ClimateGate: Finally Enough Information Against Junk Science

Big news in the area of Science was released last week when s—t hit the fan concerning the details of what is now called ClimateGate.
Rich Galen wrote in his article, What’s New(s) at Mullings, An American Cyber-Column

Of somewhat more import was the news last week that a bunch of climate scientists — in fact THE bunch of climate scientists — who have been at the center of the global warming movement were found to have cooked the books to make the ‘Earth-is-warming’ numbers work. According to … Dr. William Hamilton’s weekly ‘Central View’ column, emails which were hacked and released, ‘reveal that climatologists at Penn State, Amherst, the University of Arizona and England’s East Anglia University have been engaged in a conspiracy to: hide data that the planet is cooling, apply pressure to scientific journals to exclude studies casting doubt on their theories of global warming, hide data being requested under the Freedom of Information Act that would discredit global warming, and, delete any data in their files that would support the existence of global cooling.’ Yikes. The very people who 10 days ago were laughing and pointing at global warming skeptics for hanging on to their position notwithstanding the evidence in support of the man-induced effect on the Earth’s climate, are now very quiet. A lot of people have a lot invested in the business of global warming, and the concept of their scientific beards having cheated on the numbers, coerced their opponents, covered-up the data and shredded potential evidence is impossible for them to accept. Notwithstanding the evidence.

As Air Force One heads to Copenhagen for the climate summit Dec. 9, it will presumably not make a U-turn while flying over the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at University of East Anglia near Norwich, England. But perhaps it should. The 61 megabytes of CRU e-mails and documents made public by a hacker cast serious doubt on the ballyhooed consensus on manmade global warming that the Copenhagen summit was called to address. The CRU has been a major source of data on global temperatures, relied on by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But the e-mails suggest that CRU scientists have been suppressing and misstating data and working to prevent the publication of conflicting views in peer-reviewed science periodicals. … For those of us who have long suspected that constructing scientific models of climate and weather is an enormously complex undertaking quite possibly beyond the capacity of current computer technology, the CRU e-mails are not so surprising. Do we really suppose that anyone can construct a database of weather observations for the entire planet and its atmosphere adequate to make confident predictions of weather and climate 60 years from now? Predictions in which we have enough confidence to impose enormous costs on the American and world economies? … The more interesting question going forward is whether European and American governmental, academic and corporate elites, having embraced global warming alarmism with religious fervor, will be shaken by the scandalous CRU e-mails. They should be.

Those not living in a bubble or on vacation have heard and read about ClimateGate, which is merely what the so-called deniers have been trying to tell folks, including their governments for such a very long time. Meanwhile, governments have been forking out tax dollars and the underlying culprit is the United Nations and affiliated junk scientists. The scandal goes beyond the integrity that scientists and scientific organizations have breached – it is an example of more to come in the concept of the New World Order heartily advocated by Greenie investors and government representatives of the UN, the 44th President of the United States included.
The sociocrats ridiculed Lord Christopher Mencken and others who pointed out flaws and warned about the Copenhagen treaty convention in progress. It was pointed out, with reputable consistency and scientific data concerning Al Gore’s global warming alarm and, later when that got bad publicity and too many scientists (professional) raised an alarm, the description changed to climate change – but all of it was based upon the same bad data, misinformation and denial that their ‘proof’ was not correct in relation to what was really happening.
Clive Crook at The Atlantic wrote on November 30th (More on Climategate) …

In my previous post on Climategate I blithely said that nothing in the climate science email dump surprised me much. Having waded more deeply over the weekend I take that back. 

The closed-mindedness of these supposed men of science, their willingness to go to any lengths to defend a preconceived message, is surprising even to me. The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering. And, as Christopher Booker argues, this scandal is not at the margins of the politicised IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] process. It is not tangential to the policy prescriptions emanating from what David Henderson called the environmental policy milieu [subscription required]. It goes to the core of that process. …

But I was baffled by its reaction to the scandal. “Little wonder that the scientists are looking tribal and jumpy, and that sceptics have leapt so eagerly on such tiny scraps as proof of a conspiracy,” its report concludes. Tiny scraps? …

Remember that this is not an academic exercise. We contemplate outlays of trillions of dollars to fix this supposed problem. Can I read these emails and feel that the scientists involved deserve to be trusted? No, I cannot. …

The IPCC process needs to be fixed, as a matter of the greatest urgency. Read David Henderson or the Wegman report to see how. And in the meantime, let’s have some independent inquiries into what has been going on. 

And once again, this does not mean that there are not some temperature fluctuations going on – it is the reason that the alarmists give for its occurrence and the impression upon the public that it is going to be Armageddon if We the People do not cooperate with the government(s) to fix it.
In the mix of cattle manure we have been fed for way too long, there were answers or more viable theories available, but ignored. Al Gore’s advocated conception was law, and they gave him a Noble prize for it, just as President Obama got a Nobel Peace prize for his advocacy for peace in lieu of solid accomplishment.
As John R. Lott wrote at FoxNews

A coordinated campaign to hide scientific information about climate change appears unprecedented. Could it wind up costing us trillions? … These e-mails, which have now been confirmed as real, involved many researchers across the globe with ideologically similar advocates around the world. They were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global warming claims. The academics here also worked closely with the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. … Other global warming advocates also privately acknowledge what they won’t concede publicly, that temperature changes haven’t been consistent with their models. Dr. Kevin Trenberth, the head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and prominent man-made global warming advocate, wrote in an e-mail: “The fact is we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” 

There were also been discussions to silence academic journals that publish research skeptical of significant man-made global warming. Professor Mann wrote: “I think we have to stop considering ‘Climate Research’ as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal.” Other emails refer to efforts to exclude contrary views from publication in scientific journals. Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute, told The Wall Street Journal: “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.” 

The New York Times argues: “The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here.” — This from the same news organization that regularly publishes classified government documents! … 

Usually academic research is completely ignored by the general public but in this case proposed regulations, costing trillions of dollars, are being based on many of these claimed research results. This coordinated campaign to hide scientific information appears unprecedented.

John Lott, by the way is an economist who wrote Freedomnomics and was the one who conducted research with a partner to show that firearm related violence was less in states that exercised the rights of the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
Christopher Booker, Telegraph, UK wrote – Climate Change: This is the worst scientific scandal of our generation. …

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. … 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. …

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 skullduggery 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.

I’ll go with the concept of the 1970s, in that another Ice Age (small or large?) is approaching with natural fluctuations before setting in. Now that is scarier than global warming. Humanity will have to start building very large greenhouses warmed with the help of geothermal energy in order to not starve to death – and then we will be forced to become vegetarians with the only protein available from livestock raised indoors, poultry and maybe insects, as well as fishing under the ice for species that survive. I guess vegetarians would be happy about that. Adaptation and survival would be a much greater problem than living in a climate with overgrown vegetation and plant life as large and prolific as when the dinosaurs roamed the Earth. Of course thunderstorms, hurricanes and tornadoes will probably be more frequent and dangerous in intensity. Sociocrat, government dependent sheeple and other wimps won’t make it – but that is the law of nature – only the strong survive and multiply. Its part of the evolution process they believe in.
Further reading on the subject of ClimateGate
Climategate before Copenhagen … The Green Blog, Boston
ClimateGate: The Fix is In … Real Clear Politics