Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud

Author Topic: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud  (Read 14599 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline NotASlave

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 236
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2009, 08:37:08 pm »
*ouch* *ouch* the coals are hot ..keep dancing ..keep dancing...*ouch* *ouch*

f**k YOU AL GORE

f**k YOU WITH A RAILROAD TIE

I'm so damned sick of your ass.  Move the hell out our country now you traitorous trash you.   Or ...stick around and watch what we do do you for this lying shit ... Yeah ..stick around asshole.

/SWEARING=OFF

The Social Workers Mantra: "All Mothers neglect, All Fathers rape babies and Children never lie, unless they recant"

Offline NWOSCUM

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,348
  • "Yuppie Scum"
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2009, 08:41:40 pm »
*ouch* *ouch* the coals are hot ..keep dancing ..keep dancing...*ouch* *ouch*

f**k YOU AL GORE

f**k YOU WITH A RAILROAD TIE

I'm so damned sick of your ass.  Move the hell out our country now you traitorous trash you.   Or ...stick around and watch what we do do you for this lying shit ... Yeah ..stick around asshole.

/SWEARING=OFF



Please don't sugar coat it.  How DO you feel??
"The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, and their power of forgetting is enormous." --Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf"

Offline v

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2009, 08:47:05 pm »
At 3:10 into the video he says " one-world politicians."  Nice!

Offline HealthWyze

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 233
    • The Health Wyze Report
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2009, 09:19:48 pm »
Thanks for the link, I posted it on Facebook, too. I look forward to seeing where this goes.  If nothing else, it should get a few people to start thinking for themselves, when they realize that not all scientists believe that global warming is man-made.
Watch The Cancer Report documentary, to get a full grasp on the Rockefeller influence in medicine, and why there are no cures: http://bit.ly/WK7bbp

Read "Defy Your Doctor And Be Healed", and save yourself from medicine: http://healthwyze.org/book

luckee1

  • Guest
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #5 on: November 27, 2009, 09:22:30 pm »
Please don't sugar coat it.  How DO you feel??

 :D :D

Indeed, are you sure you are expressing yourself well?

Offline SUPREMEMASTER

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,688
  • Commander
    • http://www.activismoverdrive.comze.com
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #6 on: November 27, 2009, 10:32:21 pm »
I WONDER WHY THE REST OF THE MAINSTREAM NEWS DOESN'T TALK ABOUT THIS?
Automatic User Post Signature:
The message has to be put out in the right way.
Website Still Needs to be updated |ActivismOverDrive.comze.net|

Offline RoadRunner

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #7 on: November 27, 2009, 10:47:58 pm »

I wanna give Al Gore a carbon footprint up the arse
you can do anything you want
think anything you like
but you cant change human nature

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #8 on: November 27, 2009, 10:59:50 pm »
And look at Rothschild's Reuters media empire's top story (Rothschild still in complete denial that his complete fraud has been exposed to the worrld):



Momentum grows for Copenhagen climate deal
http://www.reuters.com/articlePrint?articleId=USTRE5AQ4W720091128
Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:44pm EST
By Pascal Fletcher and Adrian Croft

PORT OF SPAIN (Reuters) - World leaders on Friday rallied to a diplomatic offensive to forge a U.N. climate deal in Copenhagen next month and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said an agreement was "within reach".

Ban, and Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen who will host the December 7-18 U.N. climate talks, hailed what they portrayed as a growing international momentum toward a pact to curb greenhouse gas emissions and limit global warming.

"Our common goal is to achieve a firm foundation for a legally binding climate treaty as early as possible in 2010. I am confident that we are on track to do this," Ban told a summit of Commonwealth leaders in Trinidad and Tobago.

"Each week brings new commitments and pledges -- from industrialized countries, emerging economies and developing countries alike," he added.

"An agreement is within reach ... We must seal a deal in Copenhagen," Ban said. He, Rasmussen and French President Nicloas Sarkozy attended the summit of the 53-nation Commonwealth as special guests to lobby on Friday for international consensus on a climate pact.

Rasmussen said Denmark had received an "overwhelmingly positive" response to its invitation to world leaders to attend the talks next months. "More than 85 heads of state and government have told us they are coming to Copenhagen, and many are still positively considering," he said.

He urged major developed countries to deliver firm commitments on cutting greenhouse gas emissions and to "put figures on the table" for "up-front" financing to help poor nations combat climate change.

"The need for money on the table -- that is what we want to achieve in Copenhagen," Rasmussen told a news conference later.

A framework accord in Copenhagen would also need to set a deadline for finalizing a detailed treaty, he told Reuters.

Rasmussen and Ban welcomed an earlier proposal by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown for the creation of a $10 billion-a-year fund to help developing countries battle the effects of global warming. Brown said such financing should be made available as early as next year, well before any new climate deal takes effect.

'CANNOT WAIT UNTIL 2013'

"We face a climate emergency: we cannot wait until 2013 to begin taking action," Brown said.

Sarkozy, who called for an "ambitious global accord" on climate, also made a similar proposal for what Rasmussen termed a "Copenhagen launch fund" that would quickly channel money to poor states to help them counter global warming and adapt their development models to requirements to reduce carbon pollution.

Most nations have given up hopes of finalizing a detailed legal climate treaty text in Copenhagen, but prospects for achieving a broad political framework pact have been brightened this week by public promises of greenhouse gas curbs by China and the United States, the world's biggest emitters.

An upbeat Rasmussen said: "A strong deal -- sealed at the leaders level -- will serve as a clear and detailed guidance for negotiators to quickly finalize a legal framework."

"Copenhagen is capable of delivering the turning point we all want ... From here on it's a matter of political will".

Ban dismissed suggestions that the Copenhagen meeting would be merely another "talk shop". "It will be a very substantive and concrete negotiating process," he told reporters.

Asked about reservations recently expressed by Canada about whether a binding detailed climate treaty was possible, Rasmussen said: "I don't think there is any contradiction between wishful thinking and realistic thinking".

'EXISTENTIAL THREAT'

The 53-nation Commonwealth group, which represents more than a quarter of the global population, bringing together wealthy nations like Britain, Canada and Australia with some of the world's smallest states, earlier launched a diplomatic push to drum up momentum for a comprehensive climate agreement.

"On this, the eve of the U.N. Copenhagen summit on climate change, the Commonwealth has an opportunity to lead once more," Britain's Queen Elizabeth, who heads the group comprising mostly former British colonies, said at the summit opening.

Nearly half of the Commonwealth's members are small island states which are directly threatened by rising sea levels caused by global warming, and developing nations are appealing for financial aid from rich governments to help them counter climate change and reduce carbon pollution.

The accord the United Nations is aiming for in Copenhagen would cover tougher emissions targets, climate financing for poorer nations and transfer of clean-energy technology.

The Commonwealth is putting at the forefront of the climate debate the cases of tiny island states like the Maldives in the Indian Ocean and Tuvalu and Kiribati in the Pacific, whose existence would be threatened by rises in ocean levels.

Rasmussen said these faced "immediate existential threat" and "cannot afford the luxury of a failure in Copenhagen".

