdoubted but were afraid to say as much.

I still have my Time magazine predicting the coming Ice Age, stored away with my Spiderman #1.

Can anyone say Plitdown Man?

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:58 am 14. anton:

Plitdown=PILTDOWN, man I gotta learn to type (or at least proofread)

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:00 am 15. Tom Holsinger:

This is a disaster for Big Science. It shatters their credibility and turns their government funding into a target for political boondoggles by both sides. The AGW crowd are so invested in this fraud that it has turned into a paradigm matter for them – they won’t stop believing in it, or pushing it, until they die of old age.

But for ambitious politicians of both sides, the gloves are now off. Big Science’s reputation will be destroyed by this. It will become just another pig feeding off the public trough, and its budget just another vehicle for boondoggles.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:00 am 16. Adina Kutnicki, Israel:

I dearly hope that NO profs from MIT or Caltech were involved. It would put a real damper on the hard earned dough I spent on tuition payments for my kids.
Regardless, the first one in handcuffs should be Mr Plastic himself-Al Gore, the godfather of global warming hysteria.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bloviator, plus all the other professional/professorial whores belong in cells alongside him.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:02 am 17. Pedrosito:

Charlie, de nada

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:03 am 18. Trent Telenko:

Wretchard,

We seem to have the human caused global warning fraud equivalent of the “Pentagon Papers” breaking.

This analysis seems to be spot-on in terms of the evidence I am seeing:

http://sonicfrog.net/?p=2457

PS. Many are being skeptical because it seems to good to be true. I also agree we need to be very wary of this. But, for those who are doubting because it seems so bizarre that these smart people would write and have these e-mails saved, remember that most of the big corporations that have gotten into legal trouble, from Microsoft to Enron, have had a heck of a lot of evidence presented in court in the form of e-mail correspondence that, when read, you wouldn’t believe someone would not erase it, much less write it. They only purge the things when they think they might get caught, which no one ever does.

Hard science as a whole is going to take a major credibility hit with the general public because of this.

If AGW environmental science is nothing but a big fraud. The public won’t make a hard distinction between environment science and the reputation of all science.

This has a lot of implications.

1) The politicians will use that bad public reputation of science as an excuse to make every science budget outside American military research and development as nothing but vehicles for political pork and boondoggles.

2) This event will make no difference to the AGW true believers in the Obama Administration, the EPA, other Federal bureaucracies, the environmental movement and the Democratic Party. They are going to go even more full bore for cap & trade via making CO2 a “pollutant” under Federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations.

3) The SCOTUS and AGW true believers on the lower Federal courts will make States and Federal executive branch bureaucracies enforce EPA “CO2 is a pollutant” regulations that kill American manufacturing jobs and increase the cost of energy so as to force all “internet mobile” service jobs over seas.

4) Not even a Republican majority elected federal government will stop this push as long as certain egos remain on the SCOTUS. Those egos would rather die than admit that they have been conned.

5) Nothing short of the American Congress removing the Endangered Species Act from Federal law — with a general Federal preemption of state level endangered species laws on the grounds of a Federal civil right to private property — will stop these folks from using environmental law, rules and regulations at any level of government to destroy the American Economy.

It will come to that, IMO.

AGW is about the political Left’s religious beliefs and power grabs, not the environment.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:05 am 19. Trent Telenko:

Charlie Martin,

We seem to have the human caused global warning fraud equivalent of the “Pentagon Papers” breaking.

This analysis seems to be spot-on in terms of the evidence I am seeing:

http://sonicfrog.net/?p=2457

PS. Many are being skeptical because it seems to good to be true. I also agree we need to be very wary of this. But, for those who are doubting because it seems so bizarre that these smart people would write and have these e-mails saved, remember that most of the big corporations that have gotten into legal trouble, from Microsoft to Enron, have had a heck of a lot of evidence presented in court in the form of e-mail correspondence that, when read, you wouldn’t believe someone would not erase it, much less write it. They only purge the things when they think they might get caught, which no one ever does.

Hard science as a whole is going to take a major credibility hit with the general public because of this.

If AGW environmental science is nothing but a big fraud. The public won’t make a hard distinction between environment science and the reputation of all science.

This has a lot of implications.

1) The politicians will use that bad public reputation of science as an excuse to make every science budget outside American military research and development as nothing but vehicles for political pork and boondoggles.

2) This event will make no difference to the AGW true believers in the Obama Administration, the EPA, other Federal bureaucracies, the environmental movement and the Democratic Party. They are going to go even more full bore for cap & trade via making CO2 a “pollutant” under Federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations.

3) The SCOTUS and AGW true believers on the lower Federal courts will make States and Federal executive branch bureaucracies enforce EPA “CO2 is a pollutant” regulations that kill American manufacturing jobs and increase the cost of energy so as to force all “internet mobile” service jobs over seas.

4) Not even a Republican majority elected federal government will stop this push as long as certain egos remain on the SCOTUS. Those egos would rather die than admit that they have been conned.

5) Nothing short of the American Congress removing the Endangered Species Act from Federal law — with a general Federal preemption of state level endangered species laws on the grounds of a Federal civil right to private property — will stop these folks from using environmental law, rules and regulations at any level of government to destroy the American Economy.

It will come to that, IMO.

AGW is about the political Left’s religious beliefs and power grabs, not the environment.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:07 am 20. Charlie Martin:

Wretchard,…

That’s high praise too, Trent, but Wretchard’s up and to the right.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:12 am 21. Tristan Yates:

The timing couldn’t have been better. On 30 Rock on thursday, Kenneth was running around the office trying to save power and getting people to give up stuff they liked. Then at the end, Al Gore comes in and says that no real change will take place until we change the laws of this country. Even my wife rolled her eyes. The message is basically if you want to save the planet, don’t pick up trash or use less power, instead give the government the power to police everyone else. A shameless political/Federal power grab that essentially dismissed conservation or recycling any personal or local efforts to help the environment.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:12 am 22. not to worry:

Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years.
At least the weather in Copenhagen is likely to be cooperating. The Danish Meteorological Institute predicts that temperatures in December, when the city will host the United Nations Climate Change Conference, will be one degree above the long-term average.
Otherwise, however, not much is happening with global warming at the moment. The Earth’s average temperatures have stopped climbing since the beginning of the millennium,

and it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year.

Dummies!!

When you have a meeting on climate change,
Its called the GORE EFFECT!

Bwhahahahhah!

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:14 am 23. Maurice:

This makes even funnier–if unadulterated and aggressive stupidity can be considered “funny”–the unfortunate event I witnessed last evening, when an AlGore global warming infomercial busted out in the middle of a sitcom I was watching on, you guessed it, NBC. That was just downright creepy.

But the extent to which nanny-state government, the educational community, and the entertainment community are all melding together into some sort of truth-crushing propaganda machine is thoroughly alarming.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:20 am 24. Anonymous:

Hmmm, wonder how Moe Strong is taking this bad news today. I recommend we find a padded cell for Gore and Strong and let us regain our sanity without their constant fear mongering.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:25 am 25. JED:

We would expect infantile behavior from an infant science. All of this sometimes junk and sometimes real science would be a load funnier if there were not a tax structure waiting to be applied to the “realities” of computer models.
Moving from the gold standard to fiat money to offset carbon credits is hillarious.
Carbon dioxide becomes the negative coin of the realm. Every exhale is a debit. The carbon based life forms of earth exchange internation currencies with gas. Algore and true believes laugh all the way to the bank. Facts are so unbecoming of the extortions of the self righteous.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:34 am 26. anton:

Hey, maybe we can get past this whole co2 thing and start worrying about the real ecological threats to the planet’s well-being; Chinese rivers dumping millions of tons of toxins into the Pacific Ocean.

Oh, wait, that wouldn’t allow the UN to steal loads of my money and form a One World Government to oppress me. What was I thinking?

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:42 am 27. Henry chance:

Over the years, the McIntyre at Climate Audit begged for temp data from the CRU. The CRU had cheated on their data and for years refused the request. Now it comes out with e-mails that confirm the data was not clean. Michael mann is in many of the e-mails. he was busted recently on false and misleading report on trees in the norhtern Siberia indicating warming. it was only 1 tree. The liberals don’t like science but dislike conservatives even more. so they use some scientists to spread false claims about global warming and admit they also do not see warming.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:51 am 28. gus3:

It seems to be available at the moment at http://www.megaupload.com/?d=U44FST89 (but it’s one of those pesky “sign up for faster download” sites).

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:05 pm 29. Steve DeMarcus:

Heavens to Betsy does this mean that we have been lied to about Global Warming (climate change)? I can not believe that people would manipulate data to get funding for finding such data…that would be unethical and possibly illegal and immoral.

Just think of scaring all the people that are afraid the world will flood and then burn up if we don’t quit driving cars and truck and running trains and boats and aircraft. I was just getting ready to find a nice cave to move into and eat nuts and berries and grass, but I suppose now I can carry on living however I can afford to and hopefully without having to pay extra for GREENHOUSE gases I might produce.

Al Gore is a FARCE and so is his silly idea of GLOBAL WARMING FFFFFAAAAARRRRSSSSEEE!

