How bad is the scam?

Unfreaking believable!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/06/250-plus-noteworthy-climategate-2-0-emails/

They knew they were fabricating crap and conspired to cover it all up. Of course since this isn't the right doing it, the media will continue to poo-poo it.

The continuing effort to ostracize and eventually burn at the stake

those who have the unmitigated audacity to think global warming is a scam. Now the national academy of science has posted a list of scientists who cannot be trusted. The reason they can't be trusted is because they threaten the gravy train of "climate science" grants and might actually interfere with the politics of suppression that the global warming enthusiasts are pushing. Power and control, follow the money. Frank J. Tippler writes in PJM:

The National Academy of Sciences, in its official journalProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, has just published a list of scientists whom it claims should not be believed on the subject of global warming. I am number 38 on the list. The list of 496 is in descending order of scientific credentials.

Professor Freeman Dyson of the Institute for Advanced Study, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a fellow of the Royal Society, is number 3 on the list. Dyson is a friend of mine and is one of the creators of relativistic quantum field theory; most physicists think he should have shared the Nobel Prize in Physics with Richard Feynman. MIT professor Richard Lindzen, a meteorologist who is also a member of the National Academy, is number 4. Princeton physics professor William Happer, once again a member of the National Academy of Sciences, is number 6.

I think it is clearly an honor to be included in a list of people who have accomplished so much. How much longer before we start burning their books? Fascism is on the march and it hides behind so-called global warming "science".

Hot air and ice

Steve Goddard over at Whats Up With That has a nice article about how the arctic sea ice has recovered to where it was about 10 years ago. It's well worth a look.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/31/wuwt-arctic-sea-ice-new-7/#more-20063

Halp me the ice is disappearing!

Is not amused!

Science Magazine owned

Tim Blair notes

Science magazine is deeply disturbed: 

We are deeply disturbed by the recent escalation of political assaults on scientists in general and on climate scientists in particular. All citizens should understand some basic scientific facts. 

One small problem. As James Delingpole reveals, that poley bear image is fake. It’s been photoshopped. Sciencesubsequently admitted: 

The image associated with this article was selected by the editors. We did not realize that it was not an original photograph but a collage, and it was a mistake to have used it. 

As Science says: “There is always some uncertainty associated with scientific conclusions.”

The best lines are in the comments, my favorite "What Science magazine doesn’t realize is that polar bears, unlike liberal twits, run into obstacles and just deal with them."

Is it getting too easy to make fun of the global warming fakers?

It just keeps unwinding

As the evidence clearly shows anthropogenic global warming is bunk. Even those who have made a living off the hysteria are admitting it:

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon. And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Indeed...and there's more:

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.

These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.

The real climate hockey stick

Following back a link in the comments I found a nice youtube channel that had this video



he's got a bunch more on his channel and it's worth the trip to educate yourself on the real science that supports a skeptical approach to the cult of global warming.

We have only days, err weeks err months to save the planet from umm global umm

Remember that? Everyone claiming we had a seriously short period of time to "save" the earth from CO2 induced global warming, and then the tipping point would be reached and no amount of wealth distribution would save us from certain doom.

Except it was all bullshit, and they knew it. 

The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.

Does it seem like they're making it up as they go?

Cold, Cold, Cold

The cloud mystery

It's fairly long but you can get the theory from this first clip. The theory is that cosmic rays, both from the sun and the galaxy create aerosols that allow the formation of low clouds. Low clouds reflect more of the sun's energy back to space and the earth cools. A correlation between the earth's galactic position, and the climate over eons provides anecdotal evidence in support for the theory. Experimental results simulating cosmic rays to see how they effect aerosol creation supports the theory. It took these scientists years to get their study published because it didn't fit the narrative of AWG.  Here's the money quote (from part 2)

"the whole climate community really hated the idea that sun should have a major impact on climate; that was seen as a disaster."




This is a fantastic video.

Gore runs for cover

Run Al run, your scam is unwinding

Former Vice President Al Gore on Thursday abruptly canceled a Dec. 16 personal appearance that was to be staged during the United Nations' Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, which begins next week.

As described in The Washington Times' Inside the Beltway column Tuesday, the multimedia public event to promote Mr. Gore's new book, "Our Choice," included $1,209 VIP tickets that granted the holder a photo opportunity with Mr. Gore and a "light snack."

Berlingkse Media, a Danish group coordinating ticket sales and publicity for the event, said that "great annoyance" was a factor in the cancellation, along with unforeseen changes in Mr. Gore's program for the climate summit. The decision affected 3,000 ticket holders.

"We have had a clear-cut agreement, and it is unusual with great disappointment that we have to announce that Al Gore cancels. We had a huge expectation for the event. . . . We do not yet know the detailed reasons for the cancellation," said Lisbeth Knudsen, CEO of Berlingske Media, in a statement posted by the company.