The climate treaty, now expected to be adopted as a final text only next year, will replace the Kyoto Protocol that expires in 2012.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #9 on: November 27, 2009, 11:01:15 pm »
Climategate spells end to the false science of climate change
http://www.infowars.com/climategate-spells-end-to-the-false-science-of-climate-change/
Anthony Gucciardi
Infowars
November 27, 2009

With the release of over 60 megabytes worth of incriminating emails, and the world getting a glimpse into the world of fanatical pseudo-science, there is little that can be done by the professors who are now on intellectual trial. Whether the emails were leaked or hacked, the people responsible for getting the information out have helped uncover the truth about “climate change” like no news story before it. While there have been piles of evidence to expose the global warming fraud in the past, a written exchange in their very own words is the ultimate proof.



Lord Monckton on the Alex Jones Show, November 27, 2009. Hear the rest of the interview.

With Lord Christopher Monckton making an appearance on the Alex Jones show on Friday to discuss the Climategate story, it is evident that even top political figures are speaking out against phony “climate change”.  The very premise that carbon dioxide is bad for the environment goes against the basic fundamentals of science. While it is absurd to think the public would fall for something so outlandish as to say that one of the building blocks of life is a poison, you must remember that many agreed to ban water under it’s scientific name dihydrogen monoxide.

One would believe that the day the groundbreaking emails surfaced would be the last for global warming propagandists, yet the professors still attempt to lie their way out of the issue. Some so-called environmentalists even went into a state of hysteria upon finding out about the leaked emails. The professors can dance around on television all day, but the truth cannot be silenced by a thousand lies.

When looking at the history of the climate change scandal, you will find that the alarmist terminology shifts repeatedly. First they warned against global cooling, warning of a new ice age. Shortly after the warning of a new ice age, global warming was toted as the new killer. The mainstream media picked up global warming as the story of the generation, claiming it was the inevitable killer of humanity. As more and more evidence surfaces, they are now forced to admit that we are entering a cooling trend. As more and more saw this repetitious cycle for what it is, phony scientists toting global warming were forced to change their wording. “Climate change” emerged as the new word used in order to accommodate any environmental change.

The ludicrous claims made by pushers of the global warming scam have been thoroughly debunked, and those in charge of creating false numbers have been exposed. It is time to inform everyone you know about these recent findings. Don’t let false science dictate the actions that you make in your life.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #10 on: November 27, 2009, 11:02:20 pm »
ClimateGate For Dummies
http://www.infowars.com/climategate-for-dummies/
Steve Watson & Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, Nov 27, 2009

On Thursday 19th November 2009 news began to circulate that hacked documents and communications from the University of East Anglia’s Hadley Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) had been published to the internet.

The information revealed how top scientists conspired to falsify data in the face of declining global temperatures in order to prop up the premise that man-made factors are driving climate change.

The documents and emails illustrated how prominent climatologists, affiliated with the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change, embarked on a venomous and coordinated campaign to ostracize climate skeptics and use their influence to keep dissenting reports from appearing in peer-reviewed journals, as well as using cronyism to avoid compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests.

Here follows a compendium of articles and videos on what was quickly dubbed as “ClimateGate”.

The Backstory:

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

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

Hiding the Decline:

Hacked E Mails: Climate Scientists Discuss “Hiding Decline” In Temperatures

Mike’s Nature Trick

McIntyre: The deleted data from the “Hide the Decline” trick

Hide The Decline – Climategate

Bishop Hill’s compendium of CRU email issues

The Codified Smoking Gun:

Forget The Emails, Code Discusses “Artificially Adjusted” Temperatures

Climategate: hide the decline – codified

CRU Emails “may” be open to interpretation, but commented code by the programmer tells the real story

Hijacking The Peer Review System:

“Climategate”: Peer-Review System Was Hijacked By Warming Alarmists

Climate Expert: “Compromised” UN Scientists should be excluded from IPCC, Peer-Review Process

UK Scientist: ‘Case for climate fears is blown to smithereens…whole theory should be destroyed and discarded and UN conference should be closed’

British climate change scientists ‘conspired to keep skeptics in the dark’

Calls For Investigations:

Call For Independent Inquiry Into Climategate as Global Warming Fraud Implodes

Global Warming On Trial: Inhofe Calls For Investigation Of UN IPCC

US Congress investigates Climategate e-mails: this could be the beginning of the end for AGW

Congress may probe leaked global warming e-mails

Government petition started in UK regarding CRU Climategate

Calls For Criminal Prosecutions:

Another Prominent Scientist Calls CRU Scientists “Criminals”

ClimateGate: People need to go to jail

Lord Monckton: Prosecute the Climate Change Criminals

Author Points To “Climategate’s Perry Mason Moment”

Denying Email Deletion

A d v e r t i s e m e n t


Skeptics Vindicated:

Climate Alarmists Finally Admit The Debate Is Not Over

The New ‘Deniers’

TV Environmentalist Goes Nuts Over ClimateGate

Global Warming Meltdown: Climategate!

U.S Fallout:

Climategate e-mails sweep America, may scuttle Barack Obama’s Cap and Trade laws

Australian Fallout:

Ripples of Climategate? Liberal MP’s desert Turnbull in Australia over emissions trading scheme

Climategate: five Aussie MPs lead the way by resigning in disgust over carbon tax

New Zealand Fallout:

New Zealand Climate Data Shows Clear Evidence Of Fraud

Climategate: the scandal spreads, the plot thickens, the shame deepens…

Woeful Mainstream Media Coverage:

BBC Climate Correspondent Was Forwarded CRU Emails Five Weeks Before They Were Made Public

Climategate: how the MSM reported the greatest scandal in modern science

Climategate: Monbiot makes it all suddenly OK through medium of satire

Climategate: BBC website still thinks it’s a story about computer hacking

Climategate: How Faine censored the skeptical news

CNN Sucks: Climategate Never Happened

CNN Finally Does Their Propaganda Piece On Climate Gate

NYT Tackles Damning Global Warming Emails, But Reveals Own Hypocrisy

NY Times reporter whitewashes Climategate story he is part of

Alex Jones Coverage of ClimateGate:

Emergency Viral: ClimateGate Fraud Exposes Dirty Tricks Agenda For Global Government

Alex Jones on Climategate: Hoax of all time a global Ponzi scheme

Alex Jones Tv:How to Expose The Climate Fraud!!

Alex Jones TV: Hacked Emails Show Blatant Climate Change Fraud

Dr. Tim Ball on Alex Jones Tv 1/5: Myth on Global Warming & The CRU Hacked Documents

Marc Morano on Alex Jones Tv 1/2:The Case For Al Gore’s Climate Change is Falling Apart

Alex Jones Tv: Climate-Gate ” THE E-MAILS ARE REAL!!!”
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #11 on: November 27, 2009, 11:03:29 pm »
Climate Gate is YOUR fight
http://www.infowars.com/climate-gate-is-your-fight/
The Blood of Patriots and Tyrants
November 27, 2009

Those in the know are fully aware that the mainstream media is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the State. You’re reading this, so you’re probably one of those people. It is so easy to fall into the mental trap that, if you know something, then how can it not be common knowledge? The sheep don’t even know what the carbon tax is, or what’s at stake in Copenhagen. They are completely and utterly clueless.   
   
   

Professor Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit.   

   



For the rest of us, the fight is joined. The globalists have thrown their best punches while we played rope-a-dope. Even before this scandal broke, they were running out of gas. Their gloves were heavy. A global agreement to supposedly cut carbon emissions, if you believed what the media told you (I don’t), was in already in jeopardy prior to the release of the hacked emails. These revelations are a flurry of knockout blows, if only we’re able to break through the media blackout and propaganda protecting these criminals from being fully exposed. The media will not be our ally in this.