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:08 pm 30. M. Simon:

Charlie,

Jones has confirmed that at least some of the material is authentic including the e-mail you posted. Power and Control has details.

When I first saw this (about an hour after WUWT broke the story) I started blogging. Very exciting. Confirmation came about 10 AM GMT.

Instapundit hasn’t picked up the story yet (last time I checked).

This is the Zimmerman Telegram of AGW.

I also gave American Thinker a heads up since they were mentioned in one of the e-mails. Read their story. It is rather disgusting in an amusing sort of way.

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:09 pm 31. Ayrdale:

Anton, this Kiwi agrees wholeheartedly.

Many of us are true, not phoney environmentalists. The latter are concerned with advancing socialism, not greening the planet.

This scandal is hitting the international MSM big time.

See mickysmuses.blogspot.com for links.

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:25 pm 32. chuck:

This is a disaster for Big Science. It shatters their credibility…

Well, yes. And all I can say is that it is deserved. The whole AGW thing has been a disgrace, and the failure of other scientists to voice scepticism or go public with their doubts has been a sad chapter in the history of science. I can also think of a couple of journal editors who should be fired.

Sad, for all that. The subject of AGW is research worthy, but it has been so polluted by politics that it needs a thorough housecleaning.

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:25 pm 33. "gunner":

“Carbon dioxide becomes the negative coin of the realm. Every exhale is a debit.”
———————-
i’ve been wondering for years how the “powers that be” would figure out how to tax breathing.

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:35 pm 34. anonymous:

Next: the right continues its fight against the science of evolution.

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:49 pm 35. Bohemond:

“There are probably similar problems with Hanson’s GISS data base. We already know that he manipulated the data……”

And despite the fact that he runs a branch of NASA (the Goddard Institute for Space Science) and his own background is in astronomy and satellites, Hansen weirdly relies on ground stations, not satellite data, despite the fact that the ground station readings are heavily distorted upwards by poor siting and other ground cover/land use issues. But they do therefore run increasingly hotter than the satellite series, which suits Hansen to a tee.

Nov 20, 2009 - 12:59 pm 36. Sherab Zangpo:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/

Pretty damning.
Lefties are totalitarian, therefore they do ANYTHING to win.
And after they win they do anything to stay in power.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:05 pm 37. Tom Holsinger:

chuck,

The problem is that all of science will be tarred with this fraud. It wasn’t just one of a small group of scientists as with the nuclear winter hoax. Enormous numbers of scientists are involved in knowingly perpetrating the AGW fraud.

When so many scientists have lied, contentions by scientists about the merits of funding a particular research project in the future will carry much less weight, because of the loss of the reputation for credibility by all scientists.

Henceforth politicians will only give lip service to merit considerations in funding scientific research, and will instead award research funding based on how that will benefit the politicians. The budget of Big Science is now up for grabs, and will be boondoggled as much or more as any procurement budget. The primary consideration will be how much of the proposed research funding will get back to the politicians as bribes or campaign contributions.

And this will be done on a bi-partisan basis, with legislators of all parties trying to get their hands on the money.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:11 pm 38. Exactly!:

We are seeing the factual foundations of a class action lawsuit against Al Gore and his bevy of corrupt scientists who sold their credibility for the big bucks.

Anyone who has been the least bit damaged by this intentional malfeasance could be a class member.

Or, we can individually sue in our local courts under tort theory. The victims need part of Gore’s ill-gotten gain.

I think there is a high probability of multiple judgments against him.

And against the government? Check out the Daubert case. Supreme Court ruled on the requirements for “science”.

Lawyers rule !!! Any public interest lawyers interested?

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:12 pm 39. Charlie Martin:

M Simon, it’s up at AT now, including the “American Stinker” email. I had this piece in to PJM about 2200 MT, but they didn’t run it immediately, which’ll l’arn’em. Notice the TBR.cc thing says “the data appears legitimate”, without being specific about the emails. Jones is now being cagey about the emails.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:13 pm 40. anton:

30. M. Simon:

“This is the Zimmerman Telegram of AGW. ”

That is superb, I blew coffe all over my monitor when I read that, it is perfect.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:16 pm 41. Knotacommie:

AS my wife says about ALBORE-the guy is so STUPID he couldnt find his ass with a search warrant.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:23 pm 42. Charlie Martin:

By the way, the East Anglia CRU is apparently not really associated with the Met Office at Hadley, so “Hadley CRU” is wrong. Apologies.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:23 pm 43. Sherab Zangpo:

#34 Anonymous

Judging from your trollic OFFTOPIC, YOU aren’t a valuable specimen of any particular evolution…

The totalitarians defined: “change the topic of the discussion when caught with dirty hands”.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:26 pm 44. anton:

31. Ayrdale: I am with you, I have long been involved in local efforts to protect/purchase land to preserve it in a natural state (easy enough to do here in Michigan where most of the population is in a relatively small area of the state). There are larger issues that are a real concern that have been ignored for decades because of the AGW fetish. Who cares if the oceans don’t rise at all but instead are filled with dying fish and plants?

There are ways to promote economic advancement in developing countries that don’t leave them a stinking, sooty ruin, and if a fraction of the money wasted on AGW studies had been devoted to it most of those steps could already have been taken. Of course the real problem with that approach is that nobody will get a Noble Prize for it and they would have to get out of their limos and jets and do real dirty work out in the field.

I hope it’s -30C in Copenhagen the entire duration of the conference. Not that I have anything against the Danes, just the AGW freaks.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:27 pm 45. Knotacommie:

By the way-One of the names mentioned in the Emails is professor Micheal E Mann. Mann is the inventor of the discredited “hockey stick” graph the global warming scammers have been using for over 25 yrs. I believe he now is working at Penn St Univ in State College, Pa. The “hockey stick” was discredited when researchers started adding ANY number to the graph and the results were ALWAYS the same, even NEGATIVE numbers that would have suggested global cooling. Seeing Mann, a climate fraud artist if there ever was one on the Email list makes me find the hackers info credible, since Manns name isnt widely known to the general public.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:30 pm 46. Paul -Indiana:

How’s that Cap and Trade working out for you?

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:38 pm 47. turfmonster:

“It will mean the end of some scientific careers, and it might even mean those careers will end in jail.”

Absolutely correct.

And I would add that any papers that these folks published should be pulled – that under no circumstances are these papers ever to be allowed to be quoted or referenced by legitimate scientific organizations/journals unless it is for the sole purpose of showing how fraudulent science can be done by miscreants.

These people who’ve done this need to become piriahs.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:51 pm 48. Charlie Martin:

#45, Mann is widely known in the community; anyone who could forge the rest of this stuff would necessarily know his name too.

Nov 20, 2009 - 1:51 pm 49. Sherab Zangpo:

I don’t mean to play the role of the black crow of misfortune, but I see that many gentlemen here believe that the subversives will relent JUST because their lies are being revealed as such.
Forget it.
The nihilists are BEYOND silly problems such as TRUTH and untruth.
They will carry on with their projects of tax and trade (= destroy capitalism from inside) and New World Order (= subversives brothers and muslim overlords in command, through the UN).
Don’t worry, they will not stop.
Their war against Freedom will not stop.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Nov 20, 2009 - 2:09 pm 50. Ben Blankenship:

Before we swallow this vile heresy hook line and sinker, in the interest of honest science, we should ask Al Gore to thoroughly analyze and add his objective insight to dispell the false notion that the globe isn’t still warming. He’ll surely want to clear up the confusion.

Nov 20, 2009 - 2:36 pm 51. heathermc:

In a speech to the Heritage Institute (I think), Michael Crichton noted that there would come a day when “knowledge” would become open to tort law, ie, if your bad idea costs money, then the victims can sue, like they can sue for a faulty car!!!

I expect Michael Crichton is laughing, up there in Heaven.

Nov 20, 2009 - 2:38 pm 52. Tolbert:

Sherab Zangpo,

Wise words indeed.

Light causes cockroaches to scurry, but it doesn’t rid you of them. They lie waiting for you to return the warmth of your bed so they can continue their work unseen.

Nov 20, 2009 - 2:40 pm 53. Ayrdale:

“The nihilists are BEYOND silly problems such as TRUTH and untruth.
They will carry on with their projects of tax and trade (= destroy capitalism from inside) and New World Order (= subversives brothers and muslim overlords in command, through the UN).
Don’t worry, they will not stop.
Their war against Freedom will not stop.”

Sherab, you are right…they will not alter course. However, there are many scientists now who will HAVE to alter course, and the green left so called “progressives” will not be able to use them any more. This whole caper has depended on fear and lies. Both tactics have been exposed.

Careers are ruined, prosecutions may follow. Things will never be the same.

