Whistleblowers exposes global warming is a HOAX!

[Georgiacopguy]

Am I reading the thread title correctly? IS the hacking event and papers a hoax, or is global warming the hoax (duh) in regards to the point of thsi thread? It reads rather ambiguously...

[kushfiend]

go back and read the thread - the hacking has already been confirmed by a CRU official.  This is the real deal, the job now will be in exposing it to the point that MSM has to cover it.

There's no way to spin this one, the entire file is just emails pertaining to the coverup and manipulation of data and how to falsify reports.

crazy just mind boggling how evil and sick these "scientists" are.  Also no surprise that our boys at operation paper clip aka nasa are involved.

WHEN IS AL GORE GOING TO JAIL?

He needs to share a cell with bernie and ken lay - the real inventors of cap and trade global warming bullshit

[Mber]

go back and read the thread - the hacking has already been confirmed by a CRU official.  This is the real deal, the job now will be in exposing it to the point that MSM has to cover it.

There's no way to spin this one, the entire file is just emails pertaining to the coverup and manipulation of data and how to falsify reports.

crazy just mind boggling how evil and sick these "scientists" are.  Also no surprise that our boys at operation paper clip aka nasa are involved.

WHEN IS AL GORE GOING TO JAIL?

He needs to share a cell with bernie and ken lay - the real inventors of cap and trade global warming bullshit

You would have to jail the crew at The Club of Rome too. The Rockefeller Foundation for funding this lie into existence, and countless others..

[Scootle]

Wow ... this is awesome ... i think the BBC's article speaks louder than the leaked data ... Just imagine if something like this happened to the ADL or some 911 debunking front ... I'm sure that would be very revealing.

[kushfiend]

You would have to jail the crew at The Club of Rome too. The Rockefeller Foundation for funding this lie into existence, and countless others..

That can easily be done, it's not like we don't know they are.  Bildeberg list is leaked every year now.

Once enough people understand what's going on, the elite will have nothing to hide behind because now everyone can easily see who the people are behind the curtain.

[kushfiend]

Wow ... this is awesome ... i think the BBC's article speaks louder than the leaked data ... Just imagine if something like this happened to the ADL or some 911 debunking front ... I'm sure that would be very revealing.

Now maybe we can understand why the elite have been freaking out so much about "cyber security."  Can you imagine if we had a copy of every message Cheney sent out on his blackberry on 9/11?  Or every email sent between the CIA and the NSA pertaining building 7?  The files that were omitted from the commission report?

that would completely shatter people's whole lives.  LIke instantly over night.  Now I get why Jay rockefeller has been freaking out so much

[Celebrome]

i was reading thing about how thoses who hack the site should go to jail since it is illegal to hack into email and website.

Our country now officialy use torture and they accept testimony even if they were obtained from tortured victimes. something that is totaly forbiden in the genevas conventions....

[Mber]

i was reading thing about how thoses who hack the site should go to jail since it is illegal to hack into email and website.

Our country now officialy use torture and they accept testimony even if they were obtained from tortured victimes. something that is totaly forbiden in the genevas conventions....

haha so true so true

[Mber]

RulesOfTheGame.pdf is pretty much a propaganda guide for the alarmists to follow

I just read this..wow, can you say totalitarian? Here's an excerpt:

"Blowing Myths Away"

2. Forget the climate change detractors
Those who deny climate change science are irritating, but
unimportant. The argument is not about if we should deal with climate
change, but how we should deal with climate change.

3. There is no ‘rational man’
The evidence discredits the ‘rational man’ theory – we rarely weigh
objectively the value of different decisions and then take the clear
self-interested choice.

4. Information can’t work alone
Providing information is not wrong; relying on information alone to
change attitudes is wrong. Remember also that messages about
saving money are important, but not that important.

[EvadingGrid]

Grab The Stolenliberated Docs & E-Mails here

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XD050VKY


CLIMATE BOMBSHELL:
Hacker leaks thousands of emails showing conspiracy to “hide” the real data on manmade climate change[/b]


James Corbett
The Corbett Report
Friday, November 20, 2009

http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20091120_cru_hacked.htm

A hacker has leaked thousands of emails and documents from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University that appear to show how climate change data was fudged and the peer review process skewed to favor the manmade climate change hypothesis.