The globalists, the eugenicists, are in this for the long haul. All of their eggs are in the climate hoax basket. They’re not going to stop now. Why would they? We all know this was never about climate change in the first place. We knew that they knew that it was the sun driving the climate, and that temperatures haven’t risen in at least ten years. If this were about saving the Earth – if they truly were not evil, just wrong, as the newest documentary naively suggests – then the climate scientists would’ve packed it in a long time ago.

No, what this is and always was about is an excuse for global government. This they certainly do not deny. Ban Ki-Moon, the UN Secretary General, penned an op-ed in the New York Times last month in which he called for a global government funded by carbon taxes. The new president of the European Union, Herman van Rompuy, said that 2009 was the first year of global governance, and that the Copenhagen climate conference would be “another step towards the global management of our planet”. In July, Al Gore spoke at Oxford University and stated that global governance, funded by the Waxman-Markey cap and trade tax which will be voted upon in the Senate within the coming weeks, is necessary for combating “climate change”.

The globalist plan for world government – the elimination of national sovereignty, ie the destruction of the United States of America – must be fully exposed. We know that this scheme is completely unknown to the vast majority of people. Perhaps now that Glenn Beck is finally speaking of this conspiracy, the Fox “News” crowd will get their heads out of their rears and realize it’s not “liberals” behind this, it’s globalists – there are prominent Republicans and so-called conservative leaders pushing this as well. Unfortunately, because Beck and Fox actively promote the left-right paradigm, the establishment will still try to paint the issue as an attack by right wing hacks and special interests.

This story does not belong to the media. It is ours alone. BBC was given these emails a full month before they were leaked on the internet, but refused to report on the story. Did the BBC really believe something so sensational would just disappear for the simple fact that they didn’t report it? Why not report on the story, if only to downplay it and attack climate change skeptics, like every other news outlet has? Who knows.

After laughably claiming that the story spread fast, CNN did its first story on the scandal a full six days after the emails were leaked. The story repeatedly refers to “the consensus” on climate change and claims the emails contained “little context”. To CNN’s credit, they actually showed their viewers one of the emails, in which a scientist boasts of completing a “trick” to “hide the decline” in the “real temps” since 1961. That’s not a typo – 1961. Objective readers are capable of making their own judgments, but this is an obviously damning admission.

Contrast CNN’s story with other hit pieces such as the Guardian’s, in which “journalist” Mark Lynas laments the “dangerous shift in climate denial strategy”, targeting and unfairly vilifying these infallible and heroic scientists. Al Gore is a politician, you see – he can take it – but these climate change deniers, akin to creationists and 9-11 truthers, have gone too far, making “no distinction between the political and the scientific sphere.” Of course, again, their emails have been taken out of context – they are really nothing more than the private views of the scientists which surely have been left out of their work. Alas, Lynas was insufficiently moved by any sense of journalistic integrity to provide the supposedly out of context emails so his readers could make their own judgment, else his readers would’ve seen that, far from the proponents of climate change themselves being subjected to “personal attacks, exposure of their private lives and vilification”, these proponents cheered the death of skeptics, fantasized about assaulting them, and conspired to deny them funding and suppress their works in peer reviewed journals.

Meanwhile, a new hit piece today from Reuters claims it’s all a “smear campaign” designed “to distract from reasoned debate” about climate change. Again, like the Guardian piece, the emails are said to be taken out of context and “cherry-picked”, with not one direct citation of the emails in question provided to the reader. Instead the article extensively quotes the guilty parties’ lame excuses, and claims that, despite the “science” being decided, it just can’t seem to silence the skeptics. Michael Mann, co-author of the Copenhagen Diagnosis and lead author of the UN IPCC Third Assessment Report and one of the exposed scientists, claims that he and his colleagues “often speak in a language they understand and is often foreign to the outside world.” These Holocaust deniers have cherry-picked the emails and turned “something innocent into something nefarious.” This claim might have been augmented by actually showing the supposed “cherry-picked”, out of context emails, which would’ve shown that, in fact, these scientists speak in plain, coherent English that any 6 year old can comprehend, but again journalistic integrity takes a back seat to demagoguery. Revealing the content of the emails would also show that, far from this being a “sustained” and “vexatious campaign” against the guilty parties, it was the authors of these emails who were responsible for quelling “reasoned debate”, displaying their hostility, in words and actions, towards climate change skeptics.

I wouldn’t even call myself a journalist – I’m just a guy in a room in his boxer briefs – but allow me to do my part to apply journalistic integrity to my own work by citing as many of the emails in question as I can find.

• In one email, dated November 1999, Professor Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, wrote: “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” Defenders of Jones have ridiculously tried to pull a Clinton and say “that all depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is,” in reference to the use of the word “trick”, saying it simply refers to a “trick of the trade”, pretending not to notice this “trick” was used to “hide the decline” in “real temps” since 1961. If the Earth is warming, why does he need to hide any decline?

• In another email, Phil Jones calls the sudden death of prominent climate change skeptic John Daly “cheering news!”

• Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and a lead author of the 2001 and 2007 IPCC Scientific Assessment of Climate Change, penned the following email discussing the BBC’s supposed turn around on climate change:

Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low.

[...]

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.

• Tom Wigley, a senior scientist in the Climate and Global Dynamics Division at University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, wrote an email to Phil Jones in which he betrays knowledge of data that would discredit their theories on climate change, saying, “Land warming since 1980 has been twice the ocean warming — and skeptics might claim that this proves that urban warming is real and important.”

• In another email, Phil Jones appears to be instructing fellow scientists to delete incriminating emails subject to FOIA requests:

Mike,

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.

• John Overpeck, director of the Institute of the Environment at University of Arizona, in an email suggests that scientists are aware that their claim that 1998 was the warmest year on record is likely false:

I agree, that we don’t want to be seen as being too clever or defensive. Note however, that all the TAR said was “likely” the warmest in the last 1000 years. Our chapter and figs (including 6.10) make it clear that it is unlikely any multi-decadal period was as warm as the last 50 years. But, that said, I do feel your are right that our team would not have said what the TAR said about 1998, and thus, we should delete that second sentence.

• In another incriminating email, Phil Jones discusses his evident reluctance to hand over information, and suggests sending the requested information just as raw data, which would “annoy” those behind the FOI request:

Options appear to be:

Send them the data

Send them a subset removing station data from some of the countries who made us pay in the normals papers of Hulme et al. (1990s) and also any number that David can remember. This should also omit some other countries like (Australia, NZ, Canada, Antarctica). Also could extract some of the sources that Anders added in (31-38 source codes in J&M 2003). Also should remove many of the early stations that we coded up in the 1980s.

Send them the raw data as is, by reconstructing it from GHCN. How could this be done? Replace all stations where the WMO ID agrees with what is in GHCN. This would be the raw data, but it would annoy them.

• In this email, Michael Mann, Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State, conspires to muffle skepticism about his website Real Climate:

guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go there personally, but so I’m informed).

Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d like us to include.