Nov 20, 2009 - 2:42 pm 54. scythe:

Global warming, for many of us, was obiously another way to implement International Socialism. We call them watermelons – green on the outside, red on the inside. And their policies are the pits. International socialists never stop working and thinking of ways to steal liberty and enslave populations. They are in a perpetual state of war. How many of you rely on your weather forecasts only to find out they are usually way off? So how, logically, can there be an absolute certitude about this “scientific” farce if weather is unpredictable and records have been kept for such a miniscule amount of time in the life of the planet? None of it makes sense. In fact much of the Northeast was covered in glaciers at one point in time so “global warming” seems to be an occurrence having nothing to do with people and “carbon footprints”. Even if this turns out to be true and a huge fraud is uncovered don’t count on retreat from the perps. There is too much money and power invested in this and they will devise a way to make themselves look “violated and victimized” and the truthtellers look like the villians. We have seen all this before and it is part and parcel of the evil which has descended like a toxic miasma in the air we breathe suffocating the truth and perverting the world. I’ll take the carbon overload anyday.

Nov 20, 2009 - 2:51 pm 55. nolan:

I’ve just started learning more about options, real, scientifically viable options, for “combatting” global climate change. Such things as pumping some amounts of Sulfur Dioxide into the air to simulate the after-effects of vocanoes blowing. The SO2 (?) reflects the suns rays, much like a nuclear winter from what littles research I’ve managed so far. It’s supposed to, if done on a smaller scale, bring temps down. Also, I heard of putting barges to sea and have some device produce sea spray, adding to the amount of water vapor over the oceans, keeping them cooler, reducing the realease rate of CO2 from the oceans (which are, as everyone here knows, I’m sure, the biggest CO2 sinks for the planet).
Also a viable alternative, finacially and scientifically, from what I’v gathered so far. (if any one has more info re: these ideas, I’d love to get my hands, er, eyes on it).
The reason I thought about these ideas being rejected, or at least to my knowledge, not seriously considered, is that they dont transfer wealth or destroy western economies! Remember, Green is the New Red!
These e-mails, if true, will likely not slow down the power grab by the “elite” and their useful libiots. I think some serious push-back will be required! I am becoming convinced that the actions of the left, driven by their hate-filled little minds, and the thinning patience of the right are going to come to a head. I am a gloom and doom type of person, and I’ve been seeing too many indicators to leave me with any optimism.
Prepare!

out

Nov 20, 2009 - 3:07 pm 56. Marc Malone:

Is it really being picked up by the Euro MSM? That would be huge! If they do it, then, eventually, our MSM will pick it up. The paroxysms will be hilarious to watch. The Cap-Trade Congresscritters will be hilarious to watch!

A vast right-wing conspiracy theory turns out to be true. Yes, Virginia, there really IS a conspiracy.

Nov 20, 2009 - 3:08 pm 57. Hyphenated American:

Remember the Downing Street Memo? Intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy….

http://hyphenatedamericans.blogspot.com/2009/11/intelligence-and-facts-are-being-fixed.html

Nov 20, 2009 - 3:09 pm 58. Theo Goodwin:

The author writes:

“It will mean the end of some scientific careers, and it might even mean those careers will end in jail.”

No, it will mean the end of some criminal careers enjoyed by people who pretended to be scientists.

Nov 20, 2009 - 3:34 pm 59. Tom Holsinger:

This will cripple basic research in the United States for reasons I explained above. The U.S. is one of the few places to effectively support basic research, and where most of it takes place.

The long-term consequences of that will be vast.

Nov 20, 2009 - 3:42 pm 60. baal:

And when do I get my tax dollars back for all of the money spent on this religious garbage? Thats what this is. Its a religion, complete with a garden of eden, a messiah, and an end times. Our tax dollars are being spent on this religious vomit!

Nov 20, 2009 - 3:44 pm 61. Charlie Martin:

Marc, it’s now been picked up not just by the European MSM, but here, at least by Fox and the WSJ.

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:06 pm 62. Tom Holsinger:

heathermc,

Here are links to Crichton’s speeches:
http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches.html

My favorite is his “Aliens Cause Global Warming”>/b>:

http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-alienscauseglobalwarming.html

“My topic today sounds humorous but unfortunately I am serious. I am going to argue that extraterrestrials lie behind global warming. Or to speak more precisely, I will argue that a belief in extraterrestrials has paved the way, in a progression of steps, to a belief in global warming. Charting this progression of belief will be my task today.”

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:13 pm 63. Don Rodrigo:

I made the Pentagon Papers analogy over at Belmont Club as well — assuming that this giant hack turns out to be legitimate in its contents. I think the “Zimmerman Telegram” analogy is good.

A caution: all this just came out, so we don’t really know what we’re looking at. Also, what may appear as intimations of fraud based on the vocabulary the correspondents in the apparently damning e-mails are using may actually be ‘climatologist slang’ of some kind; the words “trick” and “decline” may not mean what we think they mean. A stretch on my part? Probably, but let’s see how this sorts out.

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:24 pm 64. Tom Holsinger:

Mr. Martin & Theo Goodwin,

Two many scientists are involved in perpetrating this fraud for any amount of evidence of it being fraudulent to create more than trivial adverse career effects on any of them. This is protection by numbers. Frauds on such a scale must be stopped early, and by reputable scientists willing to take risks.

I speak from personal experience here, having been involved in the squelching of one such fraud by the usual doomie suspects, and that was made possible because one of them – Carl Sagan – made the career-ending mistake of misrepresenting, in print, the opinions of his TTAPS (Turco, Toon, Ackerman, Pollack, Sagan) colleagues on the radiogical model in the nuclear winter scam. They had to call him on it to save their own careers. Here’s the URL if you want to look it up:

http://www.volokh.com/posts/1175616057.shtml

I provided the results of my investigation to Fred Singer (who is arguably THE gray eminence amoung American atmospheric sciensts), and Singer used it to quietly blackball Sagan in the scientific community. No one would work with him, his grant applications were denied, etc., and he had to leave the science profession to take up a second career as a science-fiction writer.

This was possible because only a few real scientists were promoting the nuclear winter scam. There are many thousands promoting the AGW scam, and vast amounts of money ride on promoting it. It’s about power and money, not science, just as Crichton feared.

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:32 pm 65. X:

@63 Don Rodrigo, sorry, but I do research too on geophysics and trick and decline mean what they mean to you. I’m downloading this now and I’ll prepare things to do a big eartquake about this. Everybody have to try their best too to let these things be known

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:49 pm 66. Geo:

Lets not get to excited, even if these leak is everything it appears to be and more the narrative being pushed, that only massive govt intervention can save us, is still in place and still be pushed out. None of the people or agencies that invested heavily in the narrative are just going to give up and go home. They will continue to call for govt control, only louder and more insistently.

If we can make ourselves heard over the dim then perhaps this is the the beginning of the end for global warming, but the fight to dismantle the big lie goes on.

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:50 pm 67. Banned by Huffpo:

The “Global Warming” myth has always been a thinly veiled attempt at total control over individuality.

Look at the desired outcome . . . control over where you set your thermostat, how much water you use, what you drive and when, what you eat, what you wear, how many children you can have.

Sad thing is, AGW is an industry with so much funding it won’t go away, even in light of this major revelation.

May God bless those who hacked!

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:55 pm 68. skatzbert:

//Someone who is willing to hack might also be willing to create fakes.//

So, the hand-wringing begins.

Question: When is it a crime to reveal a crime?

Last time I looked, failing to report a crime that one has knowledge of is itself, a crime. They call it misprision.

And,…why would you immediately think the worst of a person who did it? A person who wishes to reveal the fraud behind a conspiracy which has already cost billions of dollars, and if further pursued, (through Cap & Trade), would cost untold billions as well as being a planet-wide economy-wrecker.

Give. It. A. Break.

Nov 20, 2009 - 4:57 pm 69. Tom Holsinger:

Don Rodrigo & X,

You both assume that English and American idioms are the same. I’m reading a book on the World War Two chiefs of staff which mentions how the “tabling a motion” idiom had two quite different meanings in English English and American English.

The Americans thought “tabling an issue” meant removing a subject from discussion. The British thought it meant making the subject next to come up on the agenda. This mutual mistake over the meaning of the same term caused no end of trouble.

The same might be true here for the terms “trick” and “decline”.

Nov 20, 2009 - 5:09 pm 70. Donna B.:

So, what happens to the people who have bought and sold carbon credits? Is this going to another “collapse” of a market?

Nov 20, 2009 - 5:14 pm 71. skatzbert:

Yes indeed. All science will be tarred & scarred by this debacle.
Which is why honest, decent scientists everywhere should begin prowling their campuses, seeking out the fraudsters, taking the matter to their academic credentials board(s) and collecting heads & testicles.

Nov 20, 2009 - 5:28 pm 72. westerncanadian:

We will know the files are real when CRU starts shouting that the real crime is the exposure, not the content of the files. Next,if the files are real, expect cries of victim-hood from the CRU. Taxpayer dollars funded all this research. If it turns out to be invalid …?????
If the files turn out to be faked then some silly b****r needs to be taken out behind the woodshed.

Nov 20, 2009 - 5:32 pm 73. Henry chance:

Michael Mann can trip from Penn state to the State Pen

Seriously this is fraud and cheating. Academic faculties should punish the perps but probably will not. This doesn’t damage science. It just prove they didn’t apply scientific methods.

Mann is lame in that he took some data points, added one proxy that suited and created a vector. I wonder if he teaches and appeared in front of students today?

Nov 20, 2009 - 6:02 pm 74. NH:

Like we didn’t already know this was a hoax? I think the hackers need to get a Nobel Prize.

