CLIMATE FALLOUT

I just found a great video about the ClimateGate scandal.

Check it out.

The wheels are really falling off the bus.

The fallout is reaching incredible proportions now.  There is a new report about IPCC claims of African crops decreasing 50% being completely false.   Claims of increased storm intensity is unsupportable.  Now that scientists aren't afraid of being blackballed for skeptical results, there are more and more of them out there checking the IPCC/CRU data and finding it wanting.  It seems that every day there is a new report of errors and fallacies in the Nobel Prize winning 2007 IPCC report on climate change.

The level of BS involved in the report is simply staggering. 

The African crop projections were based on theories that directly contradicted the information gathered.  Whole areas of the report were based on non-scientific magazine articles and unpublished student theses.   More and more true scientists, who propose a theory and then attempt to prove or disprove it scientifically, are testing the CRU's and IPCC's theories on AGW and finding major holes in the 'science'.

Finally, disgraced 'scientist' Phil Jones of the CRU came out this weekend and admitted that there hasn't been any measurable global warming for the past 15 years.  In addition, he admitted that temperatures during the Medieval Warming Period were higher than what we are experiencing now.  What's more, those temperatures remained high for a period of about 500 years, from about 800 AD to about 1300 AD.  The MWP ended with the Little Ice Age, a period of unusual cold that lasted until the early 1800's.

The MWP was a time of global prosperity.  It was so warm that wine was grown in England and Iceland.  The world's population exploded due to increased harvests of cereal grains, which are intolerant to cold, and warmer winters, which meant less illness and disease.  Trade flourished throughout Europe and the Mediterranean and into Asia.  The Vikings explored the ice-free Atlantic ocean in their longboats and discovered Greenland (which really was green then, thus the name), Nova Scotia and quite possibly northeastern America. 

Times were easier in the MWP because of the added warmth.  With full bellies and full purses, people were able to turn their attention from subsistence to leisure.  There was an explosion of scientific discovery and artisitic achievement.

AGW alarmists tried to hide the MWP, to pretend that it didn't exist, because it's mere existence put the lie to man-made global warming.  There were no cars or factories spewing CO2 into the atmosphere back then, and yet it was warmer than it is today.  The MWP was a huge threat to AGW, and so they tried to revise history yet again and pretend that the MWP never happened.  By the way, the Little Ice Age was possibly caused by the 'Maunder Minimum', a period of extremely low sunspot activity.  We are possibly going through another period of extremely low sunspot activity right now.  Coincidence?  Well, what do you think the odds are that less activity from the giant superhot ball of gas in the center of the solar system might cause temperature changes in our atmosphere?  I'd have to say the sun would have more effect on our climate than our exhalations and flatulent cows, but what do I know?

The MWP proves the theory of Climate Change, but not AGW, which is a very different thing.  Climate Change is a natural, cyclical phenomenon that has very little to do with the activities of man.  AGW, in contrast, blames man for everything.  Humans are the plague of the Earth, bent on it's destruction, in the minds of AGW alarmists.

Yes, the climate is changing.  It has always changed - the climate we have now is nothing like the climate of 10 million years ago, 10,000 years ago, or even a mere 1,000 years ago - a drop in the climate bucket.  We may be in the midst of a warming period that may or may not be over - in about 100 years or so we will be able to look back over this newest cycle and have a clearer picture what was happening. 

The AGW hysterics scream 'there's a difference between climate and weather, you know!'  Yes, I do know.  Do you? 

The people who are claiming a few blizzards and some broken records doesn't mean it is getting colder are the very same people who jump all over a summer heat wave and claim that it proves global warming - see, it's hotter outside!  They are also the people who touted the lack of snow a few winters ago in DC proved global warming as well.  Now they are saying the cooler temps and major snowstorms are proof of global warming.  To prove this theory, they have come up with a tortured, circuitous explaination involving the increased temps causing increased water vapor in the air resulting in more precipitation, but because it is happening in winter with colder temps, the precipitation shows itself as snow.  Basically saying it is colder and snowier because the temperature is rising.  They seem to have taken to heart the little adage "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".