The link to the data appears to have been posted to a number of climate science websites yesterday by an anonymous hacker or insider going by the name “FOIA,” an apparent allusion to the Freedom of Information Act in the United States. One of the first sites where the 62 MB file was posted was The Air Vent. It was soon picked up by Watts Up With That, and Climate Audit and other climate science sites.

The information contained in the leaked emails and documents are as shocking as they are damning of the scientists who have been most vocal about the manmade global warming scare. Some of the excerpts include this email, purportedly from Phil Jones to researchers including Michael Mann of “Mann’s hockey stick” fame:

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@xxxxxxxxx,mhughes@xxxxxxx, mhughes@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxxxxx,t.osborn@xxxxxxxxxDear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow.

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) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.

Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil


And this excerpt in which researchers appear to discuss ways to discredit James Saiers of the Geophysical Research Letters journal because he seems to be sympathetic to climate realists:

M,

This is truly awful. GRL has gone downhill rapidly in recent years.

I think the decline began before Saiers. I have had some unhelpful dealings with him recently with regard to a paper Sarah and I have on glaciers — it was well received by the referees, and so is in the publication pipeline. However, I got the impression that Saiers was trying to keep it from being published.

Proving bad behavior here is very difficult. If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted. Even this would be difficult.

How different is the GRL paper from the Nature paper? Did the authors counter any of the criticisms? My experience with Douglass is that the identical (bar format changes) paper to one previously rejected was submitted to GRL.

T.



According to Investigate magazine out of Australia, Dr. Phil Jones has now confirmed that these emails do appear to be real.

The importance of this information will not be lost on The Corbett Report’s audience, as a recent interview I conducted with Tim Ball discussed the very issue of the Climate Research Unit and Phil Jones’ intense secrecy regarding their data:

You Tube Video

The video the above Corbert Report article cites:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8CVh2deXTI&feature=player_embedded


Unsurprisingly, there has so far been deafening silence on this issue in the controlled corporate media, but in light of the upcoming Copenhagen Treaty talks, it is imperative that we have a true and open debate about climate change before we make potentially world-changing decisions based on this science. It is up to all of us to push this story and its staggering implications into the mainstream.

[Mber]

I just read this..wow, can you say totalitarian? Here's an excerpt:

"Blowing Myths Away"

2. Forget the climate change detractors
Those who deny climate change science are irritating, but
unimportant. The argument is not about if we should deal with climate
change, but how we should deal with climate change.

3. There is no ‘rational man’
The evidence discredits the ‘rational man’ theory – we rarely weigh
objectively the value of different decisions and then take the clear
self-interested choice.

4. Information can’t work alone
Providing information is not wrong; relying on information alone to
change attitudes is wrong. Remember also that messages about
saving money are important, but not that important.

The report entitled, "RulesOfTheGame.pdf" which is quoted above (and that you can find in the zip file) is nothing less then a brainwashing manual. Now this Manual was put out by an organization out of the UK called Futerra.

Here's a video of the co-founder of Futerra teaching people "communication tactics" (don't you love all this war like language?) in order to brainwash people.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1247825371738652001&ei=VR0HS7WzLorOqAK9s5mWDg&q=Futerra#

Incredible.

[EvadingGrid]

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?

The Daily Telegraph
Blogs Section
James Delingpole


If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)

When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:


Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.


One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change sceptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting:

“In an odd way this is cheering news.”

But perhaps the most damaging revelations  – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.

Here are a few tasters. (So far, we can only refer to them as alleged emails because – though Hadley CRU’s director Phil Jones has confirmed the break-in to Ian Wishart at the Briefing Room – he has yet to fess up to any specific contents.) But if genuine, they suggest dubious practices such as:

Manipulation of evidence:

    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) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

    The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Suppression of evidence:

    Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

    Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.

    Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

    We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:

    Next
    time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
    the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

    ……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….

And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.