On manipulating America with environmental issues:

“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. …The real enemy then is humanity itself. Democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead.”

—From the Club of Rome’s “The First Global Revolution” p. 71,75

Nov 20, 2009 - 6:34 pm 75. TriGeek:

Where are all the trolls? I would think they would be out defending their beloved Global Warming “Scientist”.

Nov 20, 2009 - 7:08 pm 76. David WL:

This from prescient.doc

Many coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation models required fluxes, i.e. the addition of heat and water to the ocean component of the coupled model to keep the model stable. Those flux-corrections were constant but non-physical. The third generation HC coupled climate model HadCM3 is a significant advance over its predecessors, having eliminated the need for these ocean flux-corrections. It has increased (1.25 by 1.25 degrees) oceanic resolution and a much improved simulation of ocean currents. Its atmospheric component includes state-of-the-art radiation code, which allows explicit representation of the major greenhouse gases and aerosols. A new land surface scheme ‘MOSES’ accounts for the effects of soil water phase changes and the effect of CO2 concentrations on transpiration. The model includes a sulphur-cycle sub-model which converts prescribed emissions into aerosol concentrations which influence the Earth’s radiation budget both directly and indirectly through their influence on cloud properties. The model is portable, can be run on a variety of machines, and is now being used by UGAMP.

Other work involves replacing formerly prescribed elements by interactive components. In particular, a new variant of this model will incorporate models of the ocean and land carbon cycle, while another contains ocean biology and can simulate ocean chemical uptake of CO2. An interactive vegetation model resolves the terrestrial biosphere into different functional types that spread and compete while their associated land surface parameters are correspondingly modified, providing climate/vegetation feedbacks as well as those associated with CO2.

All of this illustrates the accelerating pace of model development, but it emphasises the requirement for additional and new work to validate the model and its constituent parts.

Interpretation: Models are continually rewritten to produce desired results

BTW, unzipped, the total folder size is 176 MB. Does anyone know what .pro file suffix stands for. They’re a series of tree-ring data.

Nov 20, 2009 - 8:41 pm 77. Bob14:

The AGW battle may be lost, but the Obama administration’s War on Prosperity will continue…

Nov 20, 2009 - 8:48 pm 78. David WL:

I apologize for the bold in the previous posting.

From “uea-models.ppt”
slide 5: “Modeling uncertainty”
•Set of international climate models are all ‘tuned’ to observations
•But there is no guarantee these are the actual optimal models
•Other choices of values for model input parameters could have provided equally plausible simulations of observations whilst providing a wide range of responses in the future

Nov 20, 2009 - 8:53 pm 79. dphorstick:

Al Gore
Weather Whore

Nov 20, 2009 - 8:54 pm 80. Ernst Blofeld:

The truth of the emails should be easily confirmed. Simply do a FOIA request on the data and communications that the email archive asserts exist. They’ll either cough up the communications, deny they exist, or attempt to destroy them. If the latter, they’re signing up for some very risky encounters with prison.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:06 pm 81. DAvid WL:

If you can get the info dump, check out “RulesoftheGame.pdf” (a pretty pink cover).

“The goal is to convince people of climate change.” Duh. Of course there is climate change. The question is: (1)do humans cause it? (2)can humans change it? (3) SHOULD we change it (maybe we should leave well enough alone)?

“Changing attitudes towards climate change is not like selling a particular brand of soap – it’s like convincing someone to use soap in the first place.” (p. 2)

“Recent surveys show that people without children may care more about climate change than those with children.” (p. 3) Duh. People with children have something to live for. People without, don’t. So they worry about the future.

“The evidence discredits the ‘rational man’ theory – we rarely weigh objectively the value of different decisions and then take the clear self-interested choice.” (p. 3) Exactly. Which is why the climate change argument is non-rational. Tu quoque

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:06 pm 82. peter jackson:

Conspiracy theorist annoy the piss out of me. They share the same premise as the left, that all outcomes are intended by someone somewhere, for good or ill, and thus that power is the only thing that matters, the lowest common denominator of human civilization.

Therefore I’ve alway shied away from conspiracists concerning AGW, 9/11, the economy, and everything else. I’ve never believed that man-made co2 was causing significant global warming, but I never imagined it could be a conspiracy either. What I saw was more like a bonfire of the vanities, with mostly independent actors nevertheless rushing to the same side of the boat at the same time and undoing themselves.

If this pans out it will be literally incredible. But if we can take science back from the left, if we can take back serious ecology, then we can take other things back from them too, like economics, and political science.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:07 pm 83. gjg:

The data has all been tainted by the urban heat island effect. Here is a simple comparison of matched urban and rural sites in the US with over 110 years of data. Go to youtube and look up Global Warming Urban Heat Effect.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcsvaCPYgcI

It so simple a 6th grader can understand it.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:18 pm 84. Charlie Martin:

Heh, Tom, I didn’t recall you were in on the “nuclear winter” thing. A friend of mine pressed him rather firmly abou that at a talk at Duke when we were at grad school. I’ve got to say, though, that his doom seems to have been protracted and comparatively painless, since he made a tonne of money and got a medal from the NAS shortly before he died.

David WL (#76), it’s possible to make to much of that kind of thing, as you’re demonstrating. ANY time you use modeling to try to understand a physical process, you’re going to rewrite the model to fit observations. Hell, my PhD work was all about how to make it easier for wet lab biologists to do that. The trick is that you have to not get married to a result, which these guys seem to have done. That leads to situations where you muddle with the data in order to preserve what you “know” is right. The more adoration you get — like being featured in an Oscar-winning film and in a Nobel Prize’s justification — the harder it is to deal with criticism, especially if it’s justified.

I don’t think this will make the AGW argument go away. First of all, because it’s probably true that there is some anthropogenic warming: we add CO2 and CH4 to the atmosphere, we build big cities that are marvelous heat absorbers, we cover our roofs with black shingles. All of those have some effect. What we don’t know is how much, and how it nets out with other homeostatic mechanisms like cloud cover. Second, there are people with a commitment to the idea, both because they see it as a good professional choice, and even more so because they actually believe it. Read those emails and you don’t read stuff from #2, #17 and #11 plotting how SPECTRE can take over the world — they really do believe in the model, and they really do feel they’re being unfairly attacked.

That doesn’t excuse some of the things some of them apparently did, like trying to thwart the FOAI requests. But it does mean that the AGW ideas will have to be modified over time, just like the old man-made ice age idea went away over time.

What this does mean is that the old approach of sneering at and suppressing climate skeptics is probably going to be a lot harder to make work. If so, then the science will eventually work itself out.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:36 pm 85. R7:

Maurice said:

But the extent to which nanny-state government, the educational community, and the entertainment community are all melding together into some sort of truth-crushing propaganda machine is thoroughly alarming.

It’s called the PC Cathedral, and its power is similar to that of the Medieval Church’s power over the West in the past.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:41 pm 86. virgil xenophon:

As others have noted, this will not stop the Gore and his acolytes in Govt and the Scientific community. Indeed, they will now redouble their efforts in order to push thru cap & trade, etc, before this all sinks in with the public at large. And just remember, as Thomas Kuhn famously said: “A paradigm (such as AGW) cannot be defeated by mere facts, only by a more powerful competing paradigm.” Unless these new facts are packaged/”framed” correctly they are likely to be dismissed/sold to the public as “minor” carping by embittered rivals and know-nothings.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:44 pm 87. John:

I want this to be true, but since my name isn’t Dan Rather, lets take this real slow, verify, verify, cross verify, and re-verify. Note the Rather model, running with forged documents off of a integrity cliff is bad.

Nov 20, 2009 - 9:48 pm 88. Valerie:

“All science will be tarred & scarred by this debacle.”

Nah. Scientists blew the whistle on this crap from the beginning. Physicists and chemists and engineers and even a fair number of climatologists have been pointing out that, among other things, CO2 is a minor, not a major, greenhouse gas, the SUN is the main controller of the temperature of the earth, we have only had decent temperature measurements worldwide for a couple of decades at best, and the experimental error of temperature measurement is greater than the changes they claim to track.

The arguments against laws designed to cope with the effects of Global Warming crap have been scientific, not political or economic. The only news here is that the fraud on the part of the Global Warming fear-mongers was deliberate.

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:09 pm 89. Pragmatist:

Green PEACE, Green NAZI’s, Animal Rights Terrorists, Islamophiles, Moral Equivalencers, ‘Yuman Rites’ espousers, ‘Elf n Safety’ goons, Multi Culturalists, Left winger, moonbats, Racist Blacks and Communists what do they all have in common well they all love the Obamanation.

Be afraid America be very afraid.

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:24 pm 90. deet:

#76. Does anyone know what .pro file suffix stands for. They’re a series of tree-ring data.

It sounds like a DOS file.

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:40 pm 91. GLASS:

From small dead animals.

Gore on the tonight show, type this in on YouTube to see how truly stupid this man is.

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:43 pm 92. Tom Holsinger:

Charlie, back-channel career assassinations are secret by definition. In Sagan’s case it was carefully hushed-up professional suicide. Misrepresenting the views of your professional colleagues in print is often fatal.

