Something Is Rotten In Denmark… [UPDATED]

… And I’m Not Talking About Shakespeare.

After a short absence, I return to blogging with a doozy that I’ve been sitting on. During my time away I learned of the hacked emails released on the net exposing the “scientific” reports upon which the IPCC reports on man-made global warming as a massive conspiracy to commit fraud on a global scale. What a treasure trove of information for all of us who have been saying all along that the AGW claims of the MDI* were nothing short of bovine excrement (and smell worse).

I titled this post “Something Is Rotten In Denmark” not because of the massive amount of BS that has been dumped on the world over the last decade, but rather to illustrate what is about to happen in Copenhagen, Denmark in just a few short days.

The Emperor has decreed that he will make a cameo at the MDI* conference where a treaty is being negotiated that is meant to replace the expiring Kyoto agreement. Make no mistake, the conference will produce a treaty that the Obama Infestation will sign-on with in spite of the fact that it hasn’t a prayer in the world of being ratified in the US Senate. Don’t forget, Kyoto was agreed upon during the Clintonian Infestation (1997) and never came to a vote in the Senate.

Leaked were thousands of emails compiling 61 megabytes of data exposing a massive efforts to alter collected data on climate change to fit a predetermined outcome. “The earth is warming and man is responsible. So now we must bankrupt the world in a futile effort to reverse this trend.”

One such email discussed discrediting a couple of papers which didn’t conform to the predetermined outcome. The solution? Redefine what constituted a peer-review.

“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

So much for trusting peer-review Mr. Ed Begley Jr.

Another email actually requested the destruction of emails.

“Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re AR4?”

Another explains why.

“I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU temperature station data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!”

These so-called “scientists” couldn’t risk the actual data being exposed. Because they cannot admit a truth that “inconveniently” doesn’t fit their predetermined outcome and shows their computer models to be fraudulent.

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty we can’t.”

Should this data be confirmed in the established “climate change” scientific community, it would destroy all that they’ve worked for and expose them for the frauds that they are. Heaven forbid they would have to admit that climate change is cyclical and man’s impact on the environment is actually insignificant. No, instead, they have to artificially keep their cash cow producing by hiding the truth.

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

The agency at the center of the controversy raised by the leak of these hacked emails is the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU).

Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Mediaeval Warm Period when temperatures were higher they are today, the graph became the central icon of the entire man-made global warming movement.

Since 2003, however, when the statistical methods used to create the “hockey stick” were first exposed as fundamentally flawed by an expert Canadian statistician Steve McIntyre , an increasingly heated battle has been raging between Mann’s supporters, calling themselves “the Hockey Team”, and McIntyre and his own allies, as they have ever more devastatingly called into question the entire statistical basis on which the IPCC and CRU construct their case.

The senders and recipients of the leaked CRU emails constitute a cast list of the IPCC’s scientific elite, including not just the “Hockey Team”, such as Dr Mann himself, Dr Jones and his CRU colleague Keith Briffa, but Ben Santer, responsible for a highly controversial rewriting of key passages in the IPCC’s 1995 report; Kevin Trenberth, who similarly controversially pushed the IPCC into scaremongering over hurricane activity; and Gavin Schmidt, right-hand man to Al Gore’s ally Dr James Hansen, whose own GISS record of surface temperature data is second in importance only to that of the CRU itself.

There are three threads in particular in the leaked documents which have sent a shock wave through informed observers across the world. Perhaps the most obvious, as lucidly put together by Willis Eschenbach, is the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws.[1]

None of us who have been consistently skeptical of the AGW claims actually deny that the earth was warming. Quite the contrary. We acknowledge that the earth’s climate is constantly changing (both warming and cooling) and those changes are largely to do with a variety of factors including sunspot activity and ocean currents. Both of which when combined can cause drastic changes in global temperatures.

Solar activity, in particular sunspots, had been increasing for an extended period but suddenly plateaued around – and this is a shock – 1997. Sunspots have been nearly non-existent over the past 2 years. Isn’t that interesting? Sunspot activity has decreased over the past 2 years and global temperatures have fallen over that same period? Couldn’t be. The science was settled remember? Man causes global warming with our SUV’s, air travel, heating and cooling our homes, and eating meat.

The fact that the earth’s temperatures have fallen during the same period that sunspot activity has decreased to almost no sunspot activity at all can only be explained as coincidence when we all know it is carbon dioxide which causes global warming. Right? Well – not exactly.

CO2 will likely continue to increase no matter what the temperature does. CO2 is a naturally occurring gas on this planet. It is necessary for plants to grow. And in spite of what is commonly known about CO2, it does more than make cola fizzy. It actually causes man to breath. You read that right.

It is the CO2 build-up in our lungs that causes us to exhale. Once we exhale, our bodies’ need for oxygen sparks us to inhale and the process starts all over. (Attention DRONES, this information comes from a Pulmonologist who treats my daughter at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center – I think I have this one).

Sounds to me that the science of global climate change isn’t as settled as once previously pronounced. But yet the eggheads and political hacks gathering in Copenhagen this month with the unapologetic goal of thrusting the world economy into a MEGA DEPRESSION ignore the obvious as they push an agenda based on fraud and the guilt produced by said fraud.

Unlike the drama of Hamlet, the stench emanating from Denmark this December is very real and very deadly. Global bankruptcy has no bailout mechanism. Homelessness, hunger, disease, and death are all products of depressive economies. How can the world survive a global MEGA DEPRESSION?!?

Note: The above un-sourced email citations were widely published over a week and a half prior to this post.

You can rummage through the emails yourself!

[UPDATE 0203]

Junk Science is reporting that the emails were NOT hacked as previously reported in this post and elsewhere about the web. Instead they have it explained this way on their site…

It has become fairly obvious this archive was not “hacked” or “stolen” but rather is a file assembled by CRU staff in preparation for complying with a freedom of information request. Whether it was carelessly left in a publicly accessible portion of the CRU computer system or was “leaked” by staff believing the FOIA request was improperly rejected may never be known but is not really that important. What is important is that:

1. There was no “security breach” at CRU that “stole” these files
2. The files appear genuine and to have been prepared by CRU staff, not edited by malicious hackers
3. The information was accidentally or deliberately released by CRU staff
4. Selection criteria appears to be compliance with an or several FOIA request(s)

Bookmark and Share

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

1. Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation – Telegraph (UK) November 28, 2009 [↩]