Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
lord_casek

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

Recommended Posts

Climategate: it's all unravelling now

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100018556/climategate-its-all-unravelling-now/

 

So many new developments: which story do we pick? Maybe best to summarise, instead. After all, it’s not like you’re going to find much of this reported in the MSM.

1. Australia’s Senate rejects Emissions Trading Scheme for a second time. Or: so turkeys don’t vote Christmas. Expect to see a lot more of this: politicians starting to become aware their party’s position on AGW is completely out of kilter with the public mood and economic reality. Kevin Rudd’s Emissions Trading Scheme – what Andrew Bolt calls “a $114 billion green tax on everything” – would have wreaked havoc on the coal-dependent Australian economy. That’s why several opposition Liberal frontbenchers resigned rather than vote with the Government on ETS; why Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull lost his job; and why the Senate voted down the ETS.

2. Danes caught fiddling their carbon credits. (Hat tip: Philip Stott) Carbon trading is the Emperor’s New Clothes of international finance. It was invented by none other than Ken Lay, whose Enron would currently be one of the prime beneficiaries in the global alternative energy market, if it hadn’t been shown to be (nearly) as fraudulent as the current AGW scam. It is a licence to fleece, cheat and rob. Still, jolly embarrassing for the Danes to get caught red handed, what with their hosting a conference shortly in which the world’s leaders will try, straight-faced, to persuade us that carbon emissions trading is the only viable way of defeating ManBearPig.

3. Hats off to The Daily Express – the first British newspaper to make the AGW scam its front page story.

 

 

 

The piece was inspired by another bravura performance by Professor Ian Plimer, the Aussie geologist who argues that climate change has been going on quite naturally, oblivious of human activity, for the last 4,567 million years.

4. BBC finally gets round to reporting – sort of – that Climatic Research Unit at University of East Anglia may have been up to no good. It’s true that this report on their website is so hedged with special pleading for the temporarily suspended director Phil Jones the man might have written it himself. But on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme this morning, I did hear the newsreader reporting it as more than just a routine theft story. Which is a start.

5. Legal actions ahoy! Over the next few weeks, one thing we can be absolutely certain of is concerted efforts by the rich, powerful and influential AGW lobby to squash the Climategate story. We’ve seen this already in the “nothing to see here” response of Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the jet-setting, troll-impersonating railway engineer who runs the IPCC and wants to stop ice being served with water in restaurants. This is why those of us who oppose his scheme to carbon-tax the global economy back to the dark ages must do everything in our power to bring the scandal to a wider audience. One way to do this is law suits.

At Ian Plimer’s lunch talk yesterday, Viscount Monckton talked of at least two in the offing – both by scientists, one British, one Canadian, who intend to pursue the CRU for criminal fraud. Their case, quite simply, is that the scientists implicated in Climategate have gained funding and career advancement by twisting data, hiding evidence, and shutting out dissenters by corrupting the peer-review process. More news on this, as I hear it.

Lord Monckton has written an indispensible summary of the Climategate revelations so far.

6. Watch out Green Dave! The Independent reports on the growing backlash within the party to Cameron’s libtard-wooing greenery. Turning to the Independent for a balanced report on environmental matters is a bit like consulting Der Sturmer for a sensible, insightful view on the Jewish question. Still, for once, the house journal of eco-loonery seems to have got it right and the point made by Tory backbencher David Davis is well made:

“The ferocious determination to impose hair-shirt policies on the public – taxes on holiday flights, or covering our beautiful countryside with wind turbines that look like props from War of the Worlds – is bound to cause a reaction in any democratic country.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

Casek: The Australian political situation involving a carbon trading scheme has been completely misrepresented in this article. It is highly inaccurate to suggest the Australian "public mood" is in line with the opposition party given their current approval ratings. There were also a lot more factors in play in relations to Turnbull being ousted from leadership.

 

In summary, I think it is safe to say that it is not accurate to use the Australian parliament's rejection of a carbon trading scheme as an example of a global swing against the theory of climate change.

 

Also, since I have seen you quote him a number of times, it is worth mentioning that Andrew Bolt is hardly a reputable journalist, he is more accurately described as a right wing troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Casek: The Australian political situation involving a carbon trading scheme has been completely misrepresented in this article. It is highly inaccurate to suggest the Australian "public mood" is in line with the opposition party given their current approval ratings. There were also a lot more factors in play in relations to Turnbull being ousted from leadership.

 

In summary, I think it is safe to say that it is not accurate to use the Australian parliament's rejection of a carbon trading scheme as an example of a global swing against the theory of climate change.

 

Also, since I have seen you quote him a number of times, it is worth mentioning that Andrew Bolt is hardly a reputable journalist, he is more accurately described as a right wing troll.