You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC comments as a megaphone…

• In another email, Jones admits he will delete data rather than comply with FOI requests to disclose data which would show the basis for their dire warnings about global warming:

Just sent loads of station data to Scott. Make sure he documents everything better this time ! And don’t leave stuff lying around on ftp sites – you never know who is trawling them. The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone. Does your similar act in the US force you to respond to enquiries within 20 days? – our does ! The UK works on precedents, so the first request will test it.We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind. Tom Wigley has sent me a worried email when he heard about it – thought people could ask him for his model code. He has retired officially from UEA so he can hide behind that. IPR should be relevant here, but I can see me getting into an argument with someone at UEA who’ll say we must adhere to it!

• This email from Phil Jones shows that he was warned against deleted emails subject to FOI requests:

Haven’t got a reply from the FOI person here at UEA. So I’m not entirely confident the numbers are correct. One way of checking would be to look on CA, but I’m not doing that. I did get an email from the FOI person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn’t be deleting emails – unless this was ‘normal’ deleting to keep emails manageable! McIntyre hasn’t paid his 10, so nothing looks likely to happen re his Data Protection Act email.

Anyway requests have been of three types – observational data, paleo data and who made IPCC changes and why. Keith has got all the latter – and there have been at least 4. We made Susan aware of these – all came from David Holland. According to the FOI Commissioner’s Office, IPCC is an international organization, so is above any national FOI. Even if UEA holds anything about IPCC, we are not obliged to pass it on, unless it has anything to do with our core business – and it doesn’t! I’m sounding like Sir Humphrey here!

• Jones seems to fear the Freedom of Information Acts, telling his colleagues, “I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act !”

• Jones figured out how to circumvent those FOI requests:

Wei-Chyung and Tom,

The Climate Audit web site has a new thread on the Jones et al. (1990) paper, with lots of quotes from Keenan. So they may not be going to submit something to Albany. Well may be?!?

Just agreed to review a paper by Ren et al. for JGR. This refers to a paper on urbanization effects in China, which may be in press in J. Climate. I say ‘may be’ as Ren isn’t that clear about this in the text, references and responses to earlier reviews. Have requested JGR get a copy a copy of this in order to do the review.In the meantime attaching this paper by Ren et al. on urbanization at two sites in China.Nothing much else to say except:

1. Think I’ve managed to persuade UEA to ignore all further FOIA requests if the people have anything to do with Climate Audit

2. Had an email from David Jones of BMRC, Melbourne. He said they are ignoring anybody who has dealings with CA, as there are threads on it about Australian sites.

3. CA is in dispute with IPCC (Susan Solomon and Martin Manning) about the availability of the responses to reviewer’s at the various stages of the AR4 drafts. They are most interested here re Ch 6 on paleo.

Cheers

Phil

• And another from Jones, also regarding suppressing FOI requests:

Ben,

When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by the requests. It took a couple of half hour sessions – one at a screen, to convince them otherwise showing them what CA was all about. Once they became aware of the types of people we were dealing with, everyone at UEA (in the registry and in the Environmental Sciences school – the head of school and a few others) became very supportive. I’ve got to know the FOI person quite well and the Chief Librarian – who deals with appeals. The VC is also aware of what is going on.

• Apparently the FOI doesn’t apply to climate change skeptics who want to see where these quacks are getting their whacko theories from. Another email from Tom Wigley to Phil Jones conspires to minimize data to exaggerate a warming trend:

Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly explain the 1940s warming blip. If you look at the attached plot you will see that the land also shows the 1940s blip (as I’m sure you know).So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, then this would be significant for the global mean – but we’d still have to explain the land blip. I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are 1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips—higher sensitivity plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from.Removing ENSO does not affect this.It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with “why the blip”.Let me go further. If you look at NH vs SH and the aerosol effect (qualitatively or with MAGICC) then with a reduced ocean blip we get continuous warming in the SH, and a cooling in the NH—just as one would expect with mainly NH aerosols.The other interesting thing is (as Foukal et al. note – from MAGICC) that the 1910-40 warming cannot be solar. The Sun can get at most 10% of this with Wang et al solar, less with Foukal solar. So this may well be NADW, as Sarah and I noted in 1987 (and also Schlesinger later). A reduced SST blip in the 1940s makes the 1910-40 warming larger than the SH (which it currently is not)—but not really enough.So … why was the SH so cold around 1910? Another SST problem? (SH/NH data also attached.)This stuff is in a report I am writing for EPRI, so I’d appreciate any comments you (and Ben) might have.Tom.

• This email from Phil Jones to Michael Mann shows a conspiracy to keep skeptics Chris de Freitas and Roger Pielke out of the IPCC report:

The other paper by MM is just garbage – as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well – frequently as I see it. I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. K and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !

• In another email, Benjamin Santer, climate researcher at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and lead author of the IPCC, said, “Next time I see (CATO Institute climate change skeptic) Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted.”

• Source: Austrailia Herald Sun

You can draw your own conclusions from these emails, and decide for yourself whether they are cherry-picked and taken out of context, and whether it is the proponents being vilified by the skeptics or vice-versa. It’s clear that if this were a “smear campaign”, if they were taken out of context, the media would not be so loathe to provide them in context with their own lies regarding what is said in them. As usual, you must do your own research, and it is up to you to push this into the public eye.

Most Americans don’t even know about the carbon tax, and many of them, even if they’re skeptical that man is behind global warming, are unaware that if there ever was global warming, it ended at least 10 years ago and the Earth has been cooling for several years, driven by a startling lack of solar activity. They must be made aware, and they must have a fire lit under the backsides, to understand that they cannot sit around unaware and uncaring of current events. The carbon tax is a pretext to global government, which is a pretext to depopulation – genocide. This is no longer about being “into politics”. It’s survival. Push for an aggressive congressional investigation. Write to your local newspaper. Call in to talk radio. Motivate others to do the same. The media will not drive this story. In fact they will do everything in their power to suppress it. Despite their deteriorating credibility, they still wield incredible influence over the masses – in this case simply by refusing to inform the public of a scandal related to an issue that affects us all. This is our fight. Squad up.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #12 on: November 27, 2009, 11:03:59 pm »
Lord Monckton Talks About Climategate On the Alex Jones Show
http://www.infowars.com/lord-monckton-talks-about-climategate-on-the-alex-jones-show/
Infowars
November 27, 2009
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Blowback

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,161
    • Info Salvo
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #13 on: November 27, 2009, 11:28:28 pm »
It's going to be funny when we throw him in jail.  


Punk ass Al Gore.  It's nice watching this guy get absolutely pwned every where he goes.

Offline James

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #14 on: November 27, 2009, 11:32:35 pm »
Lets make a new carbon emissions trading scheme. Where Al Gore has to pay us for all the fraudulent hot air he's emitted over the past 20 years by way of massive fines and imprisonment (regulation).


Offline EarthAngel_2012

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #15 on: November 27, 2009, 11:36:40 pm »
yes..JUSTICEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE... get himmmmmmmmmmmmmm...this is long over due.. wothless bottomfeeder.. he's the real toxic cancer on this planet.
The Hegalian Dialect:Control thru duality. Guide and manage a conflict and chaos so both sides have the same destination(order). It symbolizes a pyramid meanig left thesis vs. right thesis =middle thesis. 1 leads to 2 leads to 3.The 3rd is possible because of and NOT insipit of the 2 opposing sides.

Offline Time2WakeUpSlaves

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 121
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2009, 12:56:19 am »
Okay I don't get it.  Why is FOX going gung ho on exposing Climategate?  FOX is supposed to be the WORST for truthful news.  WHY!!!???