Ernest Blofeld,

They had plans for foiling Freedom of Information Act requests:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_warmist_conspiracy_tthe_emails_that_really_damn_professor_jones/

“And when [Professor Phil] Jones is really forced to the point of handing over his data, he considers ways to may checking it more difficult or annoying:

Options appear to be:

Send them the data

Send them a subset removing station data from some of the countries who made us pay in the normals papers of Hulme et al. (1990s) and also any number that David can remember. This should also omit some other countries like (Australia, NZ, Canada, Antarctica). Also could extract some of the sources that Anders added in (31-38 source codes in J&M 2003). Also should remove many of the early stations that we coded up in the 1980s.

Send them the raw data as is, by reconstructing it from GHCN. How could this be done? Replace all stations where the WMO ID agrees with what is in GHCN. This would be the raw data, but it would annoy them.

But Jones figures a way out:

At 04:53 AM 5/9/2008, you wrote:

Mike, Ray, Caspar,

A couple of things – don’t pass on either…

2. You can delete this attachment if you want. Keep this quiet also, but this is the person who is putting in FOI requests for all emails Keith and Tim have written and received re Ch 6 of AR4. We think we’ve found a way around this…

This message will self destruct in 10 seconds!

Cheers

Phil

Prof. Phil Jones

UPDATE

More from Don’t-Disclose Phil, who seems to have a like-minded acolyte in Melbourne’s own Bureau of Meterology warmist David Jones:

Email 1182255717.txt

Wei-Chyung and Tom,

The Climate Audit web site has a new thread on the Jones et al. (1990) paper, with lots of quotes from Keenan. So they may not be going to submit something to Albany. Well may be?!?

Just agreed to review a paper by Ren et al. for JGR. This refers to a paper on urbanization effects in China, which may be in press in J. Climate. I say ‘may be’ as Ren isn’t that clear about this in the text, references and responses to earlier reviews. Have requested JGR get a copy a copy of this in order to do the review.In the meantime attaching this paper by Ren et al. on urbanization at two sites in China.Nothing much else to say except:

1. Think I’ve managed to persuade UEA to ignore all further FOIA requests if the people have anything to do with Climate Audit

.2. Had an email from David Jones of BMRC, Melbourne. He said they are ignoring anybody who has dealings with CA, as there are threads on it about Australian sites.

3. CA is in dispute with IPCC (Susan Solomon and Martin Manning) about the availability of the responses to reviewer’s at the various stages of the AR4 drafts. They are most interested here re Ch 6 on paleo.

Cheers

Phil“

Nov 20, 2009 - 10:43 pm 93. Stepan:

Global warming is a farce, Darwinism is a farce, and liberalism is a farce.

Unless we right ourselves, we shall all pay dearly for these gross deceptions.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:03 pm 94. michael ace:

Al Gore has now made more off Global Warming then Al Capone made off Bootleg Liquor—-Maybe now the end result will be the same—-Gore’s Ponzi scheme would really impress Capone.The Hacker should be given a Noble Peace Prize for this Exposer

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:05 pm 95. ManekiNeko:

#76, IOW, “Through statistical manipulation, we arrived at the desired result.” I believe that when I was in school, this was called “dry labbing” and was considered a form of cheating.

Nov 20, 2009 - 11:22 pm 96. G.L. Alston:

#76, Great Scott — google is beyond you?

try http://filext.com/file-extension/PRO

Then again perhaps PRO is the secret file type exposing the 1.3 jiggawatt (as opposed to gigawatt) flux capacitor’s inner details.

#93 good grief this is precisely how Gore et al claim that the debate is over re AGW; it’s a copy of the stance (rightfully) taken by scientists who are confronted with anti-evolution morons. Were it not for the anti-evolution tards the “debate is settled” meme wouldn’t even exist.

#34 you’re actually funny and (pathetically) on target. See #93.

#84 Charlie you’re one of the very few on this idiot forum who understands that mankind *must* affect his environment at least in some part. Saying this however will have the hive mind accusing you of being a leftist tool. Very few here seem to grasp that affecting the environment isn’t embracing radical AGW. You’re far too educated to waste your time here.

#63 correct, ‘trick’ equates to ‘hack’ where the connotation isn’t akin to swiping credit card numbers but rather a clever and/or creative non-obvious method. Common term in science or engineering. Doesn’t mean what the laymen thinks it does.

#86 you are correct and have identified the real thing to fear: Gore and his ‘minions’ abusing scientific ignorance to foist economically ruinous law. The problem here is that for every poster like you and #84 or #63 there are 100 others who are exclusively inclined politically and essentially neuter any meaningful opposition. This makes it all too easy for Gore et al to pronounce the debate settled because the opposition message sounds like a collection of UFO nuts (a problem of idiots drowning out the useful oppostion points aka signal to noise.)

Nov 21, 2009 - 12:19 am 97. kochevnik:

You have to love American wingnuts who purport a vast conspiracy among dissociated scientists with scant evidence, while fascisticly insinuating any collusion between dual-national Zionist Chertoff, Zionist lightning Silverstein scoring 8 billion, Bush’s nephew’s security company, Bin Laden’s building inspections, Cheney’s takeover of airspace, Mossad gateway inspectors and an outright violation of known physical law to be the province of fools.

What’s more, both fiascoes court extreme fascism as solutions. Bush’s PNAC war prescription for global homogeneity employing Muslims as new boogiemen on the corporfascist right, and a communist tax on breathing from the communist left. Wingnuts miss the big point, of course: Communism is merely corporfascism adorned in socialist garb. Partisan repub jesters impugn leftwing fascism, but mandate pharisaical corporfascism.

The Vatican laughs at her pet sheeple, foolishly attempting to outwit her 500 year gameplan.

Nov 21, 2009 - 12:24 am 98. John McLachlan:

Perhaps the hackers should receive a Nobel Peace Prize for their contribution to substantially reducing the wars which were going to result from global warming as the earth’s people fought each othr over the reduced resources and many millions of climate refugees wandered over the planet, straining the infrastructure of countries which they descended upon.

Do the intelligence agencies of the western governments have the ability to ascertain the provenance of this material and commission proper scientific review? If this is the case, considering the appocalyptic scare stories which have been circulating about the implications of AGW and the real damage which western governments are inflicting upon their economies in trying to reduce it (allegedly), surely it is imperative that the political leaders are given accurate information, upon which to base their decisions.

Do the Chinese and Indians intend to wreck their economies on the basis of an audacious scientific fraud, perpetrated by a wide ranging conspiracy by supposedly respectable scientists?

Nov 21, 2009 - 12:44 am 99. Marc Malone:

#94 Michael Ace – Forget the now worthless Nobel. (Well, the money’s nice.) Queen should knight him, enfeoff him even. How much money is this going to save Western Civilization? Trillions! Effing trillions! Not to mention the liberty preserved.

Nov 21, 2009 - 12:50 am 100. John McLachlan:

If, as it appears, reputable scientists perpetrated the falsification of data to substantiate their claim of AGW, does this mean that they are aware that the AGW theory is false? Alternatively, do they believe the AGW theory and then consider falsifying data in order to substantiate the claim as a valid scientific undertaking.
It is my belief that a genuine scientific fact should need no falsification of data, to substatiate it. However, people, even scientists are emotional creatures, not totally logical. Is it possible to create a lie and then believe it, even knowing that it was produced from falsity? The large number of intelligent men and women, who are supposedly better trained than average in critical thinking and evaluating data, seem to have somehow displayed a herd mentality, rather than individually duplicating research for the purposes of corroboration of results and properly conducting peer reviews.

Nov 21, 2009 - 1:09 am 101. Francis W. Porretto:

I would suggest that among the most significant aspects of this matter is that the leftists who hoped to ride AGW to total power over the world economy are too stunned to respond.

Where are our customary leftist trolls? Where is moho? Where is Now and Then? Where are vivo and biblio? Have they nothing to say as one of their two principal weapons is knocked from their hands?

I don’t think they’re just out having a beer together. Do you?

Nov 21, 2009 - 2:29 am 102. Pragmatist:

# 93 Stephan well as Meatloaf sang ‘Two out of three ain’t bad’ pity you had to expose yourself as a deluded creationist.

Nov 21, 2009 - 3:18 am 103. Hankmeister:

Just extrapolating here, but one wonders if there had been a skeptical blogosphere 150 years ago, would Darwinism have survived its infancy? Some would see that possibility as a good thing and some as a bad thing since one can look at this question from different ends of the microscope. But it seems to me with all the Evolution hucksterism and hoaxes and evolutionary theory deadends (Lamarkism for one) Darwinism wouldn’t have near the sway it does today because it would have been invioably tainted by bias and whacko theories derived from the imperfect reasoning and observation powers of even the best trained scientists.