    “This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

    “I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”

Hadley CRU has form in this regard. In September – I wrote the story up here as “How the global warming industry is based on a massive lie” – Hadley CRU’s researchers were exposed as having “cherry-picked” data in order to support their untrue claim that global temperatures had risen higher at the end of the 20th century than at any time in the last millenium. Hadley CRU was also the organisation which – in contravention of all acceptable behaviour in the international scientific community – spent years withholding data from researchers it deemed unhelpful to its cause. This matters because Hadley CRU, established in 1990 by the Met Office, is a government-funded body which is supposed to be a model of rectitude. Its HadCrut record is one of the four official sources of global temperature data used by the IPCC.

I asked in my title whether this will be the final nail in the coffin of Anthropenic Global Warming. This was wishful thinking, of course. In the run up to Copenhagen, we will see more and more hysterical (and grotesquely exaggerated) stories such as this in the Mainstream Media. And we will see ever-more-virulent campaigns conducted by eco-fascist activists, such as this risible new advertising campaign by Plane Stupid showing CGI polar bears falling from the sky and exploding because kind of, like, man, that’s sort of what happens whenever you take another trip on an aeroplane.

The world is currently cooling; electorates are increasingly reluctant to support eco-policies leading to more oppressive regulation, higher taxes and higher utility bills; the tide is turning against Al Gore’s Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. The so-called “sceptical” view is now also the majority view.

Unfortunately, we’ve a long, long way to go before the public mood (and scientific truth) is reflected by our policy makers. There are too many vested interests in AGW, with far too much to lose either in terms of reputation or money, for this to end without a bitter fight.

But if the Hadley CRU scandal is true,it’s a blow to the AGW lobby’s credibility which is never likely to recover.

[Letsbereal]

Hadley CRU (UK Met Office) Hacked Data: FOI2009.ZIP (62 megs)
21 November 2009, (The Catastrophist blog)
http://catastrophist.wordpress.com/2009/11/21/hadley-cru-climate-research-unit-leaked-data-foi2009-zip-62-megs/

Wow. Confirmed this is real. 61 or 62 meg ZIP file — uncompresses to about 165 meg. Lots of internal emails, funding data, correspondence, PR docs, stats (etc) from Hadley CRU (Climate Research Unit) at East Anglia University — i.e. the UK Meterological Office’s Climate Change HQ — where global climate models are prepared and released to media/international institutions. Hack or leak?

Released on a Russian FTP server — but now deleted. You can find copies here:

Torrent download:

[Mininova] http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=catastrophist.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mininova.org%2Ftor%2F3168330

[Pirate Bay] http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=catastrophist.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthepiratebay.org%2Ftorrent%2F5171206%2FHadley_CRU_Files_(FOI2009.zip)

HTML download: [here] http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XD050VKY

- Contains a 2005 Climate Communications document by UK PR-firm Futerra Sustainability Communications: “The Rules of the Game” — now updated as “New Rules: New Game” (pdf) at Futerra’s site. Also check out their “Greenwash Guide” (pdf).

- Futerra’s Solitare Townsend talking about communication strategies for “winning” the climate debate: Watch Vid: http://catastrophist.wordpress.com/2009/11/21/hadley-cru-climate-research-unit-leaked-data-foi2009-zip-62-megs/

- Ian Wishart in New Zealand’s Investigate Magazine 20 Nov issue (pdf): http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=catastrophist.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.investigatemagazine.com%2Faustralia%2Flatestissue.pdf

    In one email dating back to 1999, Jones appears to talk of fudging scientific data on climate change to “hide the decline”:

    From: Phil Jones
    To: ray bradley,mann@[snipped], mhughes@[snipped]
    Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
    Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
    Cc: k.briffa@[snipped],t.osborn@[snipped]
    Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
    Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow.
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) amd [sic] from1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
    Thanks for the comments, Ray.
    Cheers, Phil
    Prof. Phil Jones
    Climatic Research Unit


"Global Warming" SCAM - Hack/Leak FLASH
20 November 2009, by Karl Denninger (Market-Ticker)
http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/1648-Global-Warming-SCAM-HackLeak-FLASH.html

Climate Center Hacked - Thousend of Files leaked on Internet PDF
http://www.investigatemagazine.com/australia/latestissue.pdf

[Scootle]

“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?"

Wow ... I have a feeling the Pentagon had that exact same conversation when Stephen Jones' Nanothermite paper was published.