Offline evolve

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2009, 01:03:08 am »
I hope he ends up working at McDonalds. ;D I better go out and get some vaseline,this is getting good. ;D
Nobody likes the TRUTH!

Offline trailhound

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,749
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2009, 01:05:19 am »
Okay I don't get it.  Why is FOX going gung ho on exposing Climategate?  FOX is supposed to be the WORST for truthful news.  WHY!!!???

 May try to save the gop with this issue my guess.

"Do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression." Qur'an 5:2
At the heart of that Western freedom and democracy is the belief that the individual man, the child of God, is the touchstone of value..." -RFK

Offline tritonman

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,255
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2009, 01:14:03 am »
Okay I don't get it.  Why is FOX going gung ho on exposing Climategate?  FOX is supposed to be the WORST for truthful news.  WHY!!!???
They have to keep the false left right paradigm alive.  The same with health care. 

Offline SUPREMEMASTER

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,688
  • Commander
    • http://www.activismoverdrive.comze.com
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2009, 01:18:44 am »
Okay I don't get it.  Why is FOX going gung ho on exposing Climategate?  FOX is supposed to be the WORST for truthful news.  WHY!!!???
They have to keep the false left right paradigm alive.  The same with health care. 

If anything goes wrong, Blame Obama, if the public figures out it wasn't Obama, blame the democrats...
Automatic User Post Signature:
The message has to be put out in the right way.
Website Still Needs to be updated |ActivismOverDrive.comze.net|

Offline unbound

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2009, 01:22:13 am »
An Inconvenient Lawsuit... hahaha. Fuck you Al Gore!
Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds - Albert Einstein
The ultimate ignorance is the rejection of something you know nothing about and refuse to investigate

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2009, 08:03:44 pm »
November 29, 2009
Flushing out the high priests of climate change
Charles Clover
 http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article6936404.ece

Some future historian will enjoy the irony. The week before last the United States and China both stated that, yes, they finally buy the theory of man-made global warming. And a foot of rain fell on Cockermouth, a record downpour entirely consistent with predicted rainfall patterns. Cue — with immaculate timing — an explosion of sceptical triumphalism in the blogosphere, as emails containing exchanges between leading climatologists, stolen from the University of East Anglia’s climatic research unit, apparently “proved” that scientists had colluded to hide the fact that man-made global warming is a con.

At the hour when the heavens opened over Cumbria, the high priests and sages of the research unit were struggling to shield themselves from a hail of blows for allegedly using questionable methods to stand up their theories.

At first it was difficult to know who had come off the worst: the scientists whose emails were published, or the bloggers who vilified the outed academics, describing “climategate” as “the greatest scandal in modern science” and branding the research unit “disgraced”.

The science of climate change has become a lot more polarised over the past five years and last week it got decidedly worse, with the former chancellor Lord Lawson’s new think tank of sceptics and its outlying cavalry of angry bloggers and man-made global warming deniers furiously spurring on the debate.
Related Links
The great climate change science scandal

One of the most absurd moments came when George Monbiot of The Guardian, a columnist normally strident in his view that climate change is the most important problem facing mankind, appointed himself judge, jury and executioner and called for Professor Phil Jones, head of the research unit, to resign.

Well, he doesn’t need to resign — yet. We need to know whether the unit has done anything wrong, which an independent review set up by the university will examine.

And while we are waiting for the result? The scientific establishment, in the form of the Royal Society, the research councils and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, needs to do a lot more thinking — not about Jones’s methods, but about its own.

The theft of emails is just another chapter in a sustained debate that has focused on Jones for some time — but we need to look beyond him. Freedom of information demands and requests for shared data often pursue the work of the most controversial scientists. The scientific establishment has no consensus on how to deal with such requests.

Is it right to withhold public interest data, with the excuse of commercial confidentiality of the meteorological institutes involved, which often own the information and want to profit from it? And were the scientists at the research unit right to refuse to give up, as alleged, data and the codes and algorithms needed to analyse them to bona-fide researchers who wanted to examine their statistical methods? That is perhaps the most damaging allegation that has emerged, because it suggests a deliberate attempt to hold up scientific progress.

This is not necessarily incriminating, but it is stupid. The testing of hypotheses in an adversarial manner often looks, close up, like cats fighting in a sack. You can hardly blame busy scientists who have spent their lives amassing a pile of data, which they have interpreted in their own way, for not wanting to release it to people who want to rubbish it. Still, release it they should, and it is up to the scientific establishment to set out better ground rules and insist on more openness. The problem is that establishment science has no means of engaging with outsiders in the blogging age. It needs to wake up.

As well as asking whether anything untoward has been going on in massaging the figures to make warming look more alarming, we should also resolve how best to defend from vexatious attacks evidence that has been accumulated over years. At the moment it’s just frustration and stonewalling all round. If you ask anyone associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change where the science is going, they tell you to wait for their next five-yearly assessment report.

No wonder the public is confused. No wonder journalists have a choice between waiting for the occasional tablet of stone from the keepers of the global warming flame, or joining the newer, hipper fraternity of bloggers who snigger about ManBearPig, the bogus global warming monster in South Park’s skit on Al Gore. This polarisation means that a considered view on global warming is much harder to achieve, so in the end people simply go for the belief that feels right for them.

Working scientists may be grumpy about the unfairness, but far higher standards are expected of them than of the rude blogger-sceptics who are crowing about the embarrassment.

Tough. They should get over it. If the high priests of global warming want to convince us that we could face a man-made rise of 4C in the global temperature this century, then they have to engage with their critics instead of hiding away in their ivory towers.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2009, 08:05:46 pm »
Climate change denier Nick Griffin to represent EU at Copenhagen

BNP leader who believes climate change activists are 'cranks' will be member of European parliament's delegation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/29/nick-griffin-bnp-copenhagen-summit
Toby Helm
The Observer, Sunday 29 November 2009
 

Nick Griffin amid an anti-BNP demonstration. Photograph: John Stillwell/PA

Nick Griffin, the leader of the British National party, is to represent the European parliament at the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, which opens next week.

Last night politicians and scientists reacted furiously to news that the far-right politician and climate change denier should be attending the summit on behalf of the EU.

Griffin, who was elected to the European parliament in June, confirmed last night that he would attend as the representative of the parliament's environmental committee. World leaders, including Barack Obama and Gordon Brown, are hoping to forge a new global agreement to curtail greenhouse gas emissions.

Without such a deal, scientists warn that world temperatures will increase by more than 2C by the end of the century, triggering ice cap melting, sea-level rises, widespread flooding, the spread of deserts and devastating storms.

In a speech in the parliament last week, Griffin denounced those who warn of the consequences of climate change as "cranks". He said they had reached "an Orwellian consensus" that was "based not on scientific agreement, but on bullying, censorship and fraudulent statistics".

"The anti-western intellectual cranks of the left suffered a collective breakdown when communism collapsed. Climate change is their new theology… But the heretics will have a voice in Copenhagen and the truth will out. Climate change is being used to impose an anti-human utopia as deadly as anything conceived by Stalin or Mao."

Griffin will be one of 15 representatives chosen to speak on behalf of the EU in Copenhagen. The shadow climate change secretary, Greg Clark, condemned the move last night. "It is utterly ridiculous that someone who doesn't even believe in climate change should be seeking to represent Europe in Copenhagen. The BNP does not command the support of the people of Britain, let alone of the rest of Europe," he said.