No content with selling carbon indulgences he actually wanted $1,209.00 for his fanbase to get a photo op?
What a maroon!

NASA hiding climate data?

How much longer can the US media refuse to cover this story in full?

The fight over global warming science is about to cross the Atlantic with a U.S. researcher poised to sue NASA, demanding release of the same kind of climate data that has landed a leading British center in hot water over charges it skewed its data.

Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said NASA has refused for two years to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act that would show how the agency has shaped its climate data and would explain why the agency has repeatedly had to correct its data going as far back as the 1930s.

"I assume that what is there is highly damaging," Mr. Horner said. "These guys are quite clearly bound and determined not to reveal their internal discussions about this."

The numbers matter. Under pressure in 2007, NASA recalculated its data and found that 1934, not 1998, was the hottest year in its records for the contiguous 48 states. NASA later changed that data again, and now 1998 and 2006 are tied for first, with 1934 slightly cooler.

Yeah it's the famous Jim Hansen, already forced to correct his data when it was challenged. Now they're back to massaging it again all the while refusing to share the data with people interested in doing a bit of honest peer review. And what does Hansen have to say about it?

James Hansen, one of the world's foremost climatologists, told the Guardian today that he believes the Copenhagen talks are flawed to the point where failure of the talks may be the best way forward.

"The approach that is being talked about is so fundamentally wrong that it would be better to reassess," Hansen said.

Don't fret warmists, Hansen hasn't suddenly decided to turn over an honest leaf, it's just that he thinks cap and trade is a mistake and just wants a tax on all carbon. Yet another politician on a fund raiser for global wealth redistribution and unfraid to make absurd comparisons to slavery or in deference to Godin's law, the Nazis. Practically every kid over 12 knows the argument is over once the Nazi references fly, I guess that's too simplistic for a NASA scientist who is busy correcting his data over and over again.

Just so we are clear on who Hansen is listen to his former supervisor:

Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist, Dr. John S. Theon, the former supervisor of James Hansen, NASA's vocal man-made global warming fear soothsayer, has now publicly declared himself a skeptic and declared that Hansen "embarrassed NASA" with his alarming climate claims and said Hansen was "was never muzzled." Theon joins the rapidly growing ranks of international scientists abandoning the promotion of man-made global warming fears. …


"Hansen was never muzzled even though he violated NASA's official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind's effect on it). Hansen thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress," Theon wrote.

Hansen, when not correcting data, has called for prison terms for warming skeptics. Clearly James is in need of medication and counseling. Send him out for regrooving...
Now lest you think these NASA scientist guys couldn't be crooks

A former top climate scientist who had become of one the scientific world's most cited authorities on the human effect on Earth's atmosphere was sentenced to probation Tuesday after pleading guilty to steering lucrative no-bid contracts to his wife's company.

It's hard to tell how they fit into the AWG research scandal from their nearly useless website but this is an interesting statement "Animated Earth also develops short movies that explain earth science processes and complement Earth Today".  If you're willing to dig furthur you could watch the short film created for the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (home of James Hansen global warming hysteric); it's at the bottom and is labelled UARS. Interestingly it deals with the ozone hole, which as I recall was getting smaller, no bigger, no smaller, err not a problem anymore now that we can't use CFCs right (despite the film clip claim). I guess they haven't decided just yet what the ozone hole is doing OR why.

For the most part the general public has afforded science a measure of trust they don't give politicians, businesses, entertainers or lawyers. Until the fraud exposed by the hack of the CRU files is fully exposed and investigated people are far less likely to want to just take scientists at their word, or allow politicians to create expensive life altering legislation based on fraudulent nonsense presented as peer reviewed science.

If you've lost Jon Stewart...

...you've lost

Botch after botch

Such a juicy scandal!

- "But what are all those monthly files? DON'T KNOW, UNDOCUMENTED. Wherever I look, there are data files, no info about what they are other than their names. And that's useless ..." (Page 17)
- "It's botch after botch after botch." (18)
- "The biggest immediate problem was the loss of an hour's edits to the program, when the network died ... no explanation from anyone, I hope it's not a return to last year's troubles ... This surely is the worst project I've ever attempted. Eeeek." (31)
- "Oh, GOD, if I could start this project again and actually argue the case for junking the inherited program suite." (37)
- "... this should all have been rewritten from scratch a year ago!" (45)
- "Am I the first person to attempt to get the CRU databases in working order?!!" (47)
- "As far as I can see, this renders the (weather) station counts totally meaningless." (57)
- "COBAR AIRPORT AWS (data from an Australian weather station) cannot start in 1962, it didn't open until 1993!" (71)
- "What the hell is supposed to happen here? Oh yeah -- there is no 'supposed,' I can make it up. So I have : - )" (98)
- "You can't imagine what this has cost me -- to actually allow the operator to assign false WMO (World Meteorological Organization) codes!! But what else is there in such situations? Especially when dealing with a 'Master' database of dubious provenance ..." (98)
- "So with a somewhat cynical shrug, I added the nuclear option -- to match every WMO possible, and turn the rest into new stations ... In other words what CRU usually do. It will allow bad databases to pass unnoticed, and good databases to become bad ..." (98-9)
- "OH F--- THIS. It's Sunday evening, I've worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done, I'm hitting yet another problem that's based on the hopeless state of our databases." (241).
- "This whole project is SUCH A MESS ..." (266)

