The Anthropocentric Global Warming Denialist Community is collectively creaming in its collective jeans over the release of zillions of emails that definitively prove that the whole global warming conspiracy thing was made up. Real Climate has the story:
There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to 'get rid of the MWP', no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no 'marching orders' from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the hackers also being in on the plot though.
Yeah, right, sure.
I'd like to write more about this but I'm going to be spending much of the weekend outside in this unseasonably warm weather we are having. In part, I'll be in the garage getting the winter fishing equipment ready to put on eBay Canada ... these ice fishing rigs are of little use in the greater Twin Cities are ever since the lakes stopped freezing over enough to put a shack on. At least I don't have to bother rebursishing the car battery, flushing the radiator fluid and checking the circuitry on the engine block warmer any more, so that saves time for our trip to the Gulf Coast ... oh, no wait, the place we usually go was wiped out by a hurricane ...
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Cameron, LA?
What a wonderful day for humanity !
The hoax is over, the kids can go back to playing and stop worrying about the polar bears and the criminals who brought this scam upon the world will now be put on trial. The âgreenâ movement was hijacked by social progressives and used as a weapon to scare the world into their âvisionâ of behavior and tax us into oblivion. Now it is over and the revolt back to common sense is on !!! Yeah !!!
There is no mention of Soros or vegetarian overlords, but there is lots of mention of criminal violation of the Freedom of Information Act, forgery of data, and collusion to use the peer review process to promote specific political goals.
I knew them dang scientists were lying to us!
Next hoax to be exposed: Maxwell's theory of electrodynamics. There's no such thing as radio waves, man. Radio and TV were invented in monasteries, and them dang scientists tried to take credit for them.
Anon: No there is not.
> The Anthropocentric Global Warming Denialist Community
> is collectively creaming in its collective jeans over the
> release of zillions of emails that definitively prove
> that the whole global warming conspiracy thing was made
> up.
...while the equally nutzo We're All Doomed Community gets a collective hernia straining for the definitive "move along, nothing to see here" post. Go to it, guys, popcorn time!
Also, what are we to think of people who imagine that email is secure and private? It's like writing what you really think of the Dean on the chalkboard and then being surprised when it gets back to him.
Anon the Second: Have you actually read any of the emails? Even if you go to realclimate.com and read the discussion, it's pretty clear the people involved are at best unethical in their work and at worst guilty of fraud. This doesn't prove or disprove anything about AGW, but it does show a cult-like mentality in the global warming community. Why not be more transparent? Isn't skepticism a good thing in research?
âCan you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. Heâs not in at the moment - minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I donât have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.â
"Just sent loads of station data to Scott. Make sure he documents everything better this time ! And donât 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 Iâll 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 whoâll say we must adhere to it !"
"...If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isnât being political, it is being selfish.
Cheers, Phil"
This is why there is a legal process in civilized countries. Take any set of hundreds of thousands of words spoken in one social context (Private, and yes, private conversations tend to be considered private by those involved in them) in a certain political context (well funded and/or organized anti-science forces) being carried out by people who are very very bad at understanding things like professionalism (scientists who, I agree, are abysmally bad at this sort of thing, in my experience) and from this one can mine a set of quotes to do whatever you want them to do.
âFrom: Phil Jones
To: âMichael E. Mannâ
Subject: HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Date: Thu Jul 8 16:30:16 2004
I canât see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow â even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!
Cheers
Philâ
Here are a âfewâ of the papers they managed to keep out,
450 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of âMan-Madeâ Global Warming
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supportin…
Poptech: Can you adduce the evidence you have used to determine that these papers were good and worthy of being included in the IPCC report?
Others: I would prefer it if this blog NOT become a shit dumping ground for AGW denialists who simply want to engage in the highly unethical practice of reproducing other people's emails out of context and without their permission. I will permit quotations of these emails in a fully contextualized manner. Otherwise, you are on very thin ice ethically and probably legally. Which is your problem, but please, not on my blog.
"these ice fishing rigs are of little use in the greater Twin Cities are ever since the lakes stopped freezing over enough to put a shack on."
Uh, you realize that would have almost nothing to do with global warming? We're talking about smaller, subtler changes here. Besides, NOAA doesn't show this decrease. At that link, it even shows above average ice cover between 1980 and 1995.
Both sides of the debate are fanatical and twist the facts.