Even Donald Trump is calling AGW a hoax, and has called for Al Gore to be stripped of his Nobel Prize.  Considering he got it in conjunction with the fatally flawed 2007 IPCC report, they should all be stripped.  While they are at it, how about the Oscar, too?

Even liberal Penn State, home of Michael Mann, a leading climate scientist and crony of the CRU's Phil Jones and author of many of the incriminating emails released in December, has students that are demanding answers.  The Young America's Foundation protested the bogus internal 'investigation' of Michael Mann, claiming it is biased.  They are demanding the investigation be conducted by a neutral, unaffiliated, external group and that the findings be released to the public.  Right now the review is being conducted by three Penn State employees and the findings will only be released to donors.  By the way, Michael Mann just recieved $2.4 million in stimulus funds for his climate research - even in the midst of an investigation. 

Our federal masters are refusing to waver from their AGW stance, and have even talked about reviving Cap and Trade.  Tone deaf and crazy, right?  No, more like politically expedient.  The liberals seem to think that saying something often enough makes it true, so they are clinging on to their hysterical ranting about climate catastrophe.  Let's face it - they have a lot at stake, and they'll be damned if they are going to give it up without a fight.  Cap and Trade is a masterpiece of political money laundering.  They will use it to pillage literally trillions of dollars from corporations, small businesses and taxpayers.  They can put that money into a nice little slush fund and claim they are using it for carbon credit offsets and other such untraceable schemes.  They have created such an illusion of major catastrophes that when they don't occur they can claim that their Cap and Trade scheme was a success and saved us from annihilation.

But now it's all falling apart. 

As is usually the case with liberals, they pushed too hard, and their rhetoric just couldn't stand up to the facts.  They tried to silence their critics, but that only works for so long.  They have now resorted to name calling and claiming that any change in weather whatsoever is proof of their theory.  Those are desperate tactics and are being seen as such by a rapidly growing majority.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the climate is changing.  There is a great deal of doubt, however, that man is the cause.  Our AGW Icaruses have flown too close to the sun and are now paying the price.

Better them than us.

LOWLIFE LOWDOWN

There is such a plethora of goodies today that it's hard to decide what to highlight.

First, lefty radio and MSNBC host Ed Schultz visited the 'Morning Joe' show on MSNBC last week.  During the broadcast, he noted that hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough were getting feedback directly from the White House during the program. 

Apparently the White House wasn't happy with the fact that they had Schultz, Arianna Huffington and Howard Dean on the show - all three have come out against ObamaCare. 

So what did the hacks at MSNBC do to appease Dear Leader?

Put David Axlerod on for a lengthy segment at the last minute, of course. 

Which is more frightening - that the White House is in direct contact with tv shows, or that the shows are so eager to hop to the administrations bidding?  State run media indeed.  Check out The Radio Equalizer for the audio of Schultz talking about the incident on his radio show.

Also in the news is the Copenhagen Debacle.  Listening to the desperate spin on the abject failure that is the Climate Change Summit from the world-wide left is quite amusing.  A week's worth of pomp, circumstance, riots and blizzards all in the name of a science that is dubious, at best, right now.

Their arrogant posturing that the ClimateGate emails mean nothing is merely making matters worse.  If they had all come out in front of the revelations and admitted that there were serious questions about the procedures, tactics and science coming out of CRU and further admitted the science needed to be transparently reviewed, they might have come out of this with a lot less damage.  Their arrogance, blind denial, and offensive name calling of skeptics is  just deepening the hole they are in.

It almost seems like the blizzard was God putting in his two cents on the subject (much like the blizzard in Washington this weekend had to have been divine commentary on the health care bum rush).  The Gore Effect is a beautiful thing.

There is even more unsavory information coming out about AGW.  The head of the UN's IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, is apparently investing in green technology at a rather disquieting level.  But don't worry - there's no conflict of interest.  Really.  And if you don't believe me, you must be a flat earther.