 

 

Only been twice that I've posted his articles. The article isn't the important story, though.

The emails and what is happening because of them is.

 

Also: I don't know much about the AU Parliaments decision. I will look into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This really doesnt effect me, I still think that people should recycle and drive less...just cause its a nice thing to do.

 

 

That's great stuff to do. It really reduces costs, pollution, etc.

 

The big thing is that they are trying to a) scare us and b) tax us for something we

aren't at fault for.

 

It really fucks up any further claims scientists make. After this, no

one is going to believe anything they say.

 

Polar bears can swim and their populations are exploding. The ice sheets in Antarctica

are growing, not shrinking.

 

To hear these climate scientists speak, you would think there were five polar bears left

floating around on a 5x5 ice drift and none of them can swim.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your first article quoted Andrew Bolt, he is the least credible person in the world and if you ever heard him talk you'd wish to punch him. Super conservative hater who writes for a horrid tabloid in Australia.

 

HOWEVER, the issue is real, no doubt about that. I am interested in it because it affects global politics as GW is a geopolitical issue more so than an environmental issue, unfortunately.

 

I haven't read any of these posts yet and I haven't finished going through the issue. But I can assure you that my information is coming from people who are unattached to the yay or nay issue but are intrinsic to the political aspect of it all.

 

One of the main things that they are saying is that this isn't going to change the "fact" that the world is warming up. Whilst East Anglia was used as the basis for IPCC there is anough data out there that is not connected to East Anglia that comes to the same basic conclusions. Also, if the data is all redone, which will take fucking months as it's in fortran, it may still lead to the same conclusions almost destroying the naysayers. There's a lot to say that this could be the probable outcome of the issue.

 

A big fuck you to the scientists that manipulate data on ANYTHING.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your first article quoted Andrew Bolt, he is the least credible person in the world and if you ever heard him talk you'd wish to punch him. Super conservative hater who writes for a horrid tabloid in Australia.

 

HOWEVER, the issue is real, no doubt about that. I am interested in it because it affects global politics as GW is a geopolitical issue more so than an environmental issue, unfortunately.

 

I haven't read any of these posts yet and I haven't finished going through the issue. But I can assure you that my information is coming from people who are unattached to the yay or nay issue but are intrinsic to the political aspect of it all.

 

One of the main things that they are saying is that this isn't going to change the "fact" that the world is warming up. Whilst East Anglia was used as the basis for IPCC there is anough data out there that is not connected to East Anglia that comes to the same basic conclusions. Also, if the data is all redone, which will take fucking months as it's in fortran, it may still lead to the same conclusions almost destroying the naysayers. There's a lot to say that this could be the probable outcome of the issue.

 

A big fuck you to the scientists that manipulate data on ANYTHING.

 

 

I'll be interested to hear what is concluded from your place of employment.

 

Make sure you guys check on the programmers notes about the data manipulation

via their software.

 

Also, make sure you check out the dickface from Penn State. Fucker was talking all kinds of garbage about how to manipulate date, how to keep the fact that the earth is cooling out of the public eye, etc.

 

 

BTW: some of the data they were trying to keep from the public admits that the earth is cooling.

DSC01724.JPG.27ea0c61b0d113634eabcfae35d2669d.JPG

DSC01725.JPG.4906def43732ba6f01764f1838fd09f6.JPG

DSC01726.JPG.e834f7f257e2ed2eee022d1814e24a7c.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the planet is not getting warmer. thats why manbearpig has officially changed his name to climate change from global warming. Various regions everywhere are experiencing some of the coldest temperatures on record. when you say that the world is still getting warmer, you are referencing the cooked numbers scientists put out which are HIDING THE ANNUAL COOLING TRENDS.

who fucking really knows though, seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Various regions everywhere are experiencing some of the coldest temperatures on record.

 

This is actually well within predictions based on global warming.

 

who fucking really knows though, seriously.

 

I dunno, maybe the scientific community that has been studying climate change for decades...oh wait, they're just liars right? Cooking numbers, that's their job.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is actually well within predictions based on global warming.

 

 

 

I dunno, maybe the scientific community that has been studying climate change for decades...oh wait, they're just liars right? Cooking numbers, that's their job.

 

 

They did this time, and this bunch of climatologists are connected to the IPCC.

This is really bad for them.

 

If you haven't gone over the emails and other information, I'd be glad to upload them

for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UN defends scientists over leaked emails

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2009/12/06/1245d933e484

 

CYA is in effect. Word from good sources says that this was a package

prepared for a denied FOIA request and not hacked at all.

 

It was placed on a public East Anglia server by mistake and someone just found it

and grabbed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is actually well within predictions based on global warming.

