Climategate or How Scientist Are in Collusion and Falsified Data

Posted by courage On November - 27 - 2009

The one thing about science I have always appreciated is the concept  of replication.  In fact, this is the backbone of what distinguishes good scientific results and theory from pure guess work.   Replication can take a couple of forms; 1.) involves unrelated scientists studying the same problem and arriving at the same or similar conclusions, or 2.) scientists sharing raw data crunching the numbers and independently reaching similar conclusions as to the meaning of the data.

The data used as the foundation of the United Nations report on global warming has always been suspect in my mind for a number of reasons.  The  data from the studies  are the foundation of the UN recommendations and the basis for the Copenhagen treaty next month, has never been shared with other scientists.  At one point these scientists, the ones who champion the treaty, even stated that the  data was inadvertently destroyed.   We  are not talking about some napkin theory, drawn up over a drunken dinner; the data used was freely passed between a handful of cheerleaders to “replicate” the original hypothesis that carbon dioxide was killing the planet and suddenly was unavailable to scientists who questioned the manipulation of the data and the results.

True scientific inquiry welcomes challenges.  This was not true for the UN science thugs who  circled the wagons, welcoming the political charlatans such as Al Gore and environmental activists, mounting a campaign to close down scientific funding, publication access to scientific journal  and  discrediting the scientists who cited research which questioned the accuracy of the “environmental justice” scientists.

Lets hear from the scientists:

YouTube Preview Image

The entire presentation of The Great Global Warming Swindle is available at the link.

Freedom of Information Act requests have been filed both here in the United States and in the United Kingdom for the data used by the climate alarmists, to data is still be stonewalled for examination.  Last week, an interesting turn of events occurred… emails from the United Nations “experts” were discovered.  First it was stated that someone hacked the computer system to and culled the emails.  More recently though I have seen online where the University this scandal originates from was in the process of compiling the requested info to comply with the Freedom of Information Act.  And that the emails were not HACKED but available in a non-secure section partition of the University website.

Since news of embarrassing, if not incriminating emails broke last Friday, it has become clear that the CRU computer system was not “hacked” and the emails were not stolen. In fact, the file containing the emails had been assembled by CRU staff in preparation for compliance with a Freedom of Information request. The file was then stored in a publicly accessible portion of the CRU computer network — making it just a matter of time before someone discovered it. Why the file was so stored may never be known, but that’s not really what’s important.

Nothing illegal or unethical was done to affect the file’s release.

Read the entire story here.

These emails outline what scientists and others who question the scientific method and validity of the studies have been saying … something is rotten in Denmark or should that be Copenhagen (with the UN Climate Conference set to begin next month)?

The University as acknowledged that the emails are in fact legitimate.  First the scientists behind this scandal sheeplessly acknowledged the emails, now they are claiming the emails were doctored.  Who couldn’t see that coming?  The emails speak about shutting other scientists out of the academic process through blackballing their research in peer reviewed journals, how they can manipulate data to get the results they desire and in one interesting email.. how the various recipients of the emails should start immediately start deleting the emails to not leave a trail of their deception.

YouTube Preview Image

and part 2:

YouTube Preview Image

LSM (lame stream media) has with the exception of Fox news been silent on this scandal.  Across the world though news agencies have been reporting on the various aspects of and the implications or fall-out from this most obvious scam.

From The Telegraph in the UK:

Among the many great amusements of the Climategate scandal are the myriad imaginative excuses being offered by the implicated scientists and their friends in the MSM as to why this isn’t a significant story. Here are some of the best:

Most Unexpectedly Honourable Response: The Guardian’s eco-columnist George Monbiot

Say what you like about the Great Moonbat, the heliophobic Old Stoic is the ONLY member of the Climate-Fear-Promotion camp to have delivered a proper apology.

I apologise. I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed. I would have been a better journalist if I had investigated their claims more closely.

Most brazen “doth protest too much” defence:

Real Climate is the website established and run by a claque of scientist friends of Michael Mann – inventor of the discredited Hockey Stick curve. They are also closely associated with the crowd at the disgraced Climate Research Unit. They clearly feel no apology is necessary:

More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords.

Well, boys, if you say so….