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/lorrie_goldstein/2009/11/29/11967916-sun.html

Better yet they threw much of their original data away!

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

Is this the biggest scientific scandal of the modern world? In the meantime the US press is turfing the story and claiming that the leak proves AWG is real! What audacity!

...and Commander Zero is headed to Copenhagen to sign away our future for these bullshit lies....

This is about money and power. Your money. Their power.

Succinct isn't it? 

If you're wondering how the robot-like march of the world's politicians towards Copenhagen can possibly continue in the face of the scientific scandal dubbed "climategate," it's because Big Government, Big Business and Big Green don't give a s*** about "the science."

They never have.

That pretty well sums it up. In a revenue shortage never underestimate the power of politicians to sign on to anything that allows them to increase revenues.

Dr. Ball's interesting comments on the AWG fraud

Listen and weep Al!

The scandal grows unabated

This time it's New Zealand. The raw data and the official data disagree, and surprise, surprise, surprise the official data show warming that DOES NOT EXIST.

UPDATE 15:49 NZDT - NIWA's news release in response to this story appears to have been delayed, and according to a radio news report a few minutes ago Rodney Hide, leader of the minority Act Party and a minister in the National Government, is now calling on his Cabinet colleague, Climate Change Minister Nick Smith, to "please explain" [normal transmission now resumes]

The New Zealand Government's chief climate advisory unit NIWA is under fire for allegedly massaging raw climate data to show a global warming trend that wasn't there.

The scandal breaks as fears grow worldwide that corruption of climate science is not confined to just Britain's CRU climate research centre.

Here's the paper that set this round off..... http://www.climatescience.org.nz/images/PDFs/global_warming_nz2.pdf

Over in global warming's corner we see more lies, more deception. Is this more Dan Ratheresk "fake but accurate" nonsense? Is it possible for the left to learn from their mistakes? I hope not.

Moar burning stupidity

Nothing like mindless propaganda in order to make your point!

Screw Science I have an agenda!

Back about the time I got out of the US Navy and returned to New England there was a threat to the environment that was a daily staple of the news, the threat of acid rain. We were told acid rain would strip the mountains of the northeast of trees within 20 years; the forest was dying we must act now! While government regulation moved to clean up the heavy sulfur emissions that primarily originated in the older coal burning power plants of the midwest that effort was eventually stalled as congress after congress 'grandfathered' those plants and the pollution continued unabated. Over time news coverage of acid rain disappeared. Small wonder since it has been nearly 30 years and I can tell you not only are the forests intact, they are thriving.

In the mid 1970's we were warned about the world ending environmental catastrophe, caused by man's reckless disregard for the environment, the coming ice age spurred on by the use of aerosol spray deodorants and similar products. Yet that too slipped from public view as it failed to engage the imagination of the ignorant masses. Acid rain and global cooling were replaced by global warming. I believed, lord knows I believed! As an outdoorsman, an avid fly fisherman in pursuit of cold water species I saw in global warming the demise of my sport. I identified every lousy fishing season with global warming AND acid rain AND the ozone hole. I set out to read as much as I possibly could about global warming to better educate myself on the implications. The problem was the more I read the more I detected a troubling trend. Those who believed that humans were causing warming were adamant that "the science" was settled. Red flag! Anytime a scientist claims the 'science is settled' it's a sure sign he's no longer a scientist he's become a true believer. They were shrill in denouncing those scientists that disagreed. In that shrillness I began to detect themes, themes that began to look more like a propaganda campaign than science. The scientists who questioned the theory seemed to be advocating scientific method, those who endorsed the theory seemed to produce studies but it became apparent that they were refusing to share their raw data; defeating any possibility of substantial peer review. The media picked up the cry. Then the UN endorsed global warming hysteria. Yet we knew the very models that were being used to predict a grim future for humanity were simplistic and unable to predict the known past. I discovered the little ice age, the medieval warm period and other things that had been glossed over by team warming. The most troubling thing was that the solution to global warming advocated by those who claim it was real and caused by humans was no less than a surrender of individual freedom and a massive wealth transfer from the richer developed west to the poorer undeveloped world, with people like Al Gore selling carbon indulgences and skimming a percentage of the trade all while using their credibility to help sell the hyperbole.

