More “Climategate”…it’s the Vatican
Last week, on the second anniversary of the “Climategate” e-mail disclosure, someone released an additional 5000 files of e-mails penned by the”‘usual suspects”.
Like the first ‘climategate’ leak of 2009, the latest release shows top scientists in the field fudging data, conspiring to bully and silence opponents, and displaying far less certainty about the reliability of anthropogenic global warming theory in private than they ever admit in public.
At least one member of Congress was outraged. I agree. Outrage is definitely warranted. If the entire playbook of the EPA, and its resulting costly and job killing regulations, is predicated on the theory of carbon emissions being harmful, and we learn more that the “science” isn’t exactly “settled”, then outrage is appropriate. We have been duped.
Unfortunately, Representative Ed Markey takes a different view.
To Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass.), for example, the leaker or leakers responsible are attempting to ‘sabotage the international climate talks’ and should be identified and brought ‘to justice.’
Representative Markey’s approach would appear to be the modern day version of shooting the messenger.
The recent disclosures shed new light on the attempt to discredit any scientist who disagrees with the concept of global warming, or climate change, or whatever the phrase “du jour” happens to be. This from Michael Mann of Penn State University, Mr. Hockey Stick himself, when referring to two skeptics, Steve McIntyre and Doug Keenan:
I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his thus far unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests. Perhaps the same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.
What’s the point in defending your “hockey stick” theory Mr. Mann when you can just get some “yellow journalist” to do your dirty work for you?
But, of all the e-mails released, this is definitely my favorite.
I heard that Zichichi has links with the Vatican. A number of other greenhouse skeptics have extreme religious views. [emphasis supplied]
Yup, it’s those radical Vatican Catholics at it again.
38 Comments
The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.
You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.
The site is not broken.
Could this global warming scam become any more ridiculous? ?They aught to start preferring charges against some of these fanatics for trying to use this “settled science” to extort so many people. ?Algore should be one of the first arrested, considering how much time and money he spent trying to sell his piece of the theory. ?Absolute fraud, every bit of it!?
So we shouldn’t shoot the messenger?
as soon as the climate changes we can start a new ,new world north of what used to be the arctic circle?
do not worry..the left will be soon on to a new crisis that must be solved RIGHT NOW..no time to debate????just pass this bill..no time to read what is in it..am I not correct?
Think I got the new crises. BBC reports that the Aurora Borealis may be a danger to us.? This could cost all the nations billions!
?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/15921547
?
?
?
?Well,I’m a near pagan & I ain’t buying their climate crap.
Just in case you have not this before: science is never settled. Good thing some scientists, e.g. Einstein did not believe that Newton’s Laws were “settled” and showed that a more encompassing theory explained what did not fit in Newton’s Laws.
Perhaps global warming is being caused by all those Chevy Volts catching on fire.
Still say the unsettled weather (it is not global warming or climate change) is a result of the huge amount of sunspot activity. The spikes coincide with the strange droughts and floods etc.
Isn’t the climate always changing? Aren’t we between to ice-ages?
The earth is slowing down and it is getting closer to the sun . . . so, doesn’t it get warmer between ice-ages?
The chicken-little climate “scientists” are just finding what the sponsors of their grants want them to find. After all, who’s paying the bills for these so-called experts?
AlGore? What an *******! My respect for the Nobel Prize Committee has tanked and any time I hear about the Nobel Prize being awarded, I wonder, are they going to give the thing to the ZerO next?
Surprise, surprise: the effect of sunspot activity on the weather is not “settled science” either.
But at least it is demonstrable, i.e. the coincidence of global warming on other planets.
Right Dims, and of course, I don’t recall saying anything about “settled science”, nor writing it. Do you? Sammy, it’s a theory and one that we don’t have to give hard-earned tax dollars to “solve”.? As a matter of fact, I also think the “Big Bang Creation Theory” holds weight! That’s not “settled science” either.? Oh, Posh, I hate when that happens, no settlement.
It is merely a fairly transparent means of taxing the weather, frankly.? All the Durban meetings, carbon taxes and cap and trade schemes are just wealth redistribution tactics, not a means of CO2 reduction.