Is it possible for 150 years of “science” (often what we accept as “science” is more like an “of course” scientism, we don’t question it because some “scientific” authority says its true – a classic argumentum ad verecundium … argument from authority) to have unconciously engaged in a Darwinian “conspiracy”? A millieu of thought often becomes a reason for its own self-perpetuating existence (now think about that one for a couple of day) Similarly, theory often influences interpretation. We really aren’t as intellectually superior as mideval man, though we certainly have some distinct advantages of having built on other brilliant people’s ideas. However, evolutionary theory has become so acceptable today among those who not only benefitted greatly from grants of all kinds but also the common people who have had a lifetime of inculcation that they can’t help but stay within the evolution box whenever the latest pronouncements come down from the Darwinian Oracles of Delphi.

Look, I’m no flatlander and neither am I some geo-centric nut because I’ve SEEN direct evidence that the Earth is not only round it’s also a sphere and astronomically it is not the center of our solar system much less the universe. But no one’s ever directly observed evolution (though some rashly claim they have) and Occam’s razor has something to do with my convictions on this matter, too, since geo-centrism was far, far too complex a theory to have been true … just like some aspects of evolutionary theory which seems to undergo fundamental changes in our “understanding”. It’s not enough to claim “I see evolution happening all around me therefore evolution exists” than it is to say “I see God all around me (though you can’t) therefore I know He exists.” Both are clear examples of circular reasoning, or at minimum petitio principii – begging the question.

I’m just sayin’ that’s all. And this isn’t necessarily a religion vs science issue since probably just as many religious people believe in the random magic of evolution as do believe in some form of “special creation” … or even theistic evolution for that matter. By some reasoning the Pope’s acceptance of evolutionary theory should raise alarm bells because it was precisely the same kind of secular, “scientific” weight of evidence which led the Catholic Church to accept the secular flat earth theory and turn it into religious dogma. But the true story of the flat earth theory is rather convoluted and filled with myths which were popularized by Andrew Dickson White’s error-filled “The Warfare of Science With Theology” which attempted to blame the Catholic Church (and I’m no Catholic) for originating the flat earth theory when in fact the early Church fathers Clement, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, Isodore, Albertus Magnus and Aquinas all accepted the earlier Greek’s contention the Earth was a globe.

As a person of faith I have no problem believing in evolution (something I ardently believed in when I was a younger materialist, btw) since it could be argued it is a natural mechanism by which the Creator of the Universe – mentioned in our own Declaration of Independence – brought life into being from inanimate matter. However, frankly, the longer I live and the longer real scientific proof still does not exist of a measurable force or physical characteristic intrinsic to matter which would inexorably compell it to organize itself into higher and more complex forms to the point where the inanimate becomes animate by random chance, the more skeptical I become of an actual “evolutionary” process. And this despite the fact the full weight of scientific devices that we have today should be able to quantifiably detect such a quantifiable aspect of matter itself.

Sure genetic adaptations occur, but they invariable occur within both the explicit and latent genetic parameters which exists within that kind of flora or fauna. That is, a Pepper Moth remains a Pepper Moth and doesn’t turn into a butterfly despite the variation of its coloration resulting from environmental factors. Genetic adaptations are useful in conserving a species, not “evolving” it, and if environmental factors exceeds the ability of a genetic population’s collective gene pool to adapt, the plant or animal becomes extinct. The whole fossilized geologic column speaks to me of of extinction, not evolution.

Maybe I’m being too “show me” skeptical but what I’ve been seeing within the materialistic Darwinian community the last forty or so years is often not hard science, particularly in light of how so many of their pet evolutionary micro-theories have been ground beneath the feet of new discoveries which overturns their pontification about this find or that find being yet another example of fossilized humankind and then turns out to be either ancient humans with rickets or simply another extinct ape species with some human-like features. Happens all the time, yet the theory of evolution itself continues to survive and, ironically, evolves because the alternative is far too distatestful for any self-respecting, secular scientist to contemplate with any seriousness,i.e. there may actually be an intelligent designer, a transcendant Creator behind this terrestrial veil! Oh, we’re modern man and we can’t have that, now can we?

And note I still say this while being open to the prospect that organic Evolution may indeed be an explanation for our physical origins.

Obviously, belief in antropogenic global warming isn’t the first time science was led astray by a nice sounding, self-supporting theory and neither will it be the last time.

Sorry, off my soapbox, just something I’ve been thinking about lately.

Hankmeister

Nov 21, 2009 - 3:43 am 104. egoist:

I think what’s missed is that the West has gone faith. It won’t matter that lies are exposed; it won’t / wouldn’t matter if summers were 10-degrees cooler. That’s not a concern for those who “believe”.

Nov 21, 2009 - 3:49 am 105. Dr. Matt:

A fact in isolation does not mean anything. On global warming there is a lot of evidence (Balto inner harbor now has water running over the pedestrian walkways at high tide..wasn’t built that way; Russia is claiming oil at the North pole which wasn’t able to be accessed until lately. First snow day free years in my County).
then… here’s the less obvious evidence.
‘hundreds of e-mails leaked.’–hundreds ?….. that’s like Lance Armstrongs biking diary showing ‘dozens of miles’. I have hundreds on my blackberry this week.
There’s no positive data on the e-mails. So…. we know the emails leaked by criminals are at best highly selected if not flat out falsified.

Also, “Oh, gee, the intelligent elite is manipulating data to give tax money to themselves and at the same time move us from paying money to oil-producing countries”. Do you really rather that Putin, Chavez, Iran gets all our money than Al Gore…. admittedly you do have to think about that a little bit…..

Nov 21, 2009 - 4:50 am 106. Tom Perkins:

@Stephan

“Darwinism is a farce”

You’ll have to actually come up with something better than, since the tendency of the most fit to survive and pass on their genes preferentially compared to the less fit in their cohort is obviously true, and demonstrated in the lab and every single day in real life.

That’s how actual science works–in constrast to how AGW theory has grown in influence–you have to prove you have a better theory.

So, you know, put up or…

Nov 21, 2009 - 5:25 am 107. Jim Ryan:

Global warming is a farce, Darwinism is a farce, and liberalism is a farce.

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn’t belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?

Nov 21, 2009 - 5:28 am 108. Brett:

“The politicians will use that bad public reputation of science as an excuse to make every science budget outside American military research and development as nothing but vehicles for political pork and boondoggles.”

They aren’t?

Nov 21, 2009 - 5:35 am 109. eon:

Just some general comments;

1. Far from getting a medal, the hackers should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This is really no different than the hacking of Sarah Palin’s emails; private information was unlawfully extracted by the electronic equivalent of burglary. Those who hacked Palin need to be fined or imprisoned, or both; the ones who hacked CRU should be given the same treatment.

2. That said, the CRU data (which appears to be valid) is prima facie evidence of both deliberate distortion of data, collusion to distort it, and collusion to conceal the distortion. (All in projects funded by taxpayers’ money, no less.) Add in the deliberate evasion of FOIA responses (in a publicly-funded institution) and you have evidence of deliberate academic fraud and violations of Federal law.

Those involved at CRU also need to be prosecuted, fined, and at the very least fired by CRU. IMPO, they should also be banned from any future work in this field, ever, and also be denied tenure at any institution that might employ them for at least the next decade. As for any other projects based on their data, those projects need to be subject to immediate review, and the CRU data expunged from their databases. Falsified data leads to erroneous conclusions, period; there is no place for it in science.

3. Viewed as a criminal law matter, what the “warmies” at CRU did is no different than it would have been for a crime lab/crime scene expert (such as myself) to collude with a prosecuting attorney to suppress exculpating evidence in a criminal case, i.e. evidence which could exonerate the defendant. (In this case, the defendant is the human race in general, and Western civilization in particular.) If, as a “CSI”, I had been fool enough to do this at the behest of a prosecutor who was stupid enough to ask me to, the pair of us would have been caught out during the discovery phase by the defense. The result would have been said prosecutor and myself facing jail time for attempted perjury, suborning perjury, falsification of evidence, suppression of evidence, and probably false arrest and unlawful prosecution as well. My career, and the prosecutor’s, would have ended at that point, and the pair of us would have had it coming. (The Duke University rape case is a case in point.)

4. On a related note, Dr. Crichton was only half right about the origins of the AGW hysteria. (I’ve read his speech.) The movement on the left predates SETI by over a decade.

It has its roots in (don’t laugh- OK, go ahead) the UFO “contactee” movement of the 1950s. led by the likes of George Adamski, truman Betherum, et al. From the end of WW II on, this lot was claiming “contact” with enlightened “Space Brothers”, who were invariably tall, blond, beautiful (and oddly “Aryan”- looking), who were usually from either Venus (Adamski), a mythical planet named “Clarion” that was somehow hidden from us on the other side of the sun (Betherum) or from somewhere outside our solar system entirely (several other “contactee” types).

All the contactees claimed that they had been “chosen” by the “Space Brotheres” due to their higher degree of “enlightenment”, to bear messages that the rest of humanity would one day be compelled to acknowledge the importance of. (See under “megalomania” in the unabridged dictionary of your choice.)

The “Space Brothers’” message was always the same- Mankind was about to destroy itself with nuclear weapons AND its advanced civilization. And far from offering us the benefits of their advanced technology to save ourselves, they repeatedly said that only a “return to the soil” could save us. The contactees would have us believe that these advanced alien beings (who flew around the Universe at FTL speeds as they liked) lived a basic, simple agrarian existence “at home”, and that we, too, must do so to “save the planet”.