Bronzepot: The reduction in lake ice and sea ice is a broad phenomenon that has been happening for the last century central and eastern North America, and the climate data shows a clear warming in this state.
Bronzepot - you appear to satirically impaired :)
I think you are justified in turning off comments here, Greg.
I'd turn off comments, too. The climate change deniers are just as dumb as the AIDS denialists. They have no concept of science or how it is done, so they grab onto any shred of non-scientific information that could possibly make the real scientists look like not nice people and they scream, "SEE?! THEY'RE BAD PEOPLE! AND THUS WRONG!" Seth Kalichman is right -- the DSM needs to create a diagnosis for them called "malignant denial." Nothing in those emails show that the climate change is not caused by human civilization. All they do is show that scientists are humans and that the deniers have made them angry. I'm angry, too, that the education system in the United States is so bad that 50% of our population doesn't believe in a verifiable fact because it runs counter to a political view.
Translation: These assholes have been pestering me for the last several years, to the point where I'd rather throw my data away than give it to them.
I'm not entirely certain why this is worthy of being trumpeted by the AGW crowd - surely they realize that the only reason why he said this is because he hates their guts?
But they missed this email:
From: George Soros
To: Al Gore ,fat@xxxxx.xxx, t.boone.pickens@xxxx.xxx
Subject: Socialist plan to take over the World
Date: Mon., 16 Nov 2009 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: w.buffett@xxx.xx.xx
Dear Al and T.,
After all this time and money spent, we can finally say that our view is aired consistently by the MSM. We now own The Washington Post editorial board (except for Will, who still insists on publishing the truth about AGW), and at the New York Times we just added Friedman to our payroll; but Rich and Kristof have been doing fairly well for us there. In short, climatofascism can now enter its next stage. With the help of the liberal noise machine at MSNBC and the blogs, we can now delude the rest of the American public into taking "action." Romm, Revkin, Dave Roberts, Zimmer are all fighting hard to keep the message fresh. We're a little concerned with Oolius at the moment. He might be going rogue in which case we'll have to terminate his contract. Otherwise we're in good shape. Once this catches on, we'll be making trillions of dollars in so-called "alternative" energy..."
Source: http://coeruleus.blogspot.com/2009/11/fridays-sciencee-news-commentary…
From: Hanson
To: Al Gore
Al, we've just finished cooking up the latest round of fake data. I'll send you the fake hockey stick graphs for you to put in your next fake global warming documentary.
H
Seriously, I'm sick to the stomach. I thought I'd seen the low in from the anti-Science community, but I was wrong. Apparently, the fact they are reading private communication that was STOLEN doesn't even stop them for a second. Not only that, but they have the outstanding mind-numbness to go out and demand explanations! I just can't wrap my mind around this. Can someone explain what kind of moral standards you have if you
1) Read stolen mail
2) Spread and copy private communication
3) Demand explanations for content of stolen mail that's none of your business
and
4) Warp words or lines from said mails to dispute scientific fact
Really, I am not able to conceive how this would be possible. However, literally thousands of commenters show that is has to possible somehow.
Good work on the "Skepticism," guys. You have earned your payoffs.
This is the Piltdown Climate theory being exposed. In the e-mails these scientists don't have the slightest CLUE as to what the data shows. They talk about omitting this data and that data so as to get rid of "blips". They talk about beating up people that don't agree with them. They talk about stymieing Freedom of Information requests (do these arrogant clowns know where their funding comes from?). They talk about not knowing too much about temperatures from over 100 years ago.
And for the nimrods who think that none of this is our business - they are about to pass a $2 trillion a year tax on us because of this garbage. I think we have a right to know the truth, even if it comes to us in a criminal manner. After all, these clowns would never admit they're not really sure about it in public.
Apparently, the fact they are reading private communication that was STOLEN doesn't even stop them for a second. Not only that, but they have the outstanding mind-numbness to go out and demand explanations! I just can't wrap my mind around this.
*cough* Pentagon Papers *cough*
Apparently, the fact they are reading private communication that was STOLEN doesn't even stop them for a second. Not only that, but they have the outstanding mind-numbness to go out and demand explanations! I just can't wrap my mind around this.
*cough* Pentagon Papers *cough*
Odd, I didn't post that twice. I guess the comment software automatically recognizes stuff that bears repeating.
Yes, it's all a conspiracy like Nixon bombing the Cambodians. Hmm, good equivalency.
Holy canoli! Emails can't be faked! Everything on the internet is true! I'm rich. RICH!