[Georgiacopguy]

PLEASE God, let this go viral.

[EvadingGrid]

Released on a Russian FTP server — but now deleted. You can find copies here:

Torrent download:

[Mininova] mininova FIO2009.zip

[Pirate Bay] The Pirate Bay FIO2009.zip

HTML download: [here] megaupload.com

Cool
We gotta MIRROR and SEED !

I'm just unpacking the FIO2009.zip onto my web server.

[EvadingGrid]

From: Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>
To: tatm@insec.quorus.e-burg.su
Subject: the Yamal data
Date: Wed Oct 30 17:45:53 1996

Dear Rashit,
       As always I seem to have been away bullshiting and politiking in
various meetings for weeks! I try to convince myself that this is of use to us as a dendrochronological community but I am not so sure how much that is really
true these days. I have the data you sent and I had to get someone here to 
decode it for me . That is fine now so I would like to try and reformat and RCS it . I will be back in touch soon. Your paper is in review for Denrochronologia.
I am very keen to get a much more detailed paper in The Holocene dealing with
this stuff and I hope you and Stepan will consider this - perhaps for some time in spring next year. Sorry I wasn't in touch sooner. Please give my regards 
to Stepan and Valerie.
             very best wishes
                          Keith

[EvadingGrid]

From: "Wallace, Helen" <helen.wallace@uk.greenpeace.org>
To: "'t.mcmichael@lshtm.ac.uk'" <t.mcmichael@lshtm.ac.uk>, "'m.hulme@uea.ac.uk'" <m.hulme@uea.ac.uk>
Subject: Letter
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 18:21:04 +0100

Dear Tony and Michael,

The final draft of the letter to the Times is attached, incorperating
your changes (I hope I have combined them in a way that you are both
happy with). 

Brian Hoskins and Adrian Jenkins have both decided that they prefer not
to sign the letter, although agreeing with its message. I haven't been
able to contact anyone else in the short time available, so I leave it
up to you to decide whether you are still both happy to go ahead.

If so, Mike could you please reply to both Tony and myself and let us
know, and Tony could you then send it as agreed?

Thank you both very much for your time and trouble.

Best regards,
Helen

Dr Helen Wallace
Senior Scientist
Greenpeace UK

Greenpeace, Canonbury Villas, London, N1 2PN

Tel: +44-171-865-8241
Fax: +44-171-865-8202
---------------------------
FINAL DRAFT

Letters Editor
The Times

Fax: 0171-782-5046
Email: letters@the-times.co.uk

21 June 1997
Dear Sir,

Without wishing to comment on the dispute between BP and Greenpeace
(Editorial, 20 August), we would like to remind your readers of the
seriousness of the potential threat caused by our continued use of
fossil fuels. This damage occurs both locally - as evidenced by the
deterioration of air quality in UK cities in the past few weeks - and
also globally.

As scientists studying the impacts of climate change, we consider the
global threat from greenhouse gases to be serious and to need
addressing. Adverse effects on human populations are likely to result
from changes in weather patterns, shifts in storm frequencies, rises in
sea level and the spread of certain pests and infectious diseases. A
wide variety of ecosystems throughout the world will be at increasing
risk.

We have little idea whether or not we can manage such adverse effects
and therefore the prudent course of action is to limit the cause of the
threat.

Major shifts in investment away from fossil fuels will therefore be
required to make the necessary reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide
to the atmosphere. Large companies like British Petroleum seem to us to
be well placed to take an active part in investing in these changes.
There is no doubt the need for precautionary, preventative action is
urgent.

Yours sincerely,




Prof. A.J. McMichael
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
University of London
Keppel Street
London
WC1E 7HT

Dr. M. Hulme
Climatic Research Unit
University of East Anglia
Norwich
NR4 7TJ

[EvadingGrid]

HOWTO Cook The DATA

From: John Daly <daly@vision.net.au>
To: n.nicholls@BoM.Gov.Au
Subject: Re: Climatic warming in Tasmania
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 20:04:00 +1100
Cc: Ed Cook <drdendro@ldgo.columbia.edu>, NNU-NB@palais.natmus.min.dk, k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, Mike Barbetti <mikeb@emu.su.oz.au>, zetterberg@joyl.joensuu.fi, rjf@dar.csiro.au

Dear Neville,

You mentioned to me some time ago that in your view, the 11-year solar cycle
did not influence temperature.  There have been numerous attempts by
academics to establish a correlation, but each has been shot down on some
ground or other.  I remember Barrie Pittock was especially dismissive of
attempts to correlate solar cycle with temperature.