The Goracle made an ass of himself (again) and had to make an official retraction of some of his alarmist rhetoric when the scientist he 'quoted' came out and denied he made the claims Gore is attributing to him.  It was extremely bad timing for him to be caught in so blatant a lie.  Ooopsie!

And, finally, Russian scientists are crying foul on the one institution that has managed to stay above the corrupt stench that is ClimateGate.  It seems the UK's  Hadley Centre has been manipulating and cherry picking data from Siberian weather stations - using data from urban areas (which always register a bit warmer than rural areas) and tossing out the rural numbers in order to make a better case for global warming. 

This is a big one, because the Hadley Centre, a division of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter has been the gold standard of AGW.  The IPCC relies heavily on their data - they, along with the CRU, created the reports on which the IPCC decisions are based. 

Of course there has been little media coverage of this latest outrage. 

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., the Senate democrats passed a cloture vote on ObamaCare in the middle of the night - standard operating procedure, these days.  It makes sense, since these horrible bills would probably not survive the light of day.

Sure would be nice if the taxpaying public who is funding this monstrosity would be allowed to actually read it.  They are voting on a concept, at this point - several senators have said they haven't seen the actual bill yet.  If it is in writing, why isn't it being released for the public to read?  What really gets me is all the heat the Republicans are taking for not backing the bill.  Considering Congress is chock full of lawyers (especially on the left), they should know one never enters into a contract without reading it first.  How can the Republicans read it and make an informed decision on it if the Democrats refuse to allow them to see it?

'Cash for Cloture' has become the buzzword of the week, and for good reason.  Harry Reid feels that buying votes and depriving some Americans of certain perks lavished on others is just the way things are done in Washington.  So much for Change.  At least back in the good old days they used to hide their backroom deals - now they crow about them and pat themselves on the back. 

The lucky senators who cut multi-million dollar deals for their states think this will buy the votes of their constituents, but I think some might have surprises coming to them next November.

The jaw dropper in this whole drama is that the democrat leadership, headed up by Rahm Emanuel and David Axlerod of course, are insisting that pushing ObamaCare down our throats is going to get them reelected!

Honestly, I'm laughing too much to comment further on that one.

Since we're on the subject of blatant corruption, there is a new survey out that shows that banks who spent more money on lobbying ended up with more of the bailout cash, as did those banks in districts with Representatives on committees or subcommittees related to TARP.   At this point, that is just par for the course.

Nothing to see here, though - move along, move along.

Just sit down, shut up, drink your Kool Aid and stop questioning your betters already!

THE FIRST CARD FALLS Updated

The house of cards that is AGW is slowly collapsing, no matter how hard the neo-pravda media, the Obama administration and the UN's IPCC are desperately trying to spin it.

The ClimateGate scandal has finally claimed it's first victim. Patient Zero, a.k.a. Phil Jones, director of East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit is temporarily stepping down while an investigation is conducted.

"What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible," Jones said in a statement. "After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director's role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this. The Review process will have my full support.

Please note the 'temporarily'.  Because, of course, as soon as the investigation clears his good name of this groundless smear, he will be right back on the job.  Either the fix is in, or the man is delusional.  Considering his alarmist tendencies towards planetary doom even though he knows the science doesn't support that theory, I'd say it's the latter.

A potential second victim is lining up, too.  Michael Mann of Penn State is now under investigation by the university.

"I would be disappointed if the university wasn't doing all [it] can to get as much information as possible" about the controversy, Mann tells the Daily Collegian.

It will be interesting to see how these investigations progress.  The universities in question must be aware that the world is watching, so hopefully the investigations will be thorough, in depth, and above board.

I would expect these two investigations to be just the tip of the iceberg.

Sen. Inhofe, for example, has asked Sen. Boxer to investigate a possible conspiracy among prominent scientists essential to the climate change debate.

Considering her 'green agenda' position on the matter and her tactics on forcing the liberal agenda, even to the point of breaking committee rules, the chances of a transparent, honest, thorough investigation are slim, at best.  Let's hope Inhofe keeps a close eye on it.

There are other universities and distinguished scientific research centers that have been touched by this scandal and may possibly be investigated, such as the National Center for Atmospheric Research and NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. 

