Thread: Climate 'Science': Skeptics Are Vindicated

November 25, 2009
The Skeptics Are Vindicated
By David Warren

A computer hacker in England has done the world a service by making available a huge quantity of evidence for the way in which "human-induced global warming" claims have been advanced over the years.

By releasing into the Internet about a thousand internal e-mails from the servers of the Climate Research Unit in the University of East Anglia -- in some respects the international clearing house for climate change "science" -- he has (or they have) put observers in a position to see that claims of conspiracy and fraud were not unreasonable.

More generally, we have been given the materials with which to obtain an insight into how all modern science works when vast amounts of public funding is at stake and when the vested interests associated with various "progressive" causes require a particular scientific result.

There is little doubt that the e-mails were real. Even so warmist a true-believer as George Monbiot led his column in the Guardian yesterday with: "It's no use pretending this isn't a major blow. The e-mails extracted ... could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken by them."

He went on to rekindle his own faith in the "settled science," however, by revealing that he will not give up on the global-warming hypothesis until he sees an e-mail that reveals a specific conspiracy over the centuries by a secret fraternity of "knights carbonic" to seize planetary power and install a Communist World Government.

Behind this sarcastic little face-saving joke is a disheartening reality.

For, as we glean from the hacked documents, supporters of the hypothesis have been able to reverse the onus of proof. In the last resort, their argument comes down to: We say the planet is warming. And anyone who says the contrary must "prove the negative" beyond the faintest shadow of a doubt. And we will be their judges.

Nigel Lawson (a.k.a. Baron Lawson of Blaby), the former British chancellor of the exchequer, who is among prominent persons demanding a full and open public inquiry, summarized the content of the e-mails in this way:

"Astonishingly, what appears, at least at first blush, to have emerged is that
(a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend;
(b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data;
(c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and
(d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals. ...

"There may be a perfectly innocent explanation," he continues with that impartial aplomb for which we have always adored British lords, but then he reminds just how much government spending and bureaucracy, in Britain and all over the world, has been mounted entirely upon this dubious research; and thus how far-reaching the implications if the obvious turns out to be true.

For the correspondence that has been hacked is not mere backroom gossip. It includes incriminating exchanges between some of the biggest names in the "global warming" business.

In its attempt to resist an inquiry, a British Meteorological Office spokesman effectively acknowledged as much. He fell back on the traditional clinching argument of persons "dressed in a little authority": that the sublimity of their office and the splendour of their robes puts them beyond the possibility of suspicion:

"It's a shame that some of the skeptics have had to take this rather shallow attempt to discredit robust science undertaken by some of the world's most respected scientists. The bottom line is that temperatures continue to rise and humans are responsible for it. We have every confidence in the science and the various datasets we use. The peer-review process is as robust as it could possibly be."

The same spokesman alleged it was no coincidence that the incriminating materials had been released on the eve of the United Nations' Copenhagen climate conference.

But, of course, that is exactly what the hacker was doing: getting a story out that could be released in no other way and at the best possible moment to draw attention. Those would be the first two laws of journalism.

It is amusing to see mainstream media sources such as the New York Times, which thinks nothing of publishing purloined government documents that will endanger the lives of U.S. soldiers in the field, and compromise vital intelligence operations, suddenly become all jowly and uptight about publishing the e-mails in question because they were "illegally obtained."

Other media -- which have played a leading part for years in giving credibility to "global warming" claims -- are now maintaining the silence of Iago on the revelations. We will see how long this can be sustained.

otiosus@sympatico.ca

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... 99296.html

The global warming activists see an ojectively warming pot and are trying to alarm us early when the problem is easier to solve. Their delivery has been so shrill that even moderates who sympathize have been put off.

I still can't believe that Obama is still going to sign our sovereignty over to the UN over all of these Lies!! Why can't the People of this country Stop this?

We all know the truth, what the hell is going on!!??