Least convincing “The Dog Ate My Homework”excuse: Professor Phil ‘It was a typing error’ Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit

Many of the potentially incriminating Climategate emails were the work of CRU’s director Phil Jones, including the infamous one where he discussed “trick” to “hide the decline” in global temperatures. But it’s OK. As he tells his sympathetic audience at the Guardian it was a perfectly honest mistake:

“The use of the term ‘hiding the decline’ was in an email written in haste,”

Which does make you wonder how the sentence would have read had he just had a little longer to type it correctly. “Hiding the sausage?” “Heeding the decline?” “Playing a straight bat and keeping everything above board and scientifically scrupulous as we always do here at CRU”. Yes, that’ll be it – the last one. But you can see how easily the slip was made.

Most Disingenuous Cop-Out: Andrew Revkin of the New York Times

For years Andrew Revkin has been using the NYT – aka Pravda – to push the Al-Gore-approved AGW narrative so kindly embellished for him by likeminded scientist chums at parti pris institutions like CRU. But, like any decent reporter, Revkin is above all else a principled seeker-after-truth. That’s why he had absolutely no hesitation in furnishing NYT readers with every juicy detail of the biggest science scandal of the age.

Or at least he would have done, had it not been for the following problem, expressed on his Dot Earth blog.

The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here.

Damn right, Andrew. Don’t you be troubling your readers with any of that “damning revelations” nonsense. If only journalists had shown similar integrity at Watergate, why, good old Richard Nixon might have stayed in power long enough to make America truly great.

Most Haughtily Dismissive “Nothing To See Here” Apologia: George Marshall

Here is George Marshall putting us right in the Guardian’s Comment Is Free section:

Leaked email climate smear was a PR disaster for UEA

There was no evidence of conspiracy among climate scientists in the leaked emails – so why was the University of East Anglia’s response so pathetic?

From Daily Mail Online also the UK (read entire article here):

The scientist at the heart of the climate change scandal was under growing pressure to quit last night.

George Monbiot, a leading environmentalist, said Phil Jones should resign from the Climatic Research Unit over leaked emails that appear to show researchers suppressed scientific data.

More emails came to light yesterday, including one in which an American climatologist admitted it was a travesty that scientists could not explain a lack of global warming in recent years.

They did more than try to “suppress” data, these scientists attempted to destroy the careers of scientists who questioned, in the name of true scientific exploration, the alarmists research.

Even with attempts to cover-up the dishonesty that permeates the “environmental justice” industry, some world leaders are speaking-up and refusing to move forward with legislation (cap and trade) which could irreversibly destroy the world’s economy.

Australia is leading the revolt against Al Gore’s great big AGW conspiracy – just as the Aussie geologist and AGW sceptic Professor Ian Plimer predicted it would.

ABC news reports that five frontbenchers from Australia’s opposition Liberal party have resigned their portfolios rather than follow their leader Malcolm Turnbull in voting with Kevin Rudd’s Government on a new Emissions Trading Scheme.

The Liberal Party is in turmoil with the resignations of five frontbenchers from their portfolios this afternoon in protest against the emissions trading scheme.

Tony Abbott, Sophie Mirabella, Tony Smith and Senators Nick Minchin and Eric Abetz have all quit their portfolios because they cannot vote for the legislation.

Senate whip Stephen Parry has also relinquished his position.

Read the rest of the story here.

Here at home:

YouTube Preview Image

To place in to context the implications of what the Copenhagen treaty could mean, or as it is being called Hopenhagen.

YouTube Preview Image

One would think that the POTUS (President of the United States) would safeguard the citizenry from a worldwide bamboozle of gigantic proportions.. but NO, this week the POTUS declared that contrary to his previous statement he will attend the opening of Hopenhagan to affirm the United States role as a leader in fighting climate change.  Nothing has changed since my August entry Obama, Science and False Conclusions.

America it is time to wake-up… I know that we’d rather just live a quiet life, filling our days with the mundane yet enjoyable moments.. yet much is at risk when pseudoscience is used as the foundation of legislation, especially when the Hopenhagan treaty threats the sovereignty of the United States.

Now you may ask… what is the purpose of willfully ignoring the questions surrounding the “environmental justice” charade?  One word…


Comments are closed.