(If we didn’t, the noble Space Brothers were ready to smack us a good one if necessary, to “save the rest of the Universe”.)

To a man, the contactees admitted to being terrified by the existence of nuclear weapons and nuclear power. The majority of them (including Adamski) were also extremely unhappy with modern civilization as a whole. They dreamed of a pre-industrial Paradise under the benevolent autocracy of the “Space Brothers”- with their own “enlightened” selves as the local leaders. (Sound familiar?)

This nihilistic, anti-human creed became part of the dogma of the political left in the 1960s due to the counterculture movement that embraced practically any silly, non-scientific idea they could find in their rebellion against “cold, unfeeling” Western linear thinking.

Linear thinking was never a strong suit of the contactees. For instance, in the Sixties, when space probes like Venera revealed that far from being a paradise, Venus was an uninhabitable furnace with a poisonous atmosphere, Adamski claimed that the data was being deliberately falsified by the Russians and NASA to “hide the truth”. (For a later example of the same thing, Google “Cydonia pyramids” and “face on Mars”.)

One of the bigwigs of the contactee movement, Donald Ware, went on to become a major mover in liberal political and academic circles in that decade, in the process helping contactee dogmas become part of the mainstream of “progressive” thought, especially in the ecology movement.

There was no real “conspiracy” to make progressives “think like contactees”- but there was a lot of “logic rejecting” groupthink going on, coupled with a great deal of enthusiasm for any and all non-Western “philosophies”. (The “Ancient Astronauts” mania of the Seventies helped there, by tying the idea of benevolent ETs to the ancient pantheons of India, Egypt, etc.)

In other words, the basic foundation of “deep-ecology” and “progressive” dogmas re “Holy Mother Gaia” is descended from the delusions of people who created aliens in their minds due to being terrified of the prospect of atomic annihilation after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And who literally infected the academic/political culture of liberalism due to a complete lack of critical thinking by the adherents of the latter.

Whenever I see someone falsifying or “cherry-picking” data to justify political actions, I immediately think of Adamski, and Betherum.

And wonder if there will ever come a time when reality is allowed to re-enter our institutions of higher learning. Or the halls of government, for that matter.

clear ether

eon

Nov 21, 2009 - 5:55 am 110. Mike Zarowitz:

I am not a AGW doubter, more of a questioner. One must bear in mind that the AGW theory did not spring full cloth out of the minds of some of the gentlemen mentioned in these copped emails. There are indeed a number of others that are integrally involved the formulation of the theory. The theory may be right or maybe wrong, but that does not mean everyone is involved with some cover-up.

Some of the guys mentioned in the emails seem to have honesty/scientific integrity problems. It is sad but there are some – not a lot – scientists who feel the need to “beautify” their data so that their bigger point can’t be missed. They do not realize that is not science.

Let’s take an opposite view which I think most of you would agree: assume for argument that AGW turns out to be true. (Ok, for some of you this may require drugs.) It would be unfortunate and irresponsible to take down the theory because of the honesty-issues of a few individuals.

Nov 21, 2009 - 7:30 am 111. tanstaafl:

“The AGW crowd are so invested in this fraud that it has turned into a paradigm matter for them – they won’t stop believing in it, or pushing it, until they die of old age.”

“I think what’s missed is that the West has gone faith. It won’t matter that lies are exposed; it won’t / wouldn’t matter if summers were 10-degrees cooler. That’s not a concern for those who “believe”.”

For the True Believer, factual information is, almost, irrelevant.

Besides AGW being a substitute “religious” belief system for the Left, it has been profitable for so called scientists (ought to be ashamed of themselves) chasing grant money.

Al Gore’s own “investment” in AGW has brought him from $2 million to an estimated hundred million income. And he still, personally, uses energy egregiously and eats steaks & cheeseburgers

“Hey, maybe we can get past this whole co2 thing and start worrying about the real ecological threats to the planet’s well-being; Chinese rivers dumping millions of tons of toxins into the Pacific Ocean.”

Not to mention deforestation and destruction of animal habitat.

7 of the 10 most polluted cities in the world are in China.

The UN gathering going on in Copenhagen in a couple of weeks (all the UN gatherings amount to egregious waste of time and resources, the brilliant Ban Ki Moon (not) says we only have a matter of months really to save the planet while Obama’s energy advisor, Steven Chu, thinks we should paint the roofs of our houses white) was intended to be another punitive strike against the United States, another “redistributive” measure where the US would be required to pay developing countries for its use of an unfair share of “the world’s” resources.

Obama’s recent announcement “can’t get there right now” has definitely dismayed a large contingent of his supporters, the warmists/the socialists/the “transnationalists”.

Nov 21, 2009 - 7:52 am 112. David WL:

I am looking at idl_cruts3_2005_vs_2008b.pdf

This consists of graphs of temps from different nations and locations in the 20th century. The upper case initials at the top of each graph are the months: “MAM” = March, April, May; “JJA” = June, July, August; etc.

There are two “smoothed curves,” one in black and one in purple (or whatever the color is). Does anyone know the difference in the two curves?

Nov 21, 2009 - 8:03 am 113. David WL:

(re 111) Ah hah!

Shoulda’ looked at the file name more closely:

Black is the smoothed curve as calculated up to 2005; purple is the smoothed curve taking into account data through 2008.

You might need to enlarge the pdf to see it clearly.

Nov 21, 2009 - 8:15 am 114. ice:

http://drop.io/climatezip#

another download site

Nov 21, 2009 - 8:22 am 115. uburoisc:

Eon, fantastic comments, hilarious backstory, very plausible. Odd, how silly ideas have a way of nudging into otherwise sensible people through indirect routes.

Nov 21, 2009 - 8:24 am 116. BC:

I see that the amateur climatologists are out in force again, gawd…. The big problem the climate researchers are dealing with is that they can’t just go about working on their science without being yanked into some flaky political baseball game where bits of research make up the balls and bats, and with the loudest screamers in the stands being the most illiterate about what’s going on (“F*cking Dumn*ass! You need to get to 3rd base for a touchdown and the batting cage for 30 love, losers!!”

Nov 21, 2009 - 8:38 am 117. Bohemond:

“I am not a AGW doubter, more of a questioner. One must bear in mind that the AGW theory did not spring full cloth out of the minds of some of the gentlemen mentioned in these copped emails. There are indeed a number of others that are integrally involved the formulation of the theory.”

However, some of the participants Notaby Michael Mann) are the ones who have produced the “evidence” on which the AGW movement is founded. Take away the Warmists’ historical climate ‘reconstructions,’ and the purported correlation of temperature with atmospheric carbon vanishes.

Nov 21, 2009 - 9:18 am 118. John:

These emails are nothing more than facts.

Do not forget: For liberals a thing doesn’t have to be true, it is sufficient that you merely *want* it to be true. Every global warming scientist on earth could come forward tomorrow to admit it was all a hoax and the liberals would STILL not concede they are wrong.

After all, there’s huge sums of money on the line and the opportunity to seize more control of the economy. They will never give that up.

Nov 21, 2009 - 9:23 am 119. tanstaafl:

Andrew Revkin may be among the more reasoned proponents of AGW.

However, when he writes…

“But the evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to global warming is so broad and deep that the hacked material is unlikely to erode the overall argument.”

…It should be noted that there are worlds of difference between there being a “human contribution to global warming” and the fanatical & agenda driven stand (promulgated by Al Gore, Ban Ki Moon et. al) that “human beings are causing catastrophic climate change.”

Hacked E-Mail Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute

Nov 21, 2009 - 10:31 am 120. Marty:

mike @ 110

Problem is, the AGW proponents we now know about are all crooked, and had to be crooked in order to keep the scam going.

In light of that, there is now an even heavier burden of proof on the AGW proponents who aren’t implicated in the Hadley leaks.

And your policy prescription is bass-ackwards. We know the harm we will suffer from restricting fossil fuels, with much greater accuracy and certainty that we know about the “risks” being avoided… not to mention we know how ineffective those restrictions will be in actually affecting climate, even accepting the AGW models.

Nov 21, 2009 - 12:01 pm 121. tdiinva:

BC:

At last a troll shows up with attempted defense of scientific fraud. AGW is the modern equivalent of the Stalinist war on genetics led by T.D. Lysenko (Al Gore staring as Lysenko).

Global warming has been under severe stress from real science for quite a while. Temperatures over the last ten years contradicts the predictions made by climate modelers who now say that warming has taken a holiday for 20 years or so. There are two reactions a real scientist can make when real data contradicts his theory. He can suck it up and modify his theory or he can falsify/manipulate his data. Important segments of the global warming mafia have chosen the second course.

It is fair to say that they can no longer claim that the planet is getting warmer because they have corrupted the data. Because of their dishonesty we no longer can say what the current climate trend is because they irresponsible behavior has rendered all climate date useless.

Fascism is a collectivist political ideology built upon a central narrative. The new narrative is the carbon cult and Warmism is the latest version of Fascism.

Nov 21, 2009 - 12:37 pm 122. Ian:

“We ought to have the context, but it appears to imply they’re massaging the data to “hide the decline” in temperatures.”

