Posted on 12/2/2009, 4:01:11 AM by ricks_place
The whistleblower deep in the basement of one of the ugly, modern tower-blocks of the dismal, windswept University of East Anglia could scarcely have timed it better.
In less than three weeks, the world’s governing class – its classe politique – would meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, to discuss a treaty to inflict an unelected and tyrannical global government on us, with vast and unprecedented powers to control all once-free world markets and to tax and regulate the world’s wealthier nations for its own enrichment: in short, to bring freedom, democracy, and prosperity to an instant end worldwide, at the stroke of a pen, on the pretext of addressing what is now known to be the non-problem of manmade “global warming”.
The unnamed hero of ‘Climategate’, after months of work gathering emails, computer code, and data, quietly sent a 61-megabyte compressed file from one of the university’s servers to an obscure public message-board on the internet, with a short covering note to the effect that the climate was too important to keep the material secret, and that the data from the University would be available for a short time only.
He had caught the world’s politico-scientific establishment green-handed. Yet his first attempts to reveal the highly-profitable fraud and systematic corruption at the very heart of the UN’s climate panel and among the scientists most prominent in influencing it’s prejudiced and absurdly doom-laden reports had failed. He had made the mistake of sending the data-file to the mainstream news media, which had also profited for decades by fostering the “global warming” scare, and by generally denying anyone who disagreed with the official viewpoint any platform.
The whistleblower’s data file revealed, for the first time, the innermost workings of the tiny international clique of climate scientists...
(Excerpt) Read more at scienceandpublicpolicy.org ...
Is it a story, if the MSM won’t cover it?
The World owes Trillions to some hacker.
Pray for America’s Freedom
They think if they pretend there is not a problem, then PRESTO! No problem. I'm going to enjoy seeing them lose.
One of the greatest heros in the history of science is an anoonymous wistleblower, known only by the code name FOI. (”freedom of information”)
Good collection of ClimateGate videos:
I’m sending to everyone I know. Most libs aren’t aware of ClimateGate. Let’s help them.
>> Is it a story, if the MSM won’t cover it?
Was Monicagate a story, when only Drudge would touch it?
I think we both know the answer to that.
I love that graphic!
Did you create it? If not, do you know where it came from?
Lord Christopher Monckton’s YouTube video STILL is viral. He did yeoman’s work laying the foundation of explanation of what AGW is; how the scam works; and who the players are than just about anyone.
In a just world, Viscount Monckton would be going to Oslo for the Peace Prize.
What an absolutely wonderful report.
The problem remains, however that, like everything else the DBM doesn’t like that contradicts them, mass at the Living Church of the Holy Climate Change is still being held.
If the DBM doesn’t like a story (like this one which exposes them for the frauds, fools and disingenuous liars that they are), they simply ignore the story.
Kind of like the way they ignore the story about zero’s ineligibility to be POTUS!!
“The whistleblower deep in the basement of one of the ugly, modern tower-blocks of the dismal, windswept University of East Anglia could scarcely have timed it better.”
Actually, I have a theory that the data was leaked by CRU. It was obviously compiled for a FOIA response. They knew it contained devastating evidence. So they leaked it knowing that the Old Media would turn the story into a “stolen data” story. Had they waited and produced the same information in response to the FOIA requests, the Old Media would have been required to cover the story more honestly.
Essentially its a gloss over with enough info to fill the attention span of the non curious reader.
>> From what I’ve seen the MSM has a story line for this one...essentially that “both sides” have been bad. One for spying and taking out of context, and the other for perhaps being a little irresponsible with the data.
Essentially its a gloss over with enough info to fill the attention span of the non curious reader.
I can’t argue with that, although I see a *few* signs of MSM coming around.
IMHO, the important question is: will the new media succesfully keep the issue alive, enough to head off the worst problems the pols and the UN have planned for us?
I think so.
We shall see.
FRegards
This paper has some noteworthy problems and I would be very careful using it.
For instance, on page 27, near the bottom, it says, “For instance, in 1988 James Hansen, now director of GISS, had testified on Capitol Hill on a day carefully chosen by the then Democrat administration because a heatwave had been forecast.” The administration in 1988 was not democrat. If the authors meant that the Congress was majority democrat, the mistake should have been caught.
This statement is at the bottom of page 17. “Taking the data from 1 January 1980, by which time the satellites had been calibrated and were in reasonably reliable operation, and running the temperature series right through to the present, the Climate Research Unit’s terrestrial mean global surface temperature dataset shows 30 years’ warming . . .”
The section that contains that statement is titles, “TERRESTRIAL VS. SATELLITE TEMPERATURE RECORDS.” The paper says that the satellites were calibrated using earth based temperature records and that data was improperly adjusted. The conclusion is that the satellite data must also be flawed, and the flaw favors global warming. Other sources suggest that although the main body of scientists did not accept any global theory of climate, some scientists began to embrace the notion of AGW through fossil fuel usage in the 70s.
Claims of experimental bias can’t be ignored. We run double blind trials specifically to eliminate any possible investigator bias from the results. But accusations of flawed data and investigator bias must be shown to have some merit, and the paper does not show this.
Page 24 has “The lie nailed” graph. The graph shows identical rates of temperature increase from 1860 to 1880, then from 1920 to 1940, then again from 1975 to 1998. The AGW crowd has already addressed this issue. The temperature fell between 1940 and 1975, but not as much as it fell between 1880 and 1910. This, according to AGW, proves that AGW affected the decrease. It doesn’t, but the paper doesn’t counter that claim.
The paper has this comment on page 34: “The temperature-station histories in New Zealand were unremarkable. There were no reasons for any large corrections. However, Mr. Treadgold was astonished to find that very substantial adjustments had indeed been made.” This refers to the graph that Richard Treadgold made of raw temperature measurements in New Zealand. The claim is wrong. Temperature monitoring stations in New Zealand had been moved, particularly the one used for Treadwell’s graph, which appears on page 33.
One of the biggest arguments against the corrected data sets used to claim AGW is that the data sets were corrected for the urban heat island effect and no one actually knows how to properly correct data sets for the urban heat island effect. This has been demonstrated. The heat island corrections are arbitrary and could easily change the raw data to indicate a heating trend. The paper spends six pages (4-10) discussing how raw data was adjusted improperly.
This problem cannot be understated. Raw data from different sources has to be adjusted if the data set is to mean anything. The accusation is that AGW supporters have no scientific basis for their data adjustments, so the adjusted data is worthless. But Treadwell didn’t even adjust the data, so his conclusion is not worth much, either.
We have to win this debate, and if we’re going to accuse Al Gore and the AGW fanatics of using false data and bad science, we must be certain that our own statements are absolute facts.
Be careful out there.
So the ones responsible for the numbers are just a bunch of liars. What a flippin’ shocker!
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.