A spokesman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said: "Membership of the European parliament's delegation to Copenhagen is a matter for the European parliament. Its delegates do not represent the UK government or its views. Nick Griffin will not be part of the UK delegation."

Tim Yeo, chairman of the Commons environmental audit committee, said the decision to choose Griffin showed the "bizarre way" the parliament operated. He added: "If the future prosperity of the human race, in the face of climate change, depends on the contributions of people like Nick Griffin, there is little hope for any of us."

Professor Alan Thorpe, chief executive of the Natural Environment Research Council, said Griffin's claim that thousands of scientists dispute the existence of man-made global warming was simply not true. "The intergovernmental panel on climate change draws on the views of most of the world's leading climate scientists and they have been quite clear that the evidence shows, with a high degree of certainty, that human activities are now having a substantial effect on the climate. It is simply not the case that there is a substantial number who do not accept a link."

Bob Ward, of Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, said: "Griffin denies the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. This appears to be driven by a dogmatic strand of right-wing ideology that opposes any form of environmental regulation, usually hidden behind the dishonest claim that climate change is a left-wing conspiracy."

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrats' home affairs spokesman and a former MEP, said the European parliament always divided up positions on such delegations according to the parliament's political balance. "Griffin was bound to get something at some stage. It is just a shame they didn't send him to Iceland instead."

Critics say Griffin addresses environmental issues when he believes he can use them to advance anti-immigration policies. His party claims that it would improve Britain's transport infrastructure and reduce carbon dioxide levels by reducing the number of immigrants in Britain using roads, cars, trains and buses.

Gerry Gable, publisher of the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight, said Griffin once tried to win over environmentalists in the 1980s. "His core beliefs – that the white race is being threatened by an invading minority – are the so-called principles that have run through his nasty career."
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2009, 08:06:55 pm »
Hoaxenhagen: Thoughts On Climategate And More
http://yesbuthowever.com/hoaxenhagen-8136287/comment-page-1/

Posted by John Romano in Opinion on November 28, 2009

It is clear from the non-story that Climategate has turned out to be in the press that the powers-that-be prefer to barrel on with the plan to institute a worldwide regulatory framework on the climate, or, dare I say it, global government.  Yes, I consider myself a straight-news, middle-of-the-road journalist with a slight tilt to the right and I’m using one of the tin foil hat crowd buzz phrases “global government.”   Read on if you dare.


The leader of the global warming hoax Al Gore.

My Case Against The Gore Machine

“Warming” taxes – er, carbon taxes – have been a boon for the British government. The Democrats in the United States, not to mention other like-minded pols around the world, want in on the scam.  The P.T. Barnum of the global warming hoax himself, Al Gore, would have it no other way.  Burdening, read taxing, instead of helping business is the plan of the climate change crowd.  Business is evil and government benign.  It’s the new way.  Mr. Gore gave a speech last Tuesday in Toronto in which 12 journalists were quietly ejected from the forum before he spoke in earnest about his climate change scenarios.  If the world is truly on its last string why would Mr. Gore eject the press from such an event?It should be noted that previously-on-the-fence President Obama finally decided to go to Copenhagen right after the news broke that some intelligent hackers broke into the computers at East Anglia University and discovered a concerted effort by scientists the world over to falsify records over global warming. Global warming, in short,  is all but a hoax based on the data being used to affirm it today. The emails show it.  The press, and various international governments ignoring the story, proves it.

The days when corporations ran the world are ending; unfire-able civil servants will take their place.  This works for many people.  They should  remember that the government has heretofore existed to watch corporations.  You got trouble with the government?  There is no place to go. The state rules all when the state rules all.

Changing the catch phrase of the Gore movement from “global warming” to “climate change” was as clever a move as ever from the media savvy left.   Global warming may not happen, but the climate will change no matter what we do.  Very clever indeed.

Reality

Global warming hysteria is managing to distract us from not one but two 800 lb gorillas no one wants to talk about. One is water supply. At the rate humans are multiplying we will not have enough clean water in the future unless we start an aggressive push to figure out how to de-salinate ocean water efficiently. We can do it today only using a large amount of energy.  Fully 1/3 or more of the world doesn’t have access to reliable sources of water.

The second gorilla is the one no one in polite society would like to discuss: overpopulation. What will the world look like with 12, 18, or 24 billion humans? I don’t know, but I can’t imagine it would be a place with a lot of open space, freedom or liberty.

We are slowly becoming a species of  caged animals. The more world government there is, the more freedom and liberty will fade away.  Not fear talking.  Just a fact of how big government works.  The Democrats always overlook this fact in America when they push for a bigger slice of GDP for Washington.

The topic of overpopulation is avoided specifically because no one wants to answer the question of who gets to reproduce and who doesn’t.  I surely don’t.  The women’s liberation movement and abortion rights folks in the west are doing a fine job of slowing or putting in place negative birth rates in Europe (and soon the U.S., if immigration from the south eroded.)  However, the Muslim world, Africa and India are surely picking up the slack.

I’m not calling for a rollback in women’s rights; however the corollary between the advent of feminism and lower western birth rates is irrefutable.  If anything, let’s see women’s rights in the Third World.  That will put birth rates on the slow track.  But, that would require telling Islamists to lift the veil and others that women aren’t solely for the purpose of reproduction.  Both would require courage, something lacking in the west these days.

Perhaps those are the things we should be discussing in Copenhagen.  Me,  I’m fully prepared for the U.S. President to sell out my country. I’ll take heart, though. The Congress in the United States cares more about reelection than making Mr. Obama the first President of the Planet Earth Federation.

Visit www.water.org to learn about the real crisis brewing.  Do your best to ignore their climate change paranoia.  It’s no surprise a group like water.org would be toeing the line for global warming.  Read the site and see how the fight for clean water is truly a worthy cause.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #25 on: November 28, 2009, 08:07:45 pm »
Global warming? Don't wait up! The Earth has her own tricks to keep the carbon count in control
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1231673/Global-warming-Dont-wait-The-Earth-tricks-carbon-count-control.html
By Ian Plimer, Professor Of Geology At The University Of Adelaide
Last updated at 10:06 PM on 28th November 2009



Perhaps it is comforting to believe that science is an absolute discipline: immune from fads, fanatics and frauds, untroubled by extremists, evangelists, glory-seekers and bigots. But it is not. It is as vulnerable to the vested interests and biases of its practitioners as any corporate entity or political party.

Uncomfortable truths are suppressed and dubious evidence given undue prominence.

Nowhere is this more worryingly obvious than in the science of climate change. As a field of research it has become so heavily politicised that opposing views are spoken of in terms of religion: believers and non-believers, with the accent being on the righteousness of the former and the benighted state of the latter.
 

Keep your cool: A polar bear strides across melting sea ice. But don't be fooled, says Ian Plimer - current fluctuations are not as extreme as the doom-mongers say

Those who believed scientists to be relentless seekers of the truth will have been shocked by the row sparked by a hacker who got hold of emails sent by staff at the University of East Anglia.

It has been claimed that the emails exchanged by members of the university's Climate Research Unit showed statistics had been finessed using 'tricks' and material that didn't fit the computer model of Climate Change presented to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was allegedly suppressed.

