Posted on 01/26/2010 7:51:52 PM PST by mimi from mi
Further damning revelations are pouring in from the gaping wound that has inflicted the fast unraveling theory of the green monster that is man made global warming. As reported today by By Marc Morano of Climate Depot, Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has split ranks with other members of the discredited “hockey team” of climatologists exposed for fraudulently hiding and destroying data in the Climategate scandal that broke on November 19, 2009.
Christy served as a UN IPCC lead author in 2001 for the 3rd assessment report and detailed in these new revelations he explains how he personally witnessed UN scientists attempting to distort the science for political purposes. But he fell from favour for proposing that the IPCC allow for well-credentialed climate scientists to craft a chapter on an alternative view presenting evidence for low climate sensitivity to greenhouse gases.
“I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol,” Christy told CNN on May 2, 2007.
Christy’s statements carry even more weight when we examine the considerable pressure also being applied to him to keep quiet about the cracks appearing in the dodgy science dossiers being churned out for the IPCC. We get an insight into the conspiracy of secrecy Christy was opposing as he is one of the climatologists whose leaked emails are part of the Climategate scandal.
In the leaked CRU email dated Thu, 24 May 2001 11:33, Michael Mann was critical of Christy and scolded him for publicly showing dissent for not agreeing with Mann that 20th century temperatures were higher than the Medieval warm period:
“So do I [Mann] understand correctly that you are referring to the results of Dahl-Jensen et al as conflicting with what we say in the chapter? At the face of it, this argument has no merit whatsoever. I think we should all use a better explanation from you, since you seem to be arguing publically that the Dahl-Jensen et al record undermines what we’ve said in the chapter.”
Professor Phil Jones again tries to indicate the peer pressure they are all under not to make public admissions damaging to their ever more flawed theory in an email sent to Christy dated Tue Jul 5, 2005;
“The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn’t statistically significant.”
The unrelenting peer pressure being applied to Christy continues, this time coming from Michael Mann. Climatologists, Neville Nichols and Phil Jones discuss the issue in another leaked CRU email dated Wed Jul 6 15:07:45 2005.
“I know I [Nichols] could have asked John [Christy] about all of this, but I suspect he feels a bit over-burdened and harassed at the moment, and I didn’t want to add to the pressure on him, so thanks for passing this stuff on to me.”
Further emails substantiate that the “hockey team” were systematically applying peer pressure to convince Christy that recent weather balloon data (out of kilt with dodgy ground thermometer readings) was, itself in error.
Phil Jones admits, “the sondes [weather balloons] clearly show too much cooling in the stratosphere.”
The fact weather balloons were detecting cooling rather than warming in the tropical stratosphere was a key signal that the whole theory of anthropogenic global warming was probably wrong. Thus, to avoid embarrassment the “hockey team” rounded on Christy to conspire to suppress these facts.
Professor Christy has since proposed major reforms and changes to the way the UN IPCC report is produced. Christy has rejected the UN approach that produces “a document designed for uniformity and consensus.” Christy presented his views at a UN meeting in 2009. “An alternative view section written by well-credentialed climate scientists is needed,” Christy said. “If not, why not? What is there to fear? In a scientific area as uncertain as climate, the opinions of all are required,” he added. ‘The reception to my comments was especially cold’
I’ll celebrate only when I see some evidence that the collapse is exhibiting itself in political decisions by those who rule us.
there is no question it was intentional fraud.- - - - -
And the fraud was mostly for the purpose of getting large grants from the government and from private foundations. That’s theft by false pretenses. Submitting for a grant using data that was known to be fraudulent should be enough reason for law enforcement to prosecute.
The fact that most of the money involved came from our tax dollars should require that prosecution.
Peer-review. Where have I heard that term before... Oh yeah, the evo threads!
I would believe an astrologer or an alchemist before I believed a “climate scientist”.
To quote Pastor Brian Richardson:
"Sin makes people stupid."
Perhaps foolish may have been a better word.
Corrupt hearts shun truth, and shunning truth makes for stupid action. And even Forest Gump knows that: "Stupid is as stupid does".
:)
I think public humiliation is enough punishment for the foot soldiers, but since Bernie Madoff got his jail sentence, I don’t see how the ringleaders should fare any better.
Its not so much the laws they're breaking; its more the laws they're making. Binding treaties, local, national and international laws are being made based on their fraudulent "opinions". There should be consequences or at least some kind of check on this type of thing.
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.