Posted on 11/21/2009 1:28:51 PM PST by maggief
Ahhh yes, those pesky skeptics and bloggers wearing pajamas doing the research that AP refuses to do .. nothing to see here, folks, just move along to the cliffs edge ....
Interestingly, about 3 decades ago, these same AP 'reporters' were all frothing with glee over some anonymous whistle-blower in the Nixon administration who met them in a dark alley ... remember Deep Throat?
Obviously "Deep Throat" wasn't wearing pajamas ......
/sarc off
crap- forgot hte link: (This is goign to be huge huge huge IF the emails are ifnact genuine- this is goign to blow wide open hopefully- however, the leberal scam artists perpetrating this scam will find a way to turn htis around soemhow- they are masters aty ducking ANY kind of responsibility, and making it appear like they are right despite gettign caught, and we’re wrong- soemhow the insanity iwll continue)
GloBull Warning Ping.
You spelled ‘hugh’ wrong.
No, crAP; not stoking debate...
Documenting fraud on a breathtaking scale.
It's good to see actual documentation for behavior that has been known for years...
About 5 years ago, an Israeli mathematician and physics expert, who became interested in AGW, spent years studyng the existing documentation and corresponded at length with "Global Warming 'scientists'," One of whom sent him an email saying, "We must get rid of the Medieval Warming period." Other than saying he was a respected climate researcher, at the time he refused to identify him Perhaps now he might change his mind.
I am now searching for this Israeli's name in my records. He has his own website.
lol- I spell a lot of things wrong :)
We also need to call on congress to investigate the Obama administration as to when they knew global warming was a scam, and WHY they NEVER informed the public about htis scam, and WHY they threatened us with bogus informaiton like they have been!!! We darn near were all forced to pay for somethign that is entirely cyclical, and infact, businesses are already being forced to pay for it via ‘carbon credits’ and these businesses SHOULD SUE our government for forcing htem to pay for somethign they are NOT responsible for.
This is goign to be huge! :)
Thanks for posting the climatedepot url. They have all the emails on their site in easy to read format.
Here is one I read as I skimmed thru the emails:
From: gjjenkins@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
To: p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, deparker@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: 1996 global temperatures
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 11:23 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: llivingston@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, djcarson@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, ckfolland@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Phil
Remember all the fun we had last year over 1995 global temperatures,
with early release of information (via Oz), “inventing” the December
monthly value, letters to Nature etc etc?
I think we should have a cunning plan about what to do this year,
simply to avoid a lot of wasted time.
I have been discussing with David P and suggest the following:
1. By 20 Dec we will have land and sea data up to Nov
2. David (?) computes the December land anomaly based on 500hPa
heights up to 20 Dec.
3. We assume that Dec SST anomaly is the same as Nov
4. We can therefore give a good estimate of 1996 global temps by 20
Dec
5. We feed this selectively to Nick Nuttall (who has had this in the
past and seems now to expect special treatment) so that he can write
an article for the silly season. We could also give this to Neville
Nicholls??
6. We explain that data is provisional and how the data has been
created so early (ie the estimate for Dec) and also
7. We explain why the globe is 0.23k (or whatever the final figure is)
cooler than 95 (NAO reversal, slight La Nina). Also that global annual
avg is only accuirate to a few hundredths of a degree (we said this
last year - can we be more exact, eg PS/MS 0.05K or is this to big??)
8. FROM NOW ON WE ANSWER NO MORE ENQUIRIES ABOUT 1996 GLOBAL TEMPS BUT
EXPLAIN THAT IT WILL BE RELEASED IN JANUARY.
9. We relesae the final estimate on 20 Jan, with a joint UEA/MetO
press release. It may not evoke any interest by then.
10. For questions after the release to Nuttall, (I late Dec, early
Jan) we give the same answer as we gave him.
Are you happy with this, or can you suggest something better (ie
simpler)? I know it sound a bit cloak-and-dagger but its just meant to
save time in the long run.
Im copying this to DEP and CKF also for comments.
Cheers
Geoff
My sentiments exactly. Those poor AP researchers. Rather than being allowed to cover the significant and unprecedented global warming story, the fraud of the century, they put huge resources on attacking an autobiography and book tour. Pretty hilarious.
“the hackers had entered the server and stolen data at its Climatic Research Unit..”
Of course the AP slugs won’t mention the billions of research money (our tax dollars) stolen by these con-men.
There’s a reason why AP won’t leave Fort DC and mix in with normal America.
Here’s the take from Dr. Ball, a retired NASA climatologist:
“Global Warming is often called a hoax. I disagree because a hoax has a humorous intent to puncture pomposity. In science, such as with the Piltdown Man hoax, it was done to expose those with fervent but blind belief. The argument that global warming is due to humans, known as the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW) is a deliberate fraud.”
Thread at:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2391469/posts
Sweet!
bttt
That is the absolute best post I have seen in a long, long time.
“Everything about socialism is sham and affectation.” 23.11, Ch23. Evil, Economic Harmonies - Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850
Witness evil.
Thanks for posting, maggief.
This is a great site for anyone interested in science. This guys enthusiasm is contageous, and the breadth of his knowledge impressive.
This site is a great place to explore for hours and, although I can't find the exact quote I seek (yet), I know it's there, probably in one of his replies to comments, on one of his numerous articles.
Shaviv relates a personal experience, where he was being ecruited to help with Warming Panic, and was asked to help "remove the Medieval Warming Period" from the debate.
Three years ago, or so.
(Thanks.)
Eleven AP fact checkers assigned to Sarah’s book. ELEVEN! (Zero’s books ... 0)
How many are relegated to this dump of authenticated documents???
Can the AP agenda be any more transparent?
“Stoke climate debate”? Don’t they mean end debate and we can now confinedently call it a fraud?
Wel, if we all burn up together we will have reached a consensus and ended all of our problems forever. Won’t cost anybody a damn dime.
Peace be with you
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.