I've read with increasing fascination, how the global warming hysterics have found themselves in a bit of a pickle. This article is well worth the read because it covers the salient points of the scandal and doesn't sugar coat the implications of the fraud.

For years, the left has spun the debate over global warming in the starkest Manichean terms. Those who disagree with the scientific and policy orthodoxy have been maligned as greedy capitalists bent on raping the earth of its natural resources for cheap material gain; they have been cast as the benighted enemies of reason itself. Efforts to publicly challenge the science behind global warming have too often resulted in professional and political character assassination. To be skeptical about the fashionable scientific and policy platform aggressively advocated by the mainstream media and self-indulgently championed by the Hollywood elite is nothing less than an “assault on reason,” to borrow Al Gore’s hyperbolic rhetoric. In predictably technocratic fashion, the left has claimed its own peculiar position as the only scientifically legitimate one—everything else reduces to craven interest, manifest dishonesty, or antiquarian faith.

However, maintaining this self-serving narrative just got a lot harder. In the last few days, the cause of climate alarmism took a big hit when more than a thousand e-mails exchanged by scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climactic Research Unit (CRU) suddenly surfaced online. These e-mails were published by the computer hackers who apparently stole them, a crime that should be investigated and prosecuted. But notwithstanding the e-mails’ route to publication, their actual content is extraordinary. These behind-the-scenes discussions among leading global-warming exponents are remarkable both in their candor and in their sheer contempt for scientific objectivity. There can be little doubt after even a casual perusal that the scientific case for global warming and the policy that springs from it are based upon a volatile combination of political ideology, unapologetic mendacity, and simmering contempt for even the best-intentioned disagreement. Especially in anticipation of the major climate summit taking place in Copenhagen next month, the significance of this explosive disclosure is hard to underestimate. According to climatologist Patrick J. Michaels, “This is not a smoking gun; this is a mushroom cloud.”

A couple of other interesting takes on this from PJM
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-alarmism-is-underpinned-by-fraud-pjm-exclusive/
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/deconstructing-climategates-smoking-gun-email/

The entire facade is deconstructing, Al Gore's investments in carbon indulgences look self serving, his Nobel is as meaningless as Obama's. These people are criminals who distorted science in order to sell one of the largest wealth transfer schemes in history but I expect the majority of the media who apparently signed on for the effort will continue in their attempts to turf the story.

Stark raving, gravel munching mad

GORDON Brown is building up the heat on global warming by telling negotiators flying to the Copenhagen climate summit that they have “50 days to save the world from global warming”.

As luck has it, these 50 days will not be interrupted by General Election, and Brown can focus his energies on telling the Major Economies Forum in London, which brings together 17 of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas-emitting countries, that there is “no plan B“.

More like 50 days to sign away our independence to a dictatorial committee of unelected, ill educated, bureaucrats who want nothing more than to redistribute the wealth of the west into third world shit holes.

here's a list of everything that's been blamed on global warming, read it and laugh your ass off.

The Hockey Stick is Dead

In what may be the scientific scandal of the decade, should it ever be reported, Steve McIntyre has proven that the famous "hockey stick" that showed dramatic global warming was a fake (for the second time).

The Briffa temperature graphs have been widely cited as evidence by the IPCC, yet it appears they were based on a very carefully selected set of data, so select, that the shape of the graph would have been totally transformed if the rest of the data had been included.
Kieth Briffa used 12 samples to arrive at his version of the hockey stick and refused to provide his data for years. When McIntyre finally got hold of it, and looked at the 34 samples that Briffa left out of his graphs, a stark message was displayed. McIntyre describes it today as one of the most disquieting images he’s ever presented.

If all the tree rings are combined, the graph looks like this below. (I’ve added the black thick line to the original to make the merged data stand out). Obviously today is not as warm as things were 1000 years ago (at least not in far north Russia), and it’s also clear things have been warming since 1800 in Yamal.

Source ICECAP
Original Steve McIntyre

This is the killer quote:

Thus the key ingredient in a lot of the studies that have been invoked to support the Hockey Stick, namely the Briffa Yamal series (red line above) depends on the influence of a thin subsample of post-1990 chronologies and the exclusion of the (much larger) collection of readily-available Schweingruber data for the same area.

It's a fake folks, science in service of ideology, or at a minimum science in the service of more funding. We should not be making public policy and subjecting ourselves to ill concieved cap and trade schemes based on lies and damn lies. Since this doesn't fit the current narrative I expect it to be ignored by the pocket media.