Have you tried this approach?

Load "Mathematica" into your PC and run the following set of instructions -

data = ReadList[ "c:\sydney.txt", Number]
dataElements = Length[data]
X = ListPlot[ data, PlotJoined-> True];
fourierTrans = Fourier[data];
ListPlot[Abs[fourierTrans], PlotJoined -> True];

fitfun1 = Fit[data,{1,x,x^2,x^3,Sin[11 2 Pi x/dataElements],
      Cos[11 2 Pi x/dataElements]},x];
fittable = Table[N[fitfun1], {x, dataElements}];
Y = ListPlot[fittable, PlotJoined -> True];
Show[X, Y] 

The reference to "c:\sydney.txt" is a suggested pathname for the following
set of data - which is Sydney's annual mean temperature.

16.8  16.5  16.8  17  17  16.7  17.1  17.4  17.9  17.4  17.2  17.1  16.9  17  17.2  17.2  17.4  
17.6  17.6  17.6  16.7  17.1  16.8  17.4  16.8  17.3  17.8  17.5  17.1  17.2  17.6  17.3  17.1  
16.9  16.9  17.3  17.3  17.3  17.6  17.5  17.4  17.2  17.1  17.3  17.2  17.2  16.9  17.5  17.4  
17.2  17  17.5  17.4  17.5  17.7  18.3  17.8  17.4  17.2  17.4  18.3  17.3  18  18.1  18  17.5  
17.3  18  17  18.2  17.4  17.6  17.5  17.4  17.1  17.4  17.3  17.5  17.7  18  17.8  18  17.4  
17.8  16.8  17.5  17.4  17.6  17.6  17.2  17.4  17.9  17.9  17.6  17.7  17.8  17.7  17.6  17.8  
18.3  18  17.6  17.8  17.8  17.8  18.1  17.9  17.5  17.8  18.3  18  17.7  17.3  17.5  18.5  17.4 
 17.8  17.7  17.8  17.7  18  18.5  18.2  17.8  18.1  17.5  17.8  17.8  18  18.6  18.1  18.1  
18.6  

So Far so good.

"Mathematica" first plots out the data itself (see Atachment 1)

The first part of the instruction set lets "mathematica" do a Fourier Transform
on the data, ie. searching out the periodicities, if there are any.   The result is
shown on Attachment 2.

The transform result shows a sharp spike at the 11 year point (I wonder
what is significant about 11 years?).  The second part of the instructions
now acts upon this observed spike (the Cos 11 bit), to extract it's
waveform from the rest of the noise.  The result is shown as a waveform
in attachment 3, the waves having an 11-year period, with the long-term
Sydney warming easily evident.

Attachment 4 shows the original Sydney data overlaid against the 11-year
periodicity.

It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.

(I tried the same run on the CRU global temperature set.  Even though CRU
must be highly smoothed by the time all the averages are worked out, the
11-year pulse is still there, albeit about half the size of Sydneys).

Stay cool.

John Daly      http://www.vision.net.au/~daly

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Sydney.gif

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Fourier.gif

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Solar1.gif

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Solar2.gif

[UK Lyn]

Here we go... the globalist AGW climate-fraudsters hit back...

It isn't a conspiracy, seems the poor globalist 'scientists' are upset when they are questioned and this made them write 'nasty' emails  

Bob Ward is Policy and Communications Director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science

[and he is very pissed-off at the conspiracy being outed of course - keep his credentials in-mind when you read this bullshit]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This climate email-hacking episode is generating more heat than light


Another skirmish has broken out in the long-running battle between climate scientists and so-called sceptics, and this one is likely to lead to more public confusion

Bob Ward
guardian.co.uk, Friday 20 November 2009 20.40 GMT

Another skirmish has broken out in the long-running battle between climate scientists and so-called sceptics, with the hacking of email messages between some of the world's leading researchers on global temperature trends. But as usually happens in the blogosphere, this episode is generating more heat than light and is likely to lead to more public confusion over the causes of climate change.