I think you need to review the Jean S. post at Climate Audit (Mike’s Nature trick), which puts this email squarely in context. The “decline” that they are discussing is what is referred to as the “divergence” problem in dendro circles – the fact that their “treemometers” don’t showing the same warming in the late 20th C, as is apparently shown by the measured temperatures. The trick, if not properly revealed and discussed in the paper, with appropriate caveats IS misleading (and deliberately so). Arguably, it also calls into question the error bands that need to be applied to all dendro work (if the trees aren’t responding to the recent warming, how certain are you that previous growth spurts – or failures to grow – are evidence of temperature changes in the past?).

The email, however, is not evidence that there is a late 20th c drop in temperature that is being covered up.

Nov 21, 2009 - 1:09 pm 123. Tom Perkins:

@ BC # 116 “I see that the amateur climatologists are out in force again, gawd…”

What I see is the AGW “professionals” are conspirators and frauds. You think we should let them continue to promulgate lies and the stupendously expensive policies the AGW’ers want?

Nov 21, 2009 - 2:02 pm 124. BC:

To Tom Perkins: What you and the others see is what you want to see, helped along by years and years petroleum industry BS, deranged right wing nonsense and a lazy, confusion-breeding corporate media.

Nov 21, 2009 - 3:18 pm 125. Brian:

Hi,

Does anybody know if the police authorities are on the case for this instance of illegal computer tampering and data theft?

Thanks!

Nov 21, 2009 - 4:30 pm 126. Charlie Martin:

#125, Brian, both Phil Jones and Mike Mann have alluded so, but I haven’t read anything specific.

Nov 21, 2009 - 4:50 pm 127. tdiinva:

BC demonstrates the intellectual straightjacket that Alinsky places upon true believers. He is incapable of thinking outside of a parameter set handed to him by his Warmist leadership. Because of this he doesn’t understand that the ground has shifted and that we are no longer discussing whether ASW is a valid theory but instead the real scientific discussion is about what is the valid data series. The data has been cherry picked and cooked and it will now take quite a while to determine what the path of global temperature is.

Thbe reality is that the ASW theory is now dead on arrival from a scientific view. What BC demonstrates is that it will take a lot to kill it politically. AGW has never been about science. It first totalitarian doctrine of the 21st Century.

If BC wants to continue his role as a climate troll he will have learn how to think on his own. I doubt he is up to the challenge.

Nov 21, 2009 - 4:55 pm 128. Tom Perkins:

@BC #124.

If these emails are real, then the only evidence of fraud is on the part of the persons–scientists who have repetitively violated basic standards of professional ethics–who claim humanity is the cause of what they say is an unusual increase in the temperature of the earth’s climate.

Even if you proved the emails were all fake–and it looks they are all real–then you still have to address the fact that the AGW’ers will not simultaneously release their data and equations, and exhaustively, ridiculously cherry pick their data to support their hypothesis.

They attempted to defraud all of humanity into relative impoverishment, something that would cause they early deaths of hundreds of millions pruely

BC, you are defending crimes against humanity.

Nov 21, 2009 - 5:38 pm 129. Tom Perkins:

@ Brian and Charlie Martin, #’s 125 & 126.

Whistleblowers are protected under the laws of the United States, I don’t know about England.

If this was done from America, they are not criminals, but heroes under the law.

Mann, et al, can lump it.

Nov 21, 2009 - 5:50 pm 130. Tom Perkins:

RE #128 typo correction

“They attempted to defraud all of humanity into relative impoverishment, something that would cause they early deaths of hundreds of millions pruely”

should be

“They attempted to defraud all of humanity into relative impoverishment, something that would cause they early deaths of hundreds of millions purely through an abandonment of the resources that would let them live.”

Nov 21, 2009 - 7:09 pm 131. Mirco:

56. Marc Malone:
Is it really being picked up by the Euro MSM?

It is on the online version of “Il Foglio”, a leading newspaper in Italy.
http://www.ilfoglio.it/soloqui/3890

Nov 21, 2009 - 7:59 pm 132. William Robert Thorton:

@ 129,

Whistleblowers are: 1) required to go to the authorities, not the internet; and 2) must be in the organization. Therefore, I doubt this hacker is a whistleblower and likely broke the law.

Nov 21, 2009 - 8:40 pm 133. Charlie Martin:

#132, frankly, I’ll worry about it when Daniel Ellsberg does time.

Nov 21, 2009 - 10:15 pm 134. GaryC:

David WL: BTW, unzipped, the total folder size is 176 MB. Does anyone know what .pro file suffix stands for. They’re a series of tree-ring data.

They are probably IDL(Interactive Data Language) files, although the .pro file suffix is normally used for code (functions or procedures), not data files. IDL is a computer language that is commercially available from ITT and is fairly expensive. It is roughly equivalent to MATLAB, but used more in the image processing community, especially for hyperspectral imagery. It is fairly fast, especially for matrix or vector operations, and can be read by most BASIC or FORTRAN programmers, as long as you understand that most operators can handle vector or matrix input variables.

There is an open source language that is supposed to be source code compatible called GDL. I’m not sure how fast it is compared to IDL, but it is about $1800 cheaper. Here is a link to the home page for the project.

http://gnudatalanguage.sourceforge.net/

Nov 21, 2009 - 10:20 pm 135. Thomas Holsinger:

Mr. Thornton,

This looks very much like either an inside job, or it was done with the assistance of one or more people in signficant capacities inside CRU.

Nov 21, 2009 - 11:32 pm 136. Robert:

I’ve always been middle of the road when it came to questions about global warming. Not to keen on the notion that it’s entirely man-made, but not stupid enough to think that we’ve never ever had even the slightest affect on climate. Let the scientists sort it all out, I’d say, and then let the engineers figure out solutions (being libertarian, I feel the State is an answer to a question best never asked).

This absolutely shakes my trust in science. Again, I’m not stupid and I know there are hundreds of reasons scientists pursue their fields and that debate is far from dispassionate, but this? This outright corruption? Sonsabitches! Garbage like this and we’ve all been set back who knows how many years. How much money, how much human capital, how much time has been wasted on perpetuating an outright fraud? Money wasted, regulations and laws created never to be repealed, jobs destroyed and all for what?

Heads need to roll and fast.

Nov 22, 2009 - 4:15 am 137. Tom Perkins:

@132

If you are blowing the whistle you are a whistleblower. IOW, what 133 said.

Nov 22, 2009 - 5:44 am 138. Dave Surls:

“Whistleblowers are: 1) required to go to the authorities, not the internet; and 2) must be in the organization. Therefore, I doubt this hacker is a whistleblower and likely broke the law.”

All UAE records of any sort must be made available if requested.

“5 key facts that all staff should know about Freedom of Information”

“The Act gives everyone both in and outside UEA a right of access to ANY recorded information held by UEA…”

“…As all documents and emails could potentially be released under the Act, you should ensure that those you create are clear and professional”

http://www.uea.ac.uk/is/foi/guidance

Nov 22, 2009 - 6:18 pm 139. Paul -Indiana:

Nov 22, 2009 - 6:30 pm 140. Dave Surls:

“I think you need to review the Jean S. post at Climate Audit (Mike’s Nature trick), which puts this email squarely in context.”

The context appears to be that there is data which shows that atmospheric temperatures are NOT rising, and they’re trying to suppress that data, as much as they can, because that conflicts with the conclusion that they’ve already reached…and they don’t like the idea of people arguing with their conclusion.

Now, maybe that’s not the way it is. Things aren’t always as they appear…but, it sure looks that way.

Nov 22, 2009 - 6:34 pm 141. Dennis Weston:

Bernie Madoff and Al Gore. Same Crime.

Nov 23, 2009 - 9:59 am 142. Danram:

The e-mails themselves are damning enough, but they won’t by themselves be what kills the AGW movement. What will kill AGW as a driver of public policy is the other 95% of the files from the CRU that were uploaded onto that Russian server.

That other 95% contains data sets, programming code, and comments from the scientists and statisticians working with them. Now that outside experts are having the chance to delve into them, what they’re discovering is that they’re garbage. The data is incomplete and corrupted, the programming code is full of bugs, and the predictive models are flawed with poor predictive power. It’s no wonder that the guys at the CRU have resisted making their work public for so long. They knew full well that if the general public was ever allowed to see it, the case for AGW would collapse, along with their funding and their reputations.

Truth be told, this was never about science. This was always about ideology, power, and the forced re-allocation of trillions of dollars worth of the world’s resources at the direction of the political left.

Nov 29, 2009 - 11:50 am 143. eric:

Whether Global Warming is actually occurring is only
half the picture. Where’s the proof that man is
responsible? The Earth has been around for billions
of years, with lots of extreme climate changes before
man arrived. What conceit to believe that any
change must be our own doing, and without evidence.

Dec 3, 2009 - 11:55 am 144. Canbyte:

Worst part is losing our democracy as stipulated in Clause 38 of treaty – IPCC (UN)’s ‘COP’ to rule your gov’t. = Taxation without Representation. Check it out and protest.

http://canbyte.newsvine.com/_news/2009/11/28/3559804-cooking-the-frog-slowly-

Dec 3, 2009 - 3:11 pm