Let's just hope I'm not simply believing what I want to believe.
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 08:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Moses Odiaka [mosesadiaha@go.com]
To: mosesadiaha@go.com
Subject: CONFIDENTIAL PROPOSAL
My name is Mr.Moses Odiaka.I work in the credit and accounts department of
Union Bank of NigeriaPlc,Lagos, Nigeria. I write you in respect of a
foreign customer with a Domicilliary account. His name is Engineer Manfred
Becker. He was among those who died in a plane crash here in Nigeria
during the reign of late General Sani Abacha.
Since the demise of this our customer, Engineer Manfred Becker, who was an
oil merchant/contractor, I have kept a close watch of the deposit records
and accounts and since then nobody has come to claim the money in this a/c
as next of kin to the late Engineer. He had only $18.5mllion in his a/c
and the a/c is coded. It is only an insider that could produce the code or
password of the deposit particulars. As it stands now,there is nobody in
that position to produce the needed information other than my very self
considering my position in the bank.
Based on the reason that nobody has come forward to claim the deposit as
next of kin, I hereby ask for your co operation in using your name as the
next of kin to the deceased to send these funds out to a foreign offshore
bank a/c for mutual sharing between myself and you. At this point I am the
only one with the information because I have removed the deposit file from
the safe.By so doing, what is required is to send an aplication laying
claims of the deposit on your name as next of kin to the late Engineer. I
will need your full name and address telephone/fax number,company or
residential, also your bank name and account,where the money will be
transfer into.
Finally i want you to understand that the request for a foreigner as the
next of kin is occassioned by the fact that the customer was a foreigner
and for that reason alone a local cannot represent as next of kin. When
you contact me, then we shall discuss on how the money will be split
between us and others we shall also speak in details.I am currently in
europe for a six months course,you can reach me on this number for further
discussion 0031 623 866 723.Kindly send your reply to my private email
address stated below mosesodig1@zwallet.com or mosesodiaka1@yahoo.com
Trusting to hear from you,
I remain Respectfully yours,
Mr Moses Odiaka.
mosesodig1@zwallet.com or mosesodiaka1@yahoo.com
(0031 623 866 723)
*yawn*
I wonder who paid the crackers?
Spot the differences
About:
Pentagon papers - Immoral actions of US government
CRU emails - Some scientists saying banal everyday things, discussing data, getting pissed off with anti-science people etc
Obtained by:
Pentagon papers - leaked
CRU emails - server hacked and emails stolen
Reason they were obtained:
Pentagon papers - contents felt to be in public interest
CRU emails - fishing expedition
Biggest champion:
Pentagon papers - Noam Chomsky
CRU emails - James Delingpole
Or you wanted to cream yourself again but there were no hookers around to help you out.
Q.: Who are those criminals doing the stealing?
Warmist bed-wetters see themselves forced to shift their damage control into high gear. Why? Seems the âstolenâ info confirms the prevalent and extensive criminal activities that are employed to advance climatofascism. I think the real thieves have been caught with their pants down and now are frantically spinning the news by claiming the material was âstolenâ. Sorry, but that doesnât change the fact that the Warmist indeed filter, exclude, enhance, fortify and withhold data from review by skeptics so to amplify the validity of their theory.
Climatofacists engage in illegal âStonewalling of Freedom of Information requestsâ and the deleting of material âafterâ the requests were made. However, the data was paid for by the public and therefore belongs to the public.
Climofascists abuse the tax system and misuse grant monies, the money the government took from us via taxes. In turn the funds are used to justify the imposition of further onerous taxes based on false data and hypotheses, maintained by the systematic exclusion of equally valid scientific data which may reaches opposite conclusions about the causes of climatic variations. Warmists have been creating a pyramid scheme of lies to promote the justification to suck every drop ob blood from every society. Climatofascism has become the new name for communism which we thought is dead.
Climofascists engage in the manipulation of the peer review process and the prevention of publication of contrary evidence and hypotheses. They are not scientists but are a click of "plain old criminals" who are now screaming that somebody stole something from them. That âstolenâ something turns out to be public property.
So some hackers have published some private e-mails on line....what does that prove......NADA!
If private e-mails of man made induced Climate change Denialists were similarly hacked and Emails were selectively placed on line out of context and edited then it would be pretty simple to make even the sternest denier seem like a global warming champion.