In my book Heaven And Earth, I hinted at the existence of this sort of activity and was pilloried by those who have everything to gain from keeping the climate-change gravy train rolling. Because that is what it has become.

Sensationalist theories are generated by scientists who have evolved into professional alarmists who can influence the IPCC and reap rewards in research grants and fame. The trouble is that the only way to protect this position - and transmit their message of doom and gloom - is for the elite little coterie of climate comrades in the UK and United States to ignore geology, archaeology, history, astronomy and solar science. You see, these are the things that don't fit.

The reality is that the Earth has been here before, it has been here through worse and it is still, resolutely, here today. Climate-change theory and the dire prognosis given by its proponents is just wrong.

Look at the facts. Earth is a warm, wet, greenhouse planet. There has been ice on its surface for less than 20 per cent of its history, and in the geological past there have been six great ice ages. Two ice ages were characterised by ice at the Equator, with sea levels rising by up to 5,000ft. That is sea-level change!

Five of the ice ages saw a far higher atmospheric carbon-dioxide content than at present. So carbon dioxide could not have caused past climate changes. Indeed, early Earth had 1,000 times more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than now - yet there was no runaway greenhouse effect, tipping points or acid oceans.

The initial source of the two main greenhouse gases, water vapour and carbon dioxide, was volcanoes. Water vapour is still the main greenhouse gas. Once oceans formed and life appeared, carbon was then recycled between the oceans, atmosphere, soils, life and rocks. Carbon dioxide is a plant food, not a pollutant.

Human activity produces only three per cent of the world's carbon-dioxide emissions each year. One volcanic belch can emit as much as that in a day. Carbon dioxide has a short life in the atmosphere and is absorbed by natural processes that have been taking place for billions of years.

At the normal past rates of absorption, even if we burned all fossil fuels on Earth, the atmospheric carbon-dioxide content would not double.
 

Rock-solid evidence: Professor Ian Plimer with a geological core sample

In past ages it has been naturally absorbed into everything from limestone reefs to soil, rocks and living things. For example, limestone is a very common rock and contains 44 per cent carbon dioxide.

Dissolving carbon dioxide in ocean water has not created ocean acidity. The constant chemical reactions between ocean water and sediments and rocks on the sea floor have kept the oceans alkaline. When we run out of rocks on the sea floor, then the oceans might become acid. Don't wait up!

We are still in an ice age that started 34million years ago, with the climate driven, among other things, by the Earth's orbit, the Sun, oceans and volcanoes. It is vital to remember that time, in a geological sense, is a far broader canvas than any of the detailed vignettes upon which the prophets of doom would have us focus.

There have been long periods of warm times during this current ice age, yet the ice sheets did not melt. They waxed and they waned, as ice sheets still do today.

Ancient climates can be revealed by drilling deep into the Antarctic ice for samples of what was snow thousands of years ago. These show climate cycles have a temperature peak at least 800 years before the peak in carbon dioxide.

So climate change evangelists who insist that carbon dioxide drives climate change have turned the truth on its head - the rise in atmospheric carbon-dioxide content followed rather than heralded temperature increases.

Climate is cyclical. The current cycles follow a pattern of about 90,000 years of highly variable glacial conditions followed by around 10,000 years of benign interglacial conditions. The current interglacial period started more than 12,000 years ago. We are due another glaciation.

At the end of the last glaciation, temperature fluctuated wildly. At one time there was a 15C natural temperature rise in 20 years. Now THAT is global warming. Yet still, humans thrived.

The peak of the current interglacial was 6,000 years ago when the sea level was almost an inch higher than now and temperatures were 5C higher than at present. The rate and amount of temperature change at present is no different to past times.

Sea levels rose by 2cm per year between 12,000 and 6,000 years ago - still part of the present interglacial - a degree of change far greater than anything observed today.

During the last glaciation, land loaded with ice sank. That land is now rising. For example, Scotland and Wales are rising and eastern England is sinking. During the last glaciation, people walked from Europe to England, from Russia to Alaska and from Papua New Guinea to Tasmania. The English Channel was a river.

During previous interglacials, coral reefs and other life thrived. Each time sea level rose, coral atolls expanded. This may be startling to those fed a diet of climate change by scaremongers, but it is not new: Charles Darwin was writing about it in 1842.

There have been smaller-scale climate changes in the present interglacial. Some are cyclical and driven by solar, ocean, tidal and orbital cycles. Others, such as volcanically driven changes, are random.

Life thrived during warm times and life suffered in cool times. Great civilisations collapsed when it was cool.

It was so hot during the 600-year-long 'Roman warming' that grapes were grown as far north as Hadrian's Wall. Sea levels did not rise and polar ice did not vanish. Some Alpine glaciers disappeared, only to appear later. The cold Dark Ages followed: starvation, rampant disease and massive depopulation occurred.

A 400-year warm period followed. The Vikings grew barley and wheat, and raised cattle and sheep in parts of Greenland that are now uninhabitable. During this 'medieval warming', there was so much excess wealth generated from generations of reliable harvests that the great monasteries, cathedrals and universities were built.

Yet sea levels did not rise and the ice sheets were not lost. And, significantly, humans could not have driven the Roman and medieval warmings by carbon-dioxide emissions, as there was no industry.

The Little Ice Age followed. There was famine, disease and depopulation. Ice fairs were held on the Thames up until the 1820s. The Little Ice Age ended in 1850. It is no wonder that temperature has increased in the past 150 years - this is what happens after a cold period.

The temperature increase was not even. There was warming from 1860 to 1880, cooling from 1880 to 1910, warming from 1910 to 1940, cooling from 1940 to 1976, warming from 1976 to 1998 and now cooling from 1998.

Each warming period was at the same rate. It was only during the warming from 1976 to 1998 that carbon dioxide increased in parallel with temperature - all other modern warmings and coolings show no relationship to carbon dioxide.

This is the reality, these are the vacillations of the evocative story of our ever-changing planet derived from observation, measurement and experiment.

Why is this story contrary to what we hear? Because sensationalism is so much more lucrative. A climate catastrophe was provided for an anxious public by scientists who had everything to gain by frightening us.

They put forward an ideology that is blind fundamentalism, unrelated to scientific facts. Politicians build new bureaucracies and pose as environmental saviours without having to face the consequences of their actions. Heads must roll. Meanwhile, the planet will do what it has always done: change.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2009, 08:08:42 pm »
Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation
Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with the Climategate whitewash
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html
By Christopher Booker
Published: 6:10PM GMT 28 Nov 2009

Comments 78 | Comment on this article
CO2 emissions will be on top of the agenda at the Copenhagen summit in December Photo: Getty

A week after my colleague James Delingpole, on his Telegraph blog, coined the term "Climategate" to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.

The reason why even the Guardian's George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Philip Jones, the CRU's director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports. Through its link to the Hadley Centre, part of the UK Met Office, which selects most of the IPCC's key scientific contributors, his global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely – not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it.

Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph which 10 years ago turned climate history on its head by showing that, after 1,000 years of decline, global temperatures have recently shot up to their highest level in recorded history.

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

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

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

There are three threads in particular in the leaked documents which have sent a shock wave through informed observers across the world. Perhaps the most obvious, as lucidly put together by Willis Eschenbach (see McIntyre's blog Climate Audit and Anthony Watt's blog Watts Up With That), is the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws.

They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.