This planet is definitely getting warmer. It has been in an interglacial period for about ten thousand years and in another minor uptrend since the Little Ice Age--ending around 400 years ago. There is also a significant increase in pollution---particularly black soot pollution, due to coal fired plants in China and the US. There may be additional soot deposits in the Arctic region due to polar flights.

How much CO2 has to do with this is debatable, and whether any attempts to reduce CO2 would actually change the trend of warming is even more so. I think consumers would welcome vehicles that are highly fuel efficient, and I think we will se even more of thos coming on the market. There are hundreds of innovations in that direction. And if alternative energy can be brought down in cost to where it is competitive with other types there would probably be a market for that, too. I would rather see countries like Iran or Libya get windpower than nuclear power, especially if it was in the form of products that we could sell to them.

My belief is simple. Mankind is full of sin, from Adam and Eve till now, and anything we do is faulty and degraded. However, since the flood of Noah, our climate has changed (note: recently there has been an upswing in the major thinkers of admitting their has been some sort of major deluge, when prior they discounted it as religious myth, although so much geological evidence points to it), the Bible states that the water in the heavens were released, which was a global "canopy" of clouds with vapor/water in it. Since then, we have been subjected to the suns damaging effects.

I know some do not believe, but to me, and millions across this globe, it is the truth (and much evidence has pointed to it, but many evolutionist scientists have ignored it).

There is very little we can do to actually reverse this. We can do what is right to make our living enviroments cleaner and use our resources better (in Christianity this is referred to as being "good stewards"), and clean up what we can that is polluting where we live, but actually change the climate, no, that is up to God Himself.

As for these scientists being found out, good! I am glad that someone outed these liars and cheats to expose them for the frauds they are.

CaptainRon,

The Little Iceage ended around the 1850's. 400 years ago, would have been right around the middle of it. And that is very close to when the coldest decades happenned. They are called the (you'll have to excuse my mispelling, as I can't remember how it's spelled) Maunder Minimum. During these coldest winters it was observed that there were no sunspots at all for long periods of time. But CO2 doesn't drive temperature. It never has. The sun drives temperature.

What should be thought about, is a rough estimate for when the next glaciation will start. As the ice core records show, there iceages that last about 100,000 years, with interglacial periods of of warmer temperatures that last from 10,000 to 15,000 years. It's been about 10,000 years since the last iceage ended. So anytime in the future, there is a chance that another glaciation will occur. Will it occur for sure? Who knows?

But there were also times when the temperature was much warmer than it is today. Vast tropical rainforests covered the earth. So temperature has changed along with the general climate long before man ever existed.

People are more apt to believe a big lie than a small one and that's why it's so hard to combat the global warming scam. It's been turned into a profitable business and erroneously linked to the need for energy independence in the U. S. Once that happens it's almost impossible to get rid of it. But eventually people will wise up.

When people talk about global warming on hot summer days, I just tell them to invest in a Farmers Almanac and read front to back. You will see 10-20 year periods of mild, and severe winters and summers.

I am 42, and can already see the patterns within my lifetime. 1980 here, we saw a severe winter storm. Froze Multnomah Falls solid, along with all other small tributaries and falls. Went up to Mt. Hood that year, and the snow was over the rooftop of Timberline Lodge (this is about a 4 story structure with high peaked rooftop). After that our winters were mild till about 1989 (close to ten years, correct me if I am wrong any Oregonians, but I believe it was about this time) and another major ice storm hit us.

The last really hot summer, with persistance, was in 2006, and it, I swear, lasted till October, when we were still getting hot temperatures. Then the last three summers have been mild, and peoples gardens have not done as well. So patterns do exist and the Farmers Almanac shows this.

I agree, fully, Hylander, that the sun is the driving factor in this all, not mans "carbon footprint" (although cows put out the most carbon, and we all know what that is from ..).

Here's a good one to watch that was on the History Channel

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=l ... 6935895155

If you want to watch the entire show, veoh has a good quality version, but you'll have to load their player, which is really nice though.