Don't get too easily led......just like those college kids that gave the world Loose Change, selective editing can be a powerful tool to get those conspiracy theorists very excited, any one with a cool head can see what this so called e-mail "scandal" and the 9/11 conspiracy theories are pretty groundless.
Wow! The wingnut elite is out in force. I guess that's to be expected. Can you imagine, a well respected researcher having to give his data to an abject moron like McKittrick? Or McIntyre? In a PRIVATE e-mail, I might even say that it's a good thing that they don't know about access to information requests too. In the mind of Anon3, though, you can scare up all kinds of nefarious things. Too bad climate theory doesn't depend on the reading of a few e-mails (translate: misreading, cherry-picking, ignorance applied to, ...). You might actually have to understand the complex interactions taking place in the land/ocean/atmosphere system. Oh, what the hell, it's just easier to be a wingnut.
"Climatofacists engage in illegal âStonewalling of Freedom of Information requestsâ and the deleting of material âafterâ the requests were made. However, the data was paid for by the public and therefore belongs to the public."
Just curious, when the CIA is found by a federal court to be lying to it and otherwise violating the FOIA statue
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20081105/11042008_Kessler%20opinion_a…
do you get outraged to the same level?
Daniel Ellsberg was tried in court on charges that could've led to him being incarcerated for 150 years.
As it happens, he won in court (due to criminal activities by the FBI and administration so polluting the case that the judge threw it out, and DOJ didn't appeal), but he fully expected to serve significant jail time for his actions.
Now why oh why do you think whoever committed the felony of breaking into the CRU server should not also face a criminal trial?
This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.
#26:
It's typical, right? Their 'skepticism' only gets applied to the things they need to not be true...
I'm still not seeing anything in any of these email quotes people have been sticking on various websites that points to any more than scientists talking in private (can we confirm that deleting data is something that actually happened, or is this joking?) having to deal with hostile denialists who take every opportunity to twist words, data, and obfuscate. Unethical, perhaps, if certain interpretations turn out to be right, but nothing to do with the actual science of climate change. They keep asking as if the emails are so damning, but if the quotes they're putting online are the cream of the crop they need to go back to the drawing board.
Even if I knew nothing about the science, their attitude would tip me off. Conspiracy theories and acting as if certain scientists do something distasteful it somehow invalidates the science. This stuff is on the level of Ben Stein and Expelled...
Phil,
I have actually read the emails, including the whole "its not about truth, only about plausibly deniable claims" part.
Oh yeah, I also read the whole "even if I have to redefine what peer review is" part.
anon, for someone who is presumably part of the group saying global warming is so much hyperbole, you're doing a lousy job of convincing me you'd recognize hyperbole if it bit you in the nose.
"Oh yeah, I also read the whole "even if I have to redefine what peer review is" part. "
Good thing for everyone involved he didn't say "over his dead body" or "over my dead body" because than we have a murder conspiracy to investigate.
Anon 3@7
You post:
âCan you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. Heâs not in at the moment - minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I donât have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.â
And yet this criminal AGW hoaxer mastermind did not delete this email - which makes me suspicious about the veracity of the aforesaid emails.
anon [37] is one of several names used for the same individual crank who has made numerous inaccurat claims about many things over the years on this blog. When he says "I've read the emails" you can take it to the bank that he lies. The "I've read these" is nothing more than an attempt to "contextualize" the quotes so I don't delete them.
There is a disturbance in the Farce and the denialist idiots leave their droppings everywhere.
Why don't Mann et al just open up and share all of their data and have an honest scientific debate for once instead of fueling the politics on both sides with their secretive bullshit? Surely they are not....... AFRAID?? ??? ???? ?? ??????????????
Honest scientific debate requires that both sides be honest. I'd lean more toward annoyed.
The burglars also tried to break into RealClimate to upload the stolen emails as a front page post on the site. So that's two felonies ... so far.
Well, actually, yes, CRU is .... AFRAID??? ... as you so quaintly put it ... that breaking contractual restrictions on their access to data THAT THEY DO NOT OWN is not something they can legally do.
CRU's working on getting the various national organizations that are the source of the raw data to agree to its being released, but until those organizations do so, THEY CAN'T LEGALLY RELEASE ALL OF THE RAW DATA THEY'VE USED.
That was the basis for the rejection of McIntyre's FOI request. Of course McI and others in the denialist camp seem to think that the FOI should force the voiding of the various agreements made by CRU with national met orgs but the only thing I conclude from that is that there's a damned good reason that McI is not a lawyer.