This in itself has become a major scandal, not least Dr Jones's refusal to release the basic data from which the CRU derives its hugely influential temperature record, which culminated last summer in his startling claim that much of the data from all over the world had simply got "lost". Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offence.

But the question which inevitably arises from this systematic refusal to release their data is – what is it that these scientists seem so anxious to hide? The second and most shocking revelation of the leaked documents is how they show the scientists trying to manipulate data through their tortuous computer programmes, always to point in only the one desired direction – to lower past temperatures and to "adjust" recent temperatures upwards, in order to convey the impression of an accelerated warming. This comes up so often (not least in the documents relating to computer data in the Harry Read Me file) that it becomes the most disturbing single element of the entire story. This is what Mr McIntyre caught Dr Hansen doing with his GISS temperature record last year (after which Hansen was forced to revise his record), and two further shocking examples have now come to light from Australia and New Zealand.

In each of these countries it has been possible for local scientists to compare the official temperature record with the original data on which it was supposedly based. In each case it is clear that the same trick has been played – to turn an essentially flat temperature chart into a graph which shows temperatures steadily rising. And in each case this manipulation was carried out under the influence of the CRU.

What is tragically evident from the Harry Read Me file is the picture it gives of the CRU scientists hopelessly at sea with the complex computer programmes they had devised to contort their data in the approved direction, more than once expressing their own desperation at how difficult it was to get the desired results.

The third shocking revelation of these documents is the ruthless way in which these academics have been determined to silence any expert questioning of the findings they have arrived at by such dubious methods – not just by refusing to disclose their basic data but by discrediting and freezing out any scientific journal which dares to publish their critics' work. It seems they are prepared to stop at nothing to stifle scientific debate in this way, not least by ensuring that no dissenting research should find its way into the pages of IPCC reports.

Back in 2006, when the eminent US statistician Professor Edward Wegman produced an expert report for the US Congress vindicating Steve McIntyre's demolition of the "hockey stick", he excoriated the way in which this same "tightly knit group" of academics seemed only too keen to collaborate with each other and to "peer review" each other's papers in order to dominate the findings of those IPCC reports on which much of the future of the US and world economy may hang. In light of the latest revelations, it now seems even more evident that these men have been failing to uphold those principles which lie at the heart of genuine scientific enquiry and debate. Already one respected US climate scientist, Dr Eduardo Zorita, has called for Dr Mann and Dr Jones to be barred from any further participation in the IPCC. Even our own George Monbiot, horrified at finding how he has been betrayed by the supposed experts he has been revering and citing for so long, has called for Dr Jones to step down as head of the CRU.

The former Chancellor Lord (Nigel) Lawson, last week launching his new think tank, the Global Warming Policy Foundation, rightly called for a proper independent inquiry into the maze of skulduggery revealed by the CRU leaks. But the inquiry mooted on Friday, possibly to be chaired by Lord Rees, President of the Royal Society – itself long a shameless propagandist for the warmist cause – is far from being what Lord Lawson had in mind. Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with a whitewash of what has become the greatest scientific scandal of our age.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Valerius

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,708
"No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck."  -Frederick Douglass

Offline New Whirled Order

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,465
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #28 on: November 28, 2009, 09:08:34 pm »
It's been a real hoot to watch the global warming / climate change idiots on other message boards try to spin all of this and virtually act as if nothing happened...  They absolutely refuse to admit they've been suckered, scammed, and conned by a bunch of overlord global architects.  In fact, most of them will never admit it, regardless of how much more evidence to the contrary smashes their left-wing fantasies of micro-managing everyones' lives in the name of saving the planet.

Offline James

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #29 on: November 29, 2009, 01:16:40 am »
They probably won't admit it even after the New World Order openly proclaims itself and starts cracking down on dissidents.

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,732
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #30 on: November 29, 2009, 01:53:51 am »
It's been a real hoot to watch the global warming / climate change idiots on other message boards try to spin all of this and virtually act as if nothing happened...  They absolutely refuse to admit they've been suckered, scammed, and conned by a bunch of overlord global architects.  In fact, most of them will never admit it, regardless of how much more evidence to the contrary smashes their left-wing fantasies of micro-managing everyones' lives in the name of saving the planet.

It's a mind-blowing question. Why would anyone choose to NOT be made aware of external threats? Yet MOST do! It's no different than a kid who needs a teddy bear to help him sleep. I don't think these people (most people) are in denial because in order to deny something you have to first actually know something about it, but the people don't even care about it!

Why do MOST people not want to know the truth about so many very important things?
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

iRonic

  • Guest
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #31 on: November 29, 2009, 01:57:21 am »
Thats not Climate gate sadly  :'( It was also posted July 05 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfHW7KR33IQ

and from what i saw on it was he never followed through with taking al gore to court,
i looked it up when climategate came out, to see if there were any reports on these 30k scientists


Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,732
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #32 on: November 29, 2009, 02:32:29 am »
Thats not Climate gate sadly  :'( It was also posted July 05 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfHW7KR33IQ

and from what i saw on it was he never followed through with taking al gore to court,
i looked it up when climategate came out, to see if there were any reports on these 30k scientists



Yep, it's especially interesting how obvious the bs was before climategate.
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

iRonic

  • Guest
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #33 on: November 29, 2009, 02:46:57 am »
indeed he nailed the talking points about the IPCC, maybe climategate will re-invigorate him to take this up again, one can only hope  ;D

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,732
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #34 on: November 29, 2009, 02:53:37 am »
This should be THE wake up call but it isn't. At least not yet in my town. I wonder what it would actually take to shock humanity into reality?

Either way, this whole climategate is way more significant than any of us could imagine, and especially in the background! I'm lovin' it! ;D

(the wheels are in motion)
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline New Whirled Order

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,465
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #35 on: November 29, 2009, 02:57:31 am »
This should be THE wake up call but it isn't. At least not yet in my town. I wonder what it would actually take to shock humanity into reality?

Either way, this whole climategate is way more significant than any of us could imagine, and especially in the background! I'm lovin' it! ;D

(the wheels are in motion)

The silence (so far) from the mainstream media is incredible.  They're probably formulating their strategy as we speak, which is very suspicious on its own.

infections

  • Guest
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #36 on: November 29, 2009, 03:02:19 am »
'its alll part of the plann' --- joker

Xill

  • Guest
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #37 on: November 29, 2009, 03:05:36 am »
The silence (so far) from the mainstream media is incredible.  They're probably formulating their strategy as we speak, which is very suspicious on its own.

Usually news are made quite in advance in the Pentagon propaganda department.
The mails came unexpectedly, therefore they needed time to think this over. There is not much way to spin this anyhow. They can either lie, ignore it, or say it is not worth looking at.

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,510
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #38 on: November 29, 2009, 03:09:03 am »
Well fasten your seatbelts fellow travellers, the proverbial excrement has hit the propellers!

Perestroika has finally come to what had become the "evil empire" of America, but will there ever be glasnost?

Offline Letsbereal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38,266
  • Know Thyself
Re: Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud
« Reply #39 on: November 29, 2009, 03:11:15 am »
ClimateGate Who's Who http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cu_ok37HDuE

'Cap and Trade Is Dead' http://tinyurl.com/y922hzb

Thatcher adviser: Copenhagen goal is 1-world government http://tinyurl.com/y8dae33
->>>|:-) THE CITY INDIANS (-:|<<<-