 

 

 

 

okay, if colder temperatures are in line with the global warming theory(oxymoron?)

then enlighten me on how colder temps will result in melting ice caps and rising sea levels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
okay, if colder temperatures are in line with the global warming theory(oxymoron?)

then enlighten me on how colder temps will result in melting ice caps and rising sea levels?

 

 

Or polar bears being able to swim for 100+ miles nonstop.....

 

2ekupmq.jpg

 

I love this global warming fear monger image. They make it seem as

though the poor bear is trapped on this chunk of ice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
okay, if colder temperatures are in line with the global warming theory(oxymoron?)

then enlighten me on how colder temps will result in melting ice caps and rising sea levels?

 

It's remarkably naive to think global warming would mean higher temperatures everywhere all over the world. The idea is that if the overall temperature of the planet increases by a few degrees, this will cause changes in the heat cycles that create the local conditions we are familiar with. For example, some people think that warming would alter the course of the gulf stream, which carries heat from the equator up the Atlantic coast and on towards Europe. This could potentially make Britain/Northern Europe a good deal colder. I took a differential equations based atmospheric/oceanic fluid dynamics course in college, so I think I at least have an idea of how complicated this stuff is. Record low temperatures are in line with the theory that global warming will create more extreme weather conditions (hot and cold) in many places, especially inland. That's why people who really know what's going on call it "climate change."

 

Colder overall temperatures would not result in melting ice caps. However, the recent retreat of glaciers is very well documented, as is a great deal of melting in the antarctic ice shelf. The polar bear thing is kind of cheesy though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's remarkably naive to think global warming would mean higher temperatures everywhere all over the world. The idea is that if the overall temperature of the planet increases by a few degrees, this will cause changes in the heat cycles that create the local conditions we are familiar with. For example, some people think that warming would alter the course of the gulf stream, which carries heat from the equator up the Atlantic coast and on towards Europe. This could potentially make Britain/Northern Europe a good deal colder. I took a differential equations based atmospheric/oceanic fluid dynamics course in college, so I think I at least have an idea of how complicated this stuff is. Record low temperatures are in line with the theory that global warming will create more extreme weather conditions (hot and cold) in many places, especially inland. That's why people who really know what's going on call it "climate change."

 

Colder overall temperatures would not result in melting ice caps. However, the recent retreat of glaciers is very well documented, as is a great deal of melting in the antarctic ice shelf. The polar bear thing is kind of cheesy though.

 

 

Antarctic ice is growing, not melting away

 

 

http://www.news.com.au/antarctic-ice-is-growing-not-melting-away/story-0-1225700043191

 

current.365.south.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the looks of that graph that's probably a yearly cyclical phenomenon (note the sinusoidal shape). Anyways it's sea ice, which is only one part of the picture and isn't of concern as far as sea levels go. Glacial ice is what could potentially raise sea levels. I read something in National Geographic a while back about how glacial melting isn't always obvious, there can be melted rivers carving away the bottom of a glacier, which eventually causes large chunks to break off unexpectedly.

 

From that site:

 

Summer rain replaces snow as Antarctica 'turns green'

 

http://www.news.com.au/features/summer-rain-replaces-snow-as-antarctica-turns-green/story-e6frfl0i-1225805697113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all well and good, the UK once had vineyards.

 

Also, check the East Anglia emails. They discuss deliberately hiding

facts that would destroy their agenda.

 

Email from Phil Jones:

 

“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.”

 

another:

 

"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."

 

 

from John Overpeck

 

"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."

 

 

another from Phil Jones regarding the FOIA 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."

 

 

Tons of these. All discussing hiding data, lying, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yep

 

Been outside tonight? We're supposed to be in the middle of an El Nino season...it is raining, but it's 40 degrees out right now and El Nino is supposed to be at least 15 degrees warmer.

 

There is something going on with the global climate but nobody really knows what the hell is going on.

 

Here's those links you wanted to see-

 

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=003LKN94

 

http://www.filedropper.com/foi2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gawd, the way i see it, this is only going to be used to debunk and discredit pretty much all efforts at creating a "sustainable future", which i personally feel is the real point of any green movement type shit.

 

who cares if the planet isn't warming by 2 degrees that will cause horrible things to happen!!

 

the real issue is the fact that polluting the earth in general just isn't a good thing to do, in conjunction with the fact that fossil fuels just aren't gonna cut it, and more importantly, that there are millions of starving people who live (die) in poverty pretty much at the expense of our awesome all consuming culture/lifestyle.

 

fuck climate change, global warming blah blah blah, how about people change, cause as of now, we are being led by fucking psychotic-severely misguided people chasing that dollar.

end rant

 

This is the best post in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...