April 29, 2010
By Dexter Wright
Last month, while the American media were distracted by the health care vote in Congress, the British Parliament published the results of its investigation into East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit (CRU) that has been at the center of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) controversy. It seems that many were hoping that no one would read this report, at least not beyond the milquetoast executive summary.
Buried deep within the report is a compelling piece of evidence. In volume two, there is a memorandum submitted as evidence from Lord Lawson of Blaby, chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which was in response to four very significant questions from the investigating committee. This memo confirms the claims by many global warming skeptics that the scientists at CRU were trying to hide data and silence the skeptics. The questions asked by the investigative committee are as follows:
(i) Have the CRU scientists been manipulating the raw surface temperature data in a way that is less than wholly objective and dispassionate?
(ii) Have they refused dissenting scientists and/or other outsiders with a bona fide interest in global warming access to the raw data, contrary to the proper canons of scientific research and to the demands of scientific integrity?
(iii) Have they been improperly seeking to avoid answering Freedom of information Act requests?
(iv) Have they actively sought to prevent papers by dissenting scientists, statisticians, or other informed commentators from being peer-reviewed and/or published, again contrary to the proper canons of scientific research and to the demands of scientific integrity?
Lord Lawson's response to these questions is damning:
American Thinker
Posts tonen met het label CRU. Alle posts tonen
Posts tonen met het label CRU. Alle posts tonen
donderdag 29 april 2010
dinsdag 9 maart 2010
Beating the Climategate Cover Up: the next legal step
by John O'Sullivan on February 25, 2010
In this article I will outline the fundamentals of the civil and criminal cases against such climate fraudsters including key crooks Professor Phil Jones, chief climatologists at the UK’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), University of East Anglia, Professor Michael E. Mann of Penn. State University and that old eco-warrior, former U.S. vice president, Al Gore.
As correctly reported yesterday in American Thinker the civil litigation net will soon be cast far and wide in the U.S. skilfully applying the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
Although RICO laws were intended to bust Mafia crimes they have successfully been employed in civil lawsuits, too. RICO-based claims will certainly be wending their way to brokers who did not perform the SEC’s necessary “due diligence” research before peddling those dodgy carbon shares.
CLIMATEGATE Anthropogenic Global Warming, history's biggest scam
In this article I will outline the fundamentals of the civil and criminal cases against such climate fraudsters including key crooks Professor Phil Jones, chief climatologists at the UK’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), University of East Anglia, Professor Michael E. Mann of Penn. State University and that old eco-warrior, former U.S. vice president, Al Gore.
As correctly reported yesterday in American Thinker the civil litigation net will soon be cast far and wide in the U.S. skilfully applying the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
Although RICO laws were intended to bust Mafia crimes they have successfully been employed in civil lawsuits, too. RICO-based claims will certainly be wending their way to brokers who did not perform the SEC’s necessary “due diligence” research before peddling those dodgy carbon shares.
CLIMATEGATE Anthropogenic Global Warming, history's biggest scam
vrijdag 22 januari 2010
Climategate: CRU Was But the Tip of the Iceberg
January 22, 2010
By Marc Sheppard
Not surprisingly, the blatant corruption exposed at Britain’s premiere climate institute was not contained within the nation’s borders. Just months after the Climategate scandal broke, a new study has uncovered compelling evidence that our government's principal climate centers have also been manipulating worldwide temperature data in order to fraudulently advance the global warming political agenda.
Not only does the preliminary report [PDF]indict a broader network of conspirators, it challenges the very mechanism by which global temperatures are measured, published, and historically ranked.
Last Thursday, Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo and computer expert E. Michael Smith appeared together on KUSI TV [Video] to discuss the Climategate -- American Style scandal they had discovered. This time out, the alleged perpetrators are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).
American Thinker
By Marc Sheppard
Not surprisingly, the blatant corruption exposed at Britain’s premiere climate institute was not contained within the nation’s borders. Just months after the Climategate scandal broke, a new study has uncovered compelling evidence that our government's principal climate centers have also been manipulating worldwide temperature data in order to fraudulently advance the global warming political agenda.
Not only does the preliminary report [PDF]indict a broader network of conspirators, it challenges the very mechanism by which global temperatures are measured, published, and historically ranked.
