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:
Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?
Hiding the Decline:
Hacked E Mails: Climate Scientists Discuss “Hiding Decline” In Temperatures
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
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
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”
Skeptics Vindicated:
Climate Alarmists Finally Admit The Debate Is Not Over
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!!!”
URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/climategate-for-dummies/
Btok 8:33 pm on December 2, 2009 Permalink |
Attention, American and Canadian citizens we are so close to losing our Sovereignty and Freedom, it is barely hanging by a thread! Make your voice and your rights known, as you are the boss not the politicans you voted into power!
Time is getting short and it is coming down to the fact, that soon ( December 7 to December 18 ) I will have to pray to the good Lord to maintain our freedoms and that God will not allow our leaders to sign the Copenhagen Treaty, which will take away our liberties, let go and let God, this being a challenge to our Lord and Saviour? However, while there is still time to prevent the loss of a lifetime, perhaps loss of life it’s self – I will do what I am able to fight for our freedoms! The whole Climate Change agenda is a proven fraud and racketeering, but the United Nations and Globalist governments don’t care as that is just the excuse instrument they have used to ensnare us, they are going to try to push it through anyway! Has everybody out there become a tree hugger? The tree will be standing 100 years from now, but will you be looking at the tree, from inside the fence of a Concentration Camp? Anyone out there want to fight to maintain their freedom anymore? Please do all you can to preserve freedom in North America!
Check out what Government is doing behind your back at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU
Canadians: To request that PM Harper doesn’t sign the Copenhagen Treaty, thereby causing Canadians to lose their Sovereignty and Freedom, email the PM at: pm@pm.gc.ca
Any lawyers want to help out by filing this Copenhagen Treaty be classified as an illegal Treaty, in order to, help save Freedom in North America? ( Unlimited Promotion Opportunity Here For a Law firm to Gain a favorable high profile credibility! )
Harleigh Kyson Jr. 1:33 pm on December 12, 2009 Permalink |
“Climategate” started out when there appeared on the Internet a collection of e-mails of a group of climatologists who work in the University of East Anglia in England. These documents reveal that some climatologists of international preeminence have manipulated the data of their investigations and have strongly tried to discredit climatologists who are not convinced that the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere are the cause of global warming.
It is true that a majority of the scientists who study climatic tendencies in our atmosphere have arrived at the conclusion that the world’s climate is changing, and they have convinced a group of politicians, some of whom are politically powerful, of the truth of their conclusions.
A minority, however, is skeptical. Some believe that recent data that suggest that the average temperature of the atmosphere is going up can be explained by natural variations in solar radiation and that global warming is a temporary phenomenon. Others believe that the historical evidence indicating that the temperature of the atmosphere is going up at a dangerous rate is simply not reliable.
Such lacks of agreement are common in the sciences. They are reduced and eventually eliminated with the accumulation of new evidence and of more refined theories or even by completely new ones. Such debates can persist for a period of decades. Academics often throw invective at one another in these debates. But typically this does not mean much.
But the case of climate change is different. If the evidence indicates that global warming is progressive, is caused principally by our industrial processes, and will probably cause disastrous changes in our atmosphere before the end of the twenty-first century, then we do not have the time to verify precisely if their evidence is reliable. Such a process would be a question of many years of new investigations. And if the alarmist climatologists are right, such a delay would be tragic for all humanity.
The difficulty is that economic and climatologic systems are very complicated. They are not like celestial mechanics, which involves only the interaction of gravity and centrifugal force, and efforts to construct computerized models to describe these complicated systems simply cannot include all the factors that are influential in the evolution of these complicated systems.
All this does not necessarily indicate that the alarmist climatologists are not right. But it really means that if global warming is occurring, we cannot know exactly what will be the average temperature of our atmosphere in the year 2100 and what will be the average sea level of the world’s ocean in that year.
It also means that we cannot be confident that efforts by the industrialized countries to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere will have a significant influence on the evolution of the world’s climate.
Alas, the reduction of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would be very costly and would greatly change the lives of all the inhabitants of our planet–with the possibility (perhaps even the probability!) that all these efforts will be completely useless.
Harleigh Kyson Jr.
hkyson 2:22 pm on December 12, 2009 Permalink |
“Climategate” started out when there appeared on the Internet a collection of e-mails of a group of climatologists who work in the University of East Anglia in England. These documents reveal that some climatologists of international preeminence have manipulated the data of their investigations and have strongly tried to discredit climatologists who are not convinced that the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere are the cause of global warming.
It is true that a majority of the scientists who study climatic tendencies in our atmosphere have arrived at the conclusion that the world’s climate is changing, and they have convinced a group of politicians, some of whom are politically powerful, of the truth of their conclusions.
A minority, however, is skeptical. Some believe that recent data that suggest that the average temperature of the atmosphere is going up can be explained by natural variations in solar radiation and that global warming is a temporary phenomenon. Others believe that the historical evidence indicating that the temperature of the atmosphere is going up at a dangerous rate is simply not reliable.
Such lacks of agreement are common in the sciences. They are reduced and eventually eliminated with the accumulation of new evidence and of more refined theories or even by completely new ones. Such debates can persist for a period of decades. Academics often throw invective at one another in these debates. But typically this does not mean much.
But the case of climate change is different. If the evidence indicates that global warming is progressive, is caused principally by our industrial processes, and will probably cause disastrous changes in our atmosphere before the end of the twenty-first century, then we do not have the time to verify precisely if this evidence is reliable. Such a process would be a question of many years of new investigations. And if the alarmist climatologists are right, such a delay would be tragic for all humanity.
The difficulty is that economic and climatologic systems are very complicated. They are not like celestial mechanics, which involves only the interaction of gravity and centrifugal force, and efforts to construct computerized models to describe these complicated systems simply cannot include all the factors that are influential in the evolution of these complicated systems.
All this does not necessarily indicate that the alarmist climatologists are not right. But it really means that if global warming is occurring, we cannot know exactly what will be the average temperature of our atmosphere in the year 2100 and what will be the average sea level of the world’s ocean in that year.
It also means that we cannot be confident that efforts by the industrialized countries to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere will have a significant influence on the evolution of the world’s climate.
Alas, the reduction of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would be very costly and would greatly change the lives of all the inhabitants of our planet–with the possibility (perhaps even the probability!) that all these efforts will be completely useless.
Harleigh Kyson Jr.
twawki 10:46 am on December 16, 2009 Permalink |
Wow great list of links!