For the past few years, a small group of climate change 'sceptics' have been poring over scientific journal papers that report historical trends in temperatures from around the world, as recorded by directly by thermometers and other instruments, and by 'proxies', such as tree rings. Their primary objective has been to seek out evidence that global warming has been invented by climate researchers who fake their data.

Among their main targets have been papers published by research teams led by Michael Mann at Pennsylvania State University and Phil Jones at the University of East Anglia, and particularly those featuring the famous 'hockey stick' graph, showing that average temperature in the northern hemisphere was relatively stable and constant for most of the last couple of millennia, but rose dramatically upwards in the last 100 years. This graph appeared prominently in the landmark Third Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2001, which concluded that "most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations".

The attacks on the hockey stick graph led the United States National Academy of Sciences to carry out an investigation, concluding in 2006 that although there had been no improper conduct by the researchers, they may have expressed higher levels of confidence in their main conclusions than was warranted by the evidence.

The 'sceptics' believe they have been vindicated and have presented the hockey stick graph as proof that global warming is not occurring. In doing so, they have ignored the academy's other conclusion that "surface temperature reconstructions for periods prior to the industrial era are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion that climatic warming is occurring in response to human activities, and they are not the primary evidence".

More importantly, these skeptics have not overturned the well-established basic physics of the greenhouse effect, namely that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and increasing its concentration in the atmosphere causes the earth to warm. They also have not managed to make melting glaciers and rising sea levels, or any other evidence of warming, disappear into thin air. But they have managed to confuse some of the public about the causes of climate change.

Over the past five years, Mann and Jones in particular have been subjected not only to legitimate scrutiny by other researchers, but also to a co-ordinated campaign of personal attacks on their reputation by 'sceptics'. If the hacked e-mails are genuine, they only show that climate researchers are human, and that they speak badly in private about 'sceptics' who accuse them of fraud.

It is inevitable as we approach the crucial meeting in conference in Copenhagen in December that the sceptics would try some stunt to try to undermine a global agreement on climate change. There is no smoking gun, but just a lot of smoke without fire.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-email-hacking

[Georgiacopguy]

Unfortunately, Eric Holder would just give Gore a free pass on it, and he would never see a bit of jail time.

Grizzly, I wasn't trying ot spin it, I'm glad this has come out, The new title is just a bit....weird to read.

[EvadingGrid]

Christmas has come early for some this year !
 

[NWOSCUM]

What pisses me off is the sheeple will call it a conspiracy and this this time by definition they are correct.  But so much negativity has been drawn around the word they will just say, "Oh it's a conspiracy......I don't believe it."

[EvadingGrid]

Editors are getting phone calls right now

"Kill That Story!"

[tattoo8118]

What pisses me off is the sheeple will call it a conspiracy and this this time by definition they are correct.  But so much negativity has been drawn around the word they will just say, "Oh it's a conspiracy......I don't believe it."

Sadly, I think you are right..........even if this does go viral......they have been so conditioned that this revelation will not have an effect whatsoever................the mainstream media will twist it and make things seem as if this isn't a big deal.

All we can hope for and try to do is make this thing go viral.  E-mail it to everyone.

[Librium]

I thought Drudge would have this front page, all day and with a siren, but it seems this is even too big for that rag.

[EvadingGrid]

Sadly, I think you are right..........even if this does go viral......they have been so conditioned that this revelation will not have an effect whatsoever................the mainstream media will twist it and make things seem as if this isn't a big deal.

All we can hope for and try to do is make this thing go viral.  E-mail it to everyone.

Yea, if we get to people first, it will imunize them from some of the propaganda backlash that the Murdock Press and fiends will spin. Your Solution is correct, lets make it go VIRAL.

[UK Lyn]

What pisses me off is the sheeple will call it a conspiracy and this this time by definition they are correct.  But so much negativity has been drawn around the word they will just say, "Oh it's a conspiracy......I don't believe it."