Last Thursday, Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo and computer expert E. Michael Smith appeared together on KUSI TV [Video] to discuss the Climategate -- American Style scandal they had discovered. This time out, the alleged perpetrators are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).
American Thinker
zondag 6 december 2009
Understanding Climategate's Hidden Decline
By Marc Sheppard
Close followers of the Climategate controversy know that much of the mêlée surrounds an email in which Climate Research Unit (CRU) chief Phil Jones wrote about using “Mike’s Nature Trick” (MNT) to “hide the decline.” And yet, 17 days and thousands of almost exclusively on-line op-eds into this scandal, it still seems very few understand exactly which “decline” was being hidden, what “trick” was used to do so, and why Jones’s words have become the slogan for the greatest scientific fraud in history.
As the mainstream media move from abject denial to dismissive whitewashing, CRU co-conspirators move to Copenhagen for tomorrow’s UN climate meeting, intent on changing the world as we know it based primarily on their now exposed trickery. Add yesterday’s announcement of a UN investigation into the matter, which will no doubt be no less corrupt than those being investigated, and public awareness of how and why that trick was performed is now more vital than ever.
So please allow me to explain in what I hope are easily digestible terms.
American Thinker
Close followers of the Climategate controversy know that much of the mêlée surrounds an email in which Climate Research Unit (CRU) chief Phil Jones wrote about using “Mike’s Nature Trick” (MNT) to “hide the decline.” And yet, 17 days and thousands of almost exclusively on-line op-eds into this scandal, it still seems very few understand exactly which “decline” was being hidden, what “trick” was used to do so, and why Jones’s words have become the slogan for the greatest scientific fraud in history.
As the mainstream media move from abject denial to dismissive whitewashing, CRU co-conspirators move to Copenhagen for tomorrow’s UN climate meeting, intent on changing the world as we know it based primarily on their now exposed trickery. Add yesterday’s announcement of a UN investigation into the matter, which will no doubt be no less corrupt than those being investigated, and public awareness of how and why that trick was performed is now more vital than ever.
So please allow me to explain in what I hope are easily digestible terms.
American Thinker
Labels:
"trick",
Climategate,
CRU,
Hide the decline,
Phil Jones
vrijdag 4 december 2009
woensdag 2 december 2009
Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
COLD FACTS ABOUT THE HOT TOPIC OF GLOBAL TEMPERATURE CHANGE AFTER THE CLIMATEGATE SCANDAL
SPPI ORIGINAL PAPER ♦ November 30, 2009
Science & Public Policy Institute
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
In public policy terms, the revelation that the international scientific and political establishment has been inventing, bending, distorting, manipulating, hiding, blocking, and destroying scientific data for the sake of advancing a narrow, extremist, and bitterly anti-Western political viewpoint cannot be safely ignored.
Climate science is too important to be left to politicized scientists, just as climate politics is too important to be left to unscientific politicians.
The first step is to close the Climate Research Unit (and perhaps the University of East Anglia with it), to dismiss all of its personnel, and not to allow any of them to be funded by taxpayers ever again. Scientific fraud and corruption on the scale that has now been revealed must be firmly rooted out and prevented from recurring.
Those responsible for the deliberate blocking, altering, concealing, or destroying of scientific data must be put on trial – to use James Hansen’s term – for “high crimes against humanity”. For it is on the word of crooks and racketeers such as these that, in the name of addressing the non-problem that they had invented and fostered and festered, the Third World has been flung into food riots and mass starvation by the doubling of world food prices that followed the biofuel scam that the “global-warming” profiteers invented as just one of a bewildering array of boondoggles to enrich themselves at the expense of the little guy, who, as always, suffers when the political elite merely exploit him when it is their duty to serve him.
Let the climate criminals stand trial, and let them be fined for offenses under the Freedom of Information laws, and let them be imprisoned for their fraudulent tampering with scientific data, and for their suppression of results uncongenial to their politicized viewpoint, and for the sheer venom with which they have publicly as well as privately denigrated all those scientists with whom they disagreed, and for the insouciance with which they interfered with editors of scientific journals and with the process of the UN’s climate panel itself.