It's time to start following the money on this. As with most things these days, greed is a main motivator.   The 'green' in the green movement is money, pure and simple.  Universities are raking in money hand over fist with their climate research, and politicians the world over are looking at diverting trillions of taxpayer dollars to do with as they see fit.  Al Gore, who so far has kept a low profile on this boondoggle (I wonder when he will be cancelling his book tour, after this and this happened, though) has got a major horse in this race, but will the High Priest of Gaia get caught for his fraud? 

I'm sure if there were an email implicating him it would have come to light already, so the smoking gun would most likely be at the end of the money trail. 

The bottom line on all of this is that the global warming alarmists are losing the PR battle.  The house of cards is collapsing around their ears.  They tried to spin it, they tried to marginalize it, they tried to pretend it didn't happen or that it isn't important, but the story is picking up steam.  More and more Americans doubt the global warming theory, and have been for a while. 

Now we need to watch the politicians and see if they are going to face reality and put their global warming cash cow out to pasture.

UPDATE:  Well blow me down -

Leaked e-mails allegedly undermining climate change science should be treated as a criminal matter, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said Wednesday afternoon.

Is anyone surprised that she is talking about investigating the hacking, not the widespread fraud revealed in the emails?  I'm having ACORN flashbacks.  It's getting to be more and more trouble to be a whistleblower these days.  I feel like I'm in a 1930's film noir sometimes....

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE...

How conveeeeeeenient.

It turns out that East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit has disposed of all of their original raw temperature data.  To be fair, this happened back in the 1980's, before current director Phil Jones took over, so this is not another mark on his record, but it is a mark on the record of the CRU.  Via the Times Online:

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”

This means that all 'baseline' information other researchers use will have been 'filtered' (read: altered) by CRU.  Hardly an unimpeachable source, these days.This is a common practice in the scientific community, but the raw data is generally considered to be a part of the record and is preserved as well. 

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

Why didn't they transfer the data to an electronic format and archive it?  This is Science 101, guys.

Scientists often check each other's work and sometimes find things previously overlooked.  That is the nature of the much vaunted peer review.  But in order to legitimately be able to do that, the data sets must include the original raw data.  What if the mistake is made in that crucial first step - the processing of the raw data?  What if something is overlooked?  The results would be skewed before researchers even started.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

What the CRU have done is not just illustrate how unscientific they really are, but also how long they've been that way.

Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said.

THE ONLY PLACE GETTING HOTTER IS EAST ANGLIA

The heat is on at East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit.  According to the UK's Mail Online, the pressure is on for the head of CRU to resign due to his role in the ClimateGate scandal.  A leading environmentalist, George Monbiot, is calling for Phil Jones to quit.

'I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken,' he said. 'There are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad.
'There appears to be evidence of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a Freedom of Information request.
'Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.'The head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.'

So far, Jones has refused calls for his resignation, stating,

'We absolutely stand by the science we produce here at the University of East Anglia and it has been peer reviewed and published.


'Some of the emails probably had poorly chosen words and were sent in the heat of the moment, when I was frustrated. I do regret sending some of them. We've not deleted any emails or data here at CRU.

'I would never manipulate the data one bit - I would categorically deny that.;

Hmmm...really?  Is that your final answer, Mr. Jones?  You might want to rethink it.  No, technically they didn't delete it - they just lost track of it.  Not that he didn't try to get some of them deleted. 

There is also a possibility that the emails were released because of the FOIA requests.  The had apparently been assembled by East Anglia staff.  Why were they actually released and why is Jones saying they were hacked?  Well, maybe they accidentally released the stuff they were supposed to bury, and are trying to say it was a crime in order to make themselves the victim and try to distract from what the emails contained.  Or maybe they really were hacked, and the accidental release is just another rumor.

At least we know the emails are real now.

And things are starting to happen.  Like investigations.  Hopefully the British authorities will check into the much larger crimes perpetrated by those scientists, and not just if or who hacked the emails.

As Pat Michaels so aptly put it, "This is not a smoking gun, this is a mushroom cloud."