Which all just means that current public policy designed around a fabricated construct is ruining our country by not allowing us the ability to provide our own fossil fuel needs, putting us at a massive disadvantage globally, and exacerbating the current economic decline.?
“The coincidence of global warming on other planets” is demonstrable? I like that, good reach!
Go Google it before you dismiss it.?? Oh heck, I will save you the trouble: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
Sorry, Sammy, Dims is right as always. There is demonstrable proof that there is global warming on other planets.
I am a curious person, so let’s see it.
See above.? Searching is your friend.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
?
As for Penn State, I can’t say that I take anything from that school too seriously after they’ve been harboring a child molester for yeeears….Perhaps if the school investigated allegations of child abuse the way they seem to be willing to investigate McIntyre, then maaaaybe we wouldn’t be getting a daily dose of the monster that is Sandusky.
Just sayin’s all.
Thanks, Winnie. Now, what was it that someone was saying about Einstein? These poor scientists who insist on working with facts instead of reworking data so that they can get mucho grant money, what are we going to do with them? You must walk in lockstep with the elite and ALGORE,? hero to the multitudes.? Ironic that a scientist from Russia can be free enough to posit another theory, apparently without fear of retribution.? Thank you Habibullo Abdussamator, whether you are right or wrong, at least you think for yourself!
Whoops!? I answered before I got here!? Good one Winnie!
Thanks, Lynn & Dims.? Personally, I figured NatGeo would be a “credible” source, but perhaps the only credible source for global warming tripe is something like the WWF.? Or perhaps the scientist, Michael Moore, has weighed in with his considerable knowledge?
Google some more and find other articles that call the notion of global warming on other planets a myth. Glad to know that Russia is being held up, in some quarters, as a beacon of freedom of expression.
Sammy, why don’t you do some legwork of your own??
Why don’t you link them, sammy?? It only takes a cut and paste.?? And why are you discriminating against Russian scientists?? They are the basis of our post shuttle space program, after all.
I like the author Robert J. Ringer’s definition of pollution: “It’s the price we have to pay for the things we don’t want to give up”. Although I believe that Global Warming is here (and there’s no such thing as an Ice Age), let’s save our money, and live with it.
Anyway, the highest recorded temperature (136 in the shade) was recorded 89 years ago, somewhere in Africa. Maybe it needs to be broken.
I’d say that Habibullo Abdussamator,does not get a lot of support in the NatGeo article. And if you Google (you know how to do that, right?) “global warming on other planets” you’ll get even less support.
Aside from your name phobias, do you have something substantial to add here?
Well, duh, you still don’t get it. If you can understand that Copernicus and Einstein could stand up to other scientists when they had a different “theory”, why can’t you understand that there may be more than one answer. Of course he will get no support, the scientists who promote and fudge their figures to “prove” global warning want to keep getting grants.? LOL, keep it up Sammy, it’s fun watching you click!
True, there can be more than one answer, Lynn. But usually the one that stands is that which is supported by a body of evidence, not a a few questionable conclusions. Some people still think the earth is flat, and stick to that notion even in the light of MANY earth-rise photographs!?
As we are seeing, that “body of evidence” has fact anorexia, compounded by fudge the date fever.? Let the chips fall where they may, but to pronounce AGW as “settled science” and throw economies into turmoil over what is more hypothesis than theory, particularly hypotheses/theories derived from questionable “facts” and sources, as the East Anglia emails continue to demonstrate.? In fact, geologically speaking, we are due to leave the current interglacial period and enter another ice age.? Actually, we are slightly overdue.
Have it your way, Dims. Regrettably, if you believe that global warming is not taking place you are the minority.
So sayeth the Vatican (and the media inquisition) to Galileo…
?
Here’s a tip: don’t confuse global warming with anthropogenic global warming.
When the preponderance of evidence shows that there is no global warming I’ll be glad to change my mind.
Does that include when the so called “preponderance of evidence” is found to be faulty?? I will hold you to that!? 😉
Again, your statement should read: “When the preponderance of evidence shows that there is no ANTHROPOGENIC global warming I?ll be glad to change my mind.”