Once the fraudsters on both sides of the Atlantic have been locked up and cleared from the field, it will be essential to obtain a reliable indication of how temperatures are really changing worldwide. For the oceans, this necessary step has already been taken. The 3319 automated bathythermograph buoys of the ARGO project, deployed throughout the world’s oceans since 2003, have for the first time provided a reasonably accurate profile of temperature change in the climate-relevant upper mile of the ocean surface. They have shown that, throughout their period of operation, there has been no net accumulation of heat-energy in the world’s oceans. None whatsoever.
The analysis has recently been extended backward for 68 years by Douglass and Knox (2009), who find that there has been no accumulation of heat-energy in the oceans for 68 years. This conclusion, like the results from the ARGO buoys, is fatal to the official (and now discredited) notion that a very small increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 will engender a very large warming.
Might an analysis of land surface temperatures produce a similarly uncongenial result for the world’s classe politique, mesmerized as it is by the prospect of vastly increasing its own wealth and power by setting up an unelected world government with massive powers to tax, regulate, interfere, shut down free markets, and cancel patent and intellectual property rights, and all in the name of saving us from ourselves?
One of the thousands of emails released by the heroic whistleblower suggests that the answer to this question is Yes. One Team member recently wrote to his conspirators to point out that land temperatures had risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures, a fact which, he said, would be seized upon by skeptics who would point out that the Climate Research Unit, like GISS/NCDC, had failed to make sufficient allowance for the “urban heat-island effect” – the increasing industrialization that has surrounded once-rural temperature stations with tarmac and industry and the direct and indirect output of heat that they bring.
Manifestly, something must now be done to put right the damage that has been done to climate science by the malevolent and incompetent antics of the Team.
First, there is now a need for a standardized, international network of properly-sited, modern, automated land temperature monitoring stations, reporting by satellite so that the data are immediately available to all. The aim should be to equal the reliability and public accessibility of the ARGO bathythermographs that have been deployed for the past six years in the oceans.
Until this standardized network has been installed worldwide, calibrated, and declared operational, all terrestrial and satellite temperature records should be regarded with profound suspicion, and no public policy – particularly any policy that menaces the freedom, democracy, and prosperity of the West – should be founded upon them.
Secondly, all those whose emails have demonstrated that they have acted maliciously and in bad faith – even those whose conduct stopped short of being actually criminal – should be dismissed from every publicly-funded scientific post, and should be permanently debarred from participating in any international scientific endeavour, including the UN’s climate panel. On grounds of its sheer nastiness alone, the Team should be disbanded forthwith and for aye, never to trouble humankind again.
Thirdly, all public policy measures to address what is now known to be the manufactured non-problem of “global warming” should be put on hold forthwith, and no further public policy measures should be instituted at any future time, unless and until global mean surface temperature, as properly and independently measured by the new methods recommended here, shall have risen by at least 1 C° (2 F°) compared with temperature in the year 2000.
Fourthly, all “global-warming” profiteers who are making money out of carbon-trading or “green investment” or UN climate boondoggles of whatever kind should be warned, and clearly warned, that now that the basis for their profitable activities is known to be hollow and fraudulent, they themselves will be indicted, prosecuted, and jailed for fraud, and their profits confiscated as the fruits of money-laundering, if in future they participate in any fostering or furthering or promoting of the lies, damned lies, and bogus statistics that have now shown the entire “global warming” theory to be nothing more than a scam.
We end this paper on temperature trends with the following quotation from Dwight D. Eisenhower’s farewell address to the nation as President of the United States –
SPPI ORIGINAL PAPER ♦ November 30, 2009
Science & Public Policy Institute
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
In public policy terms, the revelation that the international scientific and political establishment has been inventing, bending, distorting, manipulating, hiding, blocking, and destroying scientific data for the sake of advancing a narrow, extremist, and bitterly anti-Western political viewpoint cannot be safely ignored.
Climate science is too important to be left to politicized scientists, just as climate politics is too important to be left to unscientific politicians.
The first step is to close the Climate Research Unit (and perhaps the University of East Anglia with it), to dismiss all of its personnel, and not to allow any of them to be funded by taxpayers ever again. Scientific fraud and corruption on the scale that has now been revealed must be firmly rooted out and prevented from recurring.