They'll believe it when they are taxed 2 pounds-a-mile driving their cars, to be paid to Al Gore

They'll believe it when ALL 'recreational' driving is made illegal.

They'll believe it when they have to sell their rural home and move to a crap city location just to afford travelling into work.

They'll believe it when forced out of their cars, they catch every flu and germ around by cramming every traveller into crowded buses and trains.

You bet they'll believe it then!

[Librium]

Lets try and get this trending on twitter.

[EvadingGrid]

I have not seen such a news story since November 9, 1989

[Pupil]

If you're looking for this file and you're not into bit torrents, it's also been mirrored here:

http://truthactionottawa.com/main/?page_id=902

BTW, Mike Rivero's on air right now saying it may not have been a hacker, it may have been an insider/whistleblower at the Hadley CRU.

[wembley87]

If you're looking for this file and you're not into bit torrents, it's also been mirrored here:

http://truthactionottawa.com/main/?page_id=902

BTW, Mike Rivero's on air right now saying it may not have been a hacker, it may have been an insider/whistleblower at the Hadley CRU.

Do you have a link so i can listen ?

[Dig]

HOWTO Cook The DATA

From: John Daly <daly@vision.net.au>
To: n.nicholls@BoM.Gov.Au
Subject: Re: Climatic warming in Tasmania
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 20:04:00 +1100
Cc: Ed Cook <drdendro@ldgo.columbia.edu>, NNU-NB@palais.natmus.min.dk, k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, Mike Barbetti <mikeb@emu.su.oz.au>, zetterberg@joyl.joensuu.fi, rjf@dar.csiro.au

Dear Neville,

You mentioned to me some time ago that in your view, the 11-year solar cycle
did not influence temperature.  There have been numerous attempts by
academics to establish a correlation, but each has been shot down on some
ground or other.  I remember Barrie Pittock was especially dismissive of
attempts to correlate solar cycle with temperature.

Have you tried this approach?

Load "Mathematica" into your PC and run the following set of instructions -

data = ReadList[ "c:\sydney.txt", Number]
dataElements = Length[data]
X = ListPlot[ data, PlotJoined-> True];
fourierTrans = Fourier[data];
ListPlot[Abs[fourierTrans], PlotJoined -> True];

fitfun1 = Fit[data,{1,x,x^2,x^3,Sin[11 2 Pi x/dataElements],
      Cos[11 2 Pi x/dataElements]},x];
fittable = Table[N[fitfun1], {x, dataElements}];
Y = ListPlot[fittable, PlotJoined -> True];
Show[X, Y] 

The reference to "c:\sydney.txt" is a suggested pathname for the following
set of data - which is Sydney's annual mean temperature.

16.8  16.5  16.8  17  17  16.7  17.1  17.4  17.9  17.4  17.2  17.1  16.9  17  17.2  17.2  17.4  
17.6  17.6  17.6  16.7  17.1  16.8  17.4  16.8  17.3  17.8  17.5  17.1  17.2  17.6  17.3  17.1  
16.9  16.9  17.3  17.3  17.3  17.6  17.5  17.4  17.2  17.1  17.3  17.2  17.2  16.9  17.5  17.4  
17.2  17  17.5  17.4  17.5  17.7  18.3  17.8  17.4  17.2  17.4  18.3  17.3  18  18.1  18  17.5  
17.3  18  17  18.2  17.4  17.6  17.5  17.4  17.1  17.4  17.3  17.5  17.7  18  17.8  18  17.4  
17.8  16.8  17.5  17.4  17.6  17.6  17.2  17.4  17.9  17.9  17.6  17.7  17.8  17.7  17.6  17.8  
18.3  18  17.6  17.8  17.8  17.8  18.1  17.9  17.5  17.8  18.3  18  17.7  17.3  17.5  18.5  17.4 
 17.8  17.7  17.8  17.7  18  18.5  18.2  17.8  18.1  17.5  17.8  17.8  18  18.6  18.1  18.1  
18.6  

So Far so good.

"Mathematica" first plots out the data itself (see Atachment 1)

The first part of the instruction set lets "mathematica" do a Fourier Transform
on the data, ie. searching out the periodicities, if there are any.   The result is
shown on Attachment 2.