On the other hand, the GISStemp product is generated from raw data which NASA GISS has the right to distribute. You can download it to your heart's content, along with the code used to analyze it.
I bet you didn't know that, did you? I bet you're the kind of person that parrots whatever lies you're told rather than check yourself, aren't you?
Al Gore and all these elite need to stop flying around the world and nasa needs to stop sending up shuttles. They want to tax us people to the grave. Maby all the jets flying around spraying toxic waste in our air is doing more harm? they are commonly called chem trails and are not the same as con trails. Just look up.
What's with all the "denialist" accusations? Isn't it a good thing when people are skeptical?
Anyway, even if I bought the science of man made global warming, I still would have serious doubts about the solutions. Since there seems to be a distinct lack of objectivity on both sides, wouldn't it be better to discuss actual solutions instead of having this stupid "debate" over and over again?
I'll even start. What will the effects of global warming be in the next 100 years. Ball park estimates, I know it's impossible to say exactly. I've read everything from a slight cost of living increase to complete global catastrophy. If we can't say how serious the problem is how are we supposed to know how much effort and resources should be put into the problem?
Since (as far as I can tell from reading different sources) humans only put about 3-5% of the CO2 into the atmosphere wouldn't that mean that for any significant reduction in global temp. to occur we would have to reduce our CO2 production by 50-75% or more? How is that possible? From what I've read there are currently no really good, reliable alternatives to oil and coal.
If I understand cap and trade correctly, doesn't it incentivise the biggest polluters not to participate in it? I mean, it's effectively a gas and coal tax. At this point, huge parts of the economies of most developed and rapidly developing countries depend on coal and oil. Wouldn't it create a net benefit for those who don't apply a cap and trade law (in decreased oil and coal prices, cheaper manufacturing, cheaper transportation, and cheaper products and services), and a net loss for those who do go along with cap and trade? Where's the incentive? Will coal and oil production also be lessened? If not, won't it just create a good market for the people who don't go along with cap and trade? Will that lessen the net amount of CO2 or just move the pollution to different countries?
These are just some of my concerns. I don't realy care about the e-mails since they don't really mean anything whether AGW is a real issue or not.
David, what is the incentive to other countries if the U.S. does nothing? "We're doomed because we can't decrease emissions enough on our own" isn't a solution, or even a partial solution that gives us more time to come up with a better one. Nor is demanding that any solution be as cheap as what we're doing now.
I submit there is a vast gulf of difference between skepticism and cynicism. "Climate skeptics" are actually cynics. Just like antivaxxers and Creationists.
Sorry!
Global warming is indeed anthropogenic and in fact- not so accidental. The global climate records for the last few thousand yearsâ show that we are heading inexorably back to another Ice Age. This fact caused great consternation in the 1970âs as it became mainstream knowledge. But it has been known since the turn of the last century.
Little understood background to this revelation is the machinations of governments pushing toward a global solution to this issue. Much in the way that we had a Copenhagen recently we had the formation of NATO after the Second World War etc. to facilitate adaptation and securitization for impending climate change toward a New Ice Age. The Northern Hemisphere, i.e. Europe, USA and Russia were due to be hit hard, not by nukes but by catastrophic climate cooling. The Cold War takes on a new meaning. As was expected, if the Ice hit the fan, those with the most nuclear weapons could dictate terms. The expansion of Russian / Communist influence into the sub-tropics of South-East Asia and Cuba became more important. The USA had eyes on these warmer climes also with the inevitable consequences.
Upon realizing the indefatigable proof of a cooling planet and the impending war for resources these global governments sought a new response which could allow the main players to survive in a business as usual scenario. It was soon realized that the best antidote to their problem was seeding the climate. A global effort to warm the planet. Pump as much GHGs into the atmosphere as possible. Part of this strategy was the use of aerosols / CFCs (this affected warming a little too much as it turned out). The general idea was to counter the natural cycle.
The biggest problem is that this tactic has the consequence of heating up the poorer southern countries to such a degree that life becomes unbearable. However this wonât matter so much to the USA, Russia (with a defrosting tundra in Siberia becoming habitable), the UK (wine growing now an option !) and similarly so with the rest of the EU where Scandinavia becomes more useful. When the dust settles the First World powers have a new weapon in their arsenal âan ability to change the climate. The elusive weather machine!