Those responsible for the deliberate blocking, altering, concealing, or destroying of scientific data must be put on trial – to use James Hansen’s term – for “high crimes against humanity”. For it is on the word of crooks and racketeers such as these that, in the name of addressing the non-problem that they had invented and fostered and festered, the Third World has been flung into food riots and mass starvation by the doubling of world food prices that followed the biofuel scam that the “global-warming” profiteers invented as just one of a bewildering array of boondoggles to enrich themselves at the expense of the little guy, who, as always, suffers when the political elite merely exploit him when it is their duty to serve him.
Let the climate criminals stand trial, and let them be fined for offenses under the Freedom of Information laws, and let them be imprisoned for their fraudulent tampering with scientific data, and for their suppression of results uncongenial to their politicized viewpoint, and for the sheer venom with which they have publicly as well as privately denigrated all those scientists with whom they disagreed, and for the insouciance with which they interfered with editors of scientific journals and with the process of the UN’s climate panel itself.
Once the fraudsters on both sides of the Atlantic have been locked up and cleared from the field, it will be essential to obtain a reliable indication of how temperatures are really changing worldwide. For the oceans, this necessary step has already been taken. The 3319 automated bathythermograph buoys of the ARGO project, deployed throughout the world’s oceans since 2003, have for the first time provided a reasonably accurate profile of temperature change in the climate-relevant upper mile of the ocean surface. They have shown that, throughout their period of operation, there has been no net accumulation of heat-energy in the world’s oceans. None whatsoever.
The analysis has recently been extended backward for 68 years by Douglass and Knox (2009), who find that there has been no accumulation of heat-energy in the oceans for 68 years. This conclusion, like the results from the ARGO buoys, is fatal to the official (and now discredited) notion that a very small increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 will engender a very large warming.
Might an analysis of land surface temperatures produce a similarly uncongenial result for the world’s classe politique, mesmerized as it is by the prospect of vastly increasing its own wealth and power by setting up an unelected world government with massive powers to tax, regulate, interfere, shut down free markets, and cancel patent and intellectual property rights, and all in the name of saving us from ourselves?
One of the thousands of emails released by the heroic whistleblower suggests that the answer to this question is Yes. One Team member recently wrote to his conspirators to point out that land temperatures had risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures, a fact which, he said, would be seized upon by skeptics who would point out that the Climate Research Unit, like GISS/NCDC, had failed to make sufficient allowance for the “urban heat-island effect” – the increasing industrialization that has surrounded once-rural temperature stations with tarmac and industry and the direct and indirect output of heat that they bring.
Manifestly, something must now be done to put right the damage that has been done to climate science by the malevolent and incompetent antics of the Team.
First, there is now a need for a standardized, international network of properly-sited, modern, automated land temperature monitoring stations, reporting by satellite so that the data are immediately available to all. The aim should be to equal the reliability and public accessibility of the ARGO bathythermographs that have been deployed for the past six years in the oceans.
Until this standardized network has been installed worldwide, calibrated, and declared operational, all terrestrial and satellite temperature records should be regarded with profound suspicion, and no public policy – particularly any policy that menaces the freedom, democracy, and prosperity of the West – should be founded upon them.
Secondly, all those whose emails have demonstrated that they have acted maliciously and in bad faith – even those whose conduct stopped short of being actually criminal – should be dismissed from every publicly-funded scientific post, and should be permanently debarred from participating in any international scientific endeavour, including the UN’s climate panel. On grounds of its sheer nastiness alone, the Team should be disbanded forthwith and for aye, never to trouble humankind again.
Thirdly, all public policy measures to address what is now known to be the manufactured non-problem of “global warming” should be put on hold forthwith, and no further public policy measures should be instituted at any future time, unless and until global mean surface temperature, as properly and independently measured by the new methods recommended here, shall have risen by at least 1 C° (2 F°) compared with temperature in the year 2000.
Fourthly, all “global-warming” profiteers who are making money out of carbon-trading or “green investment” or UN climate boondoggles of whatever kind should be warned, and clearly warned, that now that the basis for their profitable activities is known to be hollow and fraudulent, they themselves will be indicted, prosecuted, and jailed for fraud, and their profits confiscated as the fruits of money-laundering, if in future they participate in any fostering or furthering or promoting of the lies, damned lies, and bogus statistics that have now shown the entire “global warming” theory to be nothing more than a scam.