The transform result shows a sharp spike at the 11 year point (I wonder
what is significant about 11 years?).  The second part of the instructions
now acts upon this observed spike (the Cos 11 bit), to extract it's
waveform from the rest of the noise.  The result is shown as a waveform
in attachment 3, the waves having an 11-year period, with the long-term
Sydney warming easily evident.

Attachment 4 shows the original Sydney data overlaid against the 11-year
periodicity.

It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.

(I tried the same run on the CRU global temperature set.  Even though CRU
must be highly smoothed by the time all the averages are worked out, the
11-year pulse is still there, albeit about half the size of Sydneys).

Stay cool.

John Daly      http://www.vision.net.au/~daly

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Sydney.gif

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Fourier.gif

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Solar1.gif

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\Solar2.gif

The gift that keeps on giving.

The truth Santa has come early this year!

And all the Global Warming Fraudsters have been vewy vewy naughty!

[wembley87]

Do you have a link so i can listen ?

Just realised he is on GCN 

[Pupil]

Just realised he is on GCN 

He's actually got a better sounding m3u on his site at whatreallyhappened.com on the right.

He was onto another topic before the break, but I'm sure he'll come back to it.  AGW is one of his favourite topics.

[EvadingGrid]

See if you can spot anything in this e-mail
FOI2009/FOIA/mail/0843161829.txt

From: Gary Funkhouser <gary@LTRR.Arizona.EDU>
To: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk
Subject: kyrgyzstan and siberian data
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 15:37:09 -0700

Keith,

Thanks for your consideration. Once I get a draft of the central
and southern siberian data and talk to Stepan and Eugene I'll send
it to you.

I really wish I could be more positive about the Kyrgyzstan material,
but I swear I pulled every trick out of my sleeve trying to milk
something out of that. It was pretty funny though - I told Malcolm
what you said about my possibly being too Graybill-like in evaluating
the response functions - he laughed and said that's what he thought
at first also. The data's tempting but there's too much variation
even within stands. I don't think it'd be productive to try and juggle
the chronology statistics any more than I already have - they just
are what they are (that does sound Graybillian).  I think I'll have
to look for an option where I can let this little story go as it is.

Not having seen the sites I can only speculate, but I'd be
optimistic if someone could get back there and spend more time
collecting samples, particularly at the upper elevations.

Yeah, I doubt I'll be over your way anytime soon. Too bad, I'd like
to get together with you and Ed for a beer or two. Probably
someday though.

Cheers, Gary
Gary Funkhouser
Lab. of Tree-Ring Research
The University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona 85721  USA
phone: (520) 621-2946
fax:   (520) 621-8229
e-mail: gary@ltrr.arizona.edu

[Cobra]

They'll believe it when they are taxed 2 pounds-a-mile driving their cars, to be paid to Al Gore

They'll believe it when ALL 'recreational' driving is made illegal.

They'll believe it when they have to sell their rural home and move to a crap city location just to afford travelling into work.

They'll believe it when forced out of their cars, they catch every flu and germ around by cramming every traveller into crowded buses and trains.

You bet they'll believe it then!

No they won't.

Many people who "get it" underestimate just how easily and quickly the rest of the popualtion can be conditioned to accept a certain paradigm.

[EvadingGrid]

Climate Scientists Statistical Methodology :



Witch Powered

"I really wish I could be more positive about the Kyrgyzstan material,
but I swear I pulled every trick out of my sleeve trying to milk
something out of that.

    - Gary Funkhouser <gary@LTRR.Arizona.EDU>
"

[Mber]

No they won't.

Many people who "get it" underestimate just how easily and quickly the rest of the popualtion can be conditioned to accept a certain paradigm.

This is true.

A funny thing really in brainwashing -- even while a person is being lined up against a wall about to be executed, they'll still say to themselves "this can't be happening".

It's always Individuals who change history. Leaders not followers.

[Dig]

And the NWO has been spending the past 25 years trying to trivialize, demonize, and render sophmoric the "Hackers" while creating predictive programming conditioning for them to follow.

Awww poor NWO never factored in the human spirit and free will ( control freak incestuous f*cktards!)