The Global Warming Conspiracy, Caught out?

[7redorbs]

Looks like Smith W's theory has some credence all along,

If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)

When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:

Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

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

[Mr X]

I think more and more such stories are going to start coming out now. The MMGW folks can't keep claiming CO2 causes warming as the climate continues to cool. I do not know anyone who believes the IPCC, the ecos, or politicians when they speak about climate change. The article you linked to is correct, the majority are very sceptical of MMGW.

The whole thing is a massive scam, the biggest there has ever been.

[7redorbs]

Well, I think it's kind of silly, that is like saying that blood causes poisoning, it is equally the trigger as much as the carrier, but it is not the very thing that kills you, it is the thing that delivers your killing.

I suppose an analogy to what the IPCC has done, is detect a pulse without checking underneath the skin (and it seems to have only come back to bite them in the ass), it is surely only mildly better than claiming that CO2 isn't causing `global warming` and thus, we should continue to burn fossil fuels inefficiently undeterred. Such arrogance, but fitting that global wallies came up with it.

Kinda funny really, we don't get the truth from anyone, because nobody who gets in the limelight usually is brave enough to speak it, admit it, or live it, right? right?

A

[Mr X]

That's the thing though, CO2 isn't causing warming. If it was, the climate would not have been cooling for the last ten years and would not have cooled for thirty years between the 1940s and the 1970s (the most polluting industrial era yet). Gore's graphs were wrong. The archaeological record clearly shows that first the climate warms, and then hundreds of years later atmospheric CO2 increases.
I think a better analogy of what the IPCC has done is to hear a fairy tale, promote it as fact, and get the whole world sitting on a beach throwing money in the sea to stop the tide coming in.

[7redorbs]

I agree, in principle. However, look around we are destroying the environment around us, CO2 has an affect on Coral reefs, and it's not totally unsubstantiated to expect a latent reaction to the cycle of the climatic earth. I think the earth is a system, and the earth has a very long lifetime. It's true to conclude that a damaged kidney system due to increased minerals is not going to result in death immediately, but definitely shorten lifetime.

There's no denying that there are large gaping holes in Al Gore's documentary that launched the climate change as a 'world issue' - it's just not scientific, I'm sure cynar could have something to say about the reasoning behind that , too.

I see what you are saying too, but the nature of subtle forces can be cummulative, and since we do not have a complete picture, it is equally untenable to plead ignorance to a problem that clearly exists (pollution and extreme interaction with environment via nuclear blasts etc) as it is untenable to believe the half whitted story from the IPCC, and now seemingly a serious confirmed leak and smoking gun as to the sort of things that _really do go on_ among communities.

The meaning of community has nothing to do with science, and that's a shame, because it can't be changed, it seems - scientists still need humans to a certain extent, or at least - are reluctant to let go of themselves.

No surprise there, we're all human. Sometimes I'm not sure whether its a sociological problem, the "i" in IPCC does afterall stand for inter-governmental, any politicization of science wouldn't be a first,

A

[Mr X]

The main problem is the human tendency to dislike change. The Earth, coastlines, sea levels, temperatures, glaciers, ice packs, ice caps etc. are NOT static. They change, and nothing we do will stop that. I think it is incredibly arrogant of us to think we can change the course of nature.
The climate has been magnitudes warmer in the past, the planet and life is still here. The planet has been magnitudes cooler in the past, the planet and life is still here.
The planet isn't dying. The planet will be here long after the human race has gone, and it won't give a damn that we were ever here.

[Mr X]

I have emailed the BBC with the following:

"I am just curious why the BBC has not been reporting the release of many megabytes of emails exposing the false representation, and falsifying of data by climatologists at University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit. If this is true it is an enormous story which would expose the global warming and man-made climate change theory as a complete fiction, and as one of the biggest scientific blunders in history.

Has this story been ignored because no matter what evidence ids given to the contrary, the BBC is dedicated to promoting the theory of MMGW?"

[7redorbs]

Yeah I couldnt agree more Smith, funny isn't it how LAW protects the guilty, as well as the innocent. That's a serious problem with justice. Why can't they give injustice to the bastards, well, because they can't afford to dig their heels in with legal action that upsets big government and big business ;o

The BBC wouldn't dare, after all the information was stolen - what a great way to make sure it's never heard about.

I'm asking myself the question why the BBC and the UK government intentionally chose not to cover the Ukranian Swine Flu outbreak stories recently. Reminds me of the blackout on the afghanistan war, i was reading highly alarming reports in al jazeera, that would surely have been reported. Nop, nothing.

These days people are more interested in a bunch of fat cheating elitists shagging prostitutes scoffing at each others expenses than what sort of crimes they are actually doing via government laws themselves, and indeed any foreign policy, what madness. The power of voluntary dis-empowerment syllabus in action?

A

ps. maybe if they stopped teaching people to do what they were told, and to think for themselves, people would come up with an idea to solve the hypocritical inquisition of authoritative rules of mob. oh.. I don't know.. republicanism maybe.. oh.. oh wait.. only problem with that system is anyone can break it.

Maybe the problem isn't what system we use..

[Cynar]

Haven't had a chance to read up on the info released yet (been working all weekend). And I will over the next few days. By a few comments I'll throw in now.
First, yes Scientist are human. Hard to believe I know, but it's true. The checks and balances of science tend to correct for this. They assume no vested interest in the subject though. I can tell you now, most scientists HATE having issues spun around by politics and companies. I dislike it, but I can see how they might push back in less than honest ways. (It happens, other scientists spot it and pull them up on it. At least in theory). The problem is only compounded by the complexity of the issue. The climate goings various oscillations. And yes we are currently in the cooling period of a 200 year cycle. The problem is this cooling is far smaller than it should be. The problem comes when we hit the warming, but my then it will be too late. At least based on best theories. The problem comes because all the theories have weak spots, error margins, disagreements over details etc. Those with a vested interest in the status quo (Oil companies and their political lapdogs particularly). Use these to confuse the layman public who don't understand the details.

Smith is right about humans not liking change and global warming not killing the planet. The planet will be fine (if changed). The GW campaign though be renamed, the 'Save the Human' Campaign. More accurate and likely to get more attention.

As I said though, not read the data yet. So cant comment on it's validity or content.

Cynar

[outlander]

I think they have taken the wrong approach from day1. It should have never been about 'warming' and 'climate change', it should have been a fight to reduce emissions and pollution. Now we have everyone jumping for joy that if we're not responsible for the warming -yehaw now we can just keep polluting -business as usual