We end this paper on temperature trends with the following quotation from Dwight D. Eisenhower’s farewell address to the nation as President of the United States –
“Public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite ... The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.”Amen to that.
maandag 30 november 2009
450 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of "Man-Made" Global Warming
From Popular Technology:
See the list at:Popular Technology
The following papers support skepticism of "man-made" global warming or the environmental or economic effects of. Comments, Corrections, Erratum, Replies, Responses and Submitted papers are not included in the peer-reviewed paper count. There are many more listings than just the 450 papers. The inclusion of a paper in this list does not imply a specific position to any of the authors. This list will be updated and corrected as necessary.
See the list at:Popular Technology
vrijdag 27 november 2009
Nog meer klimaatfraude? Deel II
Hé, kijk eens aan, NIWA volgt in de voetstappen van CRU. Hoe verrassend.
Terwijl Phil Jones van CRU onlangs beweerde dat de door zijn organisatie verzamelde temperatuurgegevens waren "vernietigd" of "verloren gegaan", zegt David Wratt van NIWA gewoon dat hij niet van plan is die data vrij te geven. TBR.cc
Een korte samenvatting van het persbericht van NIWA:
- De opwarming van Nieuw Zeeland is onmiskenbaar.
- We gebruiken internationaal geaccepteerde technieken voor onze analyses.
- We hebben het al een keer uitgelegd.
- We zijn vastbesloten stevige informatie te leveren om alle Nieuw Zeelanders te helpen goede beslissingen te nemen.
Hm...
In een telefoongesprek met Investigate zegt David Wratt dat hij van plan is de gegevens betreffende het Kelburn weerstation vrij te geven, maar "dat we niet van plan zijn ons nodeloos druk te maken alleen maar omdat iemand een persbericht heeft laten uitgaan."
De door NIWA vrijgegeven data roepen weer nieuwe vragen op: NIWA's explanation raises major new questions
AGW wordt met de dag minder geloofwaardig.
Terwijl Phil Jones van CRU onlangs beweerde dat de door zijn organisatie verzamelde temperatuurgegevens waren "vernietigd" of "verloren gegaan", zegt David Wratt van NIWA gewoon dat hij niet van plan is die data vrij te geven. TBR.cc
Een korte samenvatting van het persbericht van NIWA:
- De opwarming van Nieuw Zeeland is onmiskenbaar.
- We gebruiken internationaal geaccepteerde technieken voor onze analyses.
- We hebben het al een keer uitgelegd.
- We zijn vastbesloten stevige informatie te leveren om alle Nieuw Zeelanders te helpen goede beslissingen te nemen.
Hm...
In een telefoongesprek met Investigate zegt David Wratt dat hij van plan is de gegevens betreffende het Kelburn weerstation vrij te geven, maar "dat we niet van plan zijn ons nodeloos druk te maken alleen maar omdat iemand een persbericht heeft laten uitgaan."
snipGewoon blijven volhouden dat je cijfers/analyses/methodes/eindresultaten kloppen, maar de basisgegevens lekker onder de pet houden zodat niemand ze echt kan controleren. Precies hetzelfde verhaal als bij CRU, waar onderzoekers nu alleen nog beschikken over gemanipuleerde data, zie The Day The Science Died…
"There’s been a whole lot of work behind this in terms of things like having overlaps between particular stations when they’ve moved. There’s a whole methodology, internationally accepted, where you actually work out how to correct for these sorts of site changes and so on.”
“But you’ll be providing all that shortly?”
“Well, we’re not going to run around in circles just because somebody has put out a press release. We will continue to put out what is reasonable to provide.”
“Wouldn’t it be important –“
“No!”
“…for people to see the comparison studies between both sites?”
“Look, we’re talking about scientific studies here. I’ve told you we’ll put out information about Wellington. Basically it’s not up to us to justify ourselves to a whole lot of people that come out with truly unfounded allegations. We work through the scientific process, we publish stuff through the literature, that’s the way that we deal with this stuff and I can’t have my staff running around in circles over something which is not a justified allegation. The fact that the Climate Science Coalition are making allegations about my staff who have the utmost integrity really really pisses me off.
“That’s all I’ve got to say to you now – [click]”
De door NIWA vrijgegeven data roepen weer nieuwe vragen op: NIWA's explanation raises major new questions
AGW wordt met de dag minder geloofwaardig.
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)