Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate – Corruption exposed again.

How to spin a lie.

A new batch of 5,000 emails among scientists central to the assertion that humans are causing a global warming crisis were anonymously released to the public yesterday, igniting a new firestorm of controversy nearly two years to the day after similar emails ignited the Climategate scandal.

Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.

Regarding scientific transparency, a defining characteristic of science is the open sharing of scientific data, theories and procedures so that independent parties, and especially skeptics of a particular theory or hypothesis, can replicate and validate asserted experiments or observations. Emails between Climategate scientists, however, show a concerted effort to hide rather than disseminate underlying evidence and procedures.

“I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI [Freedom of Information] Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process,”writes Phil Jones, a scientist working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in a newly released email.

“Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” Jones writes in another newly released email. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.”

The original Climategate emails contained similar evidence of destroying information and data that the public would naturally assume would be available according to freedom of information principles. “Mike, can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith [Briffa] re AR4 [UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 4th Assessment]?” Jones wrote to Penn State University scientist Michael Mann in an email released in Climategate 1.0. “Keith will do likewise. … We will be getting Caspar [Ammann] to do likewise. I see that CA [the Climate Audit Web site] claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!”

The new emails also reveal the scientists’ attempts to politicize the debate and advance predetermined outcomes.

“The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out” of IPCC reports, writes Jonathan Overpeck, coordinating lead author for the IPCC’s most recent climate assessment.

“I gave up on [Georgia Institute of Technology climate professor] Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but its not helping the cause,” wrote Mann in another newly released email.

via Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate – Forbes.

6 Comments to “Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate – Corruption exposed again.”

  1. You stupid stupid little anti-science right-wing sheep. You’d be against popcorn if that’s what you were told to do.

  2. You sincerely believe you know more about what changes the earth’s climate than the scientists mentioned in this article that are trying to hide the faults with their findings?

    This article exposes corruption among scientist hiding facts that do not support their findings.

    Since you reacted to the article by calling me names I can only assume you agree with this approach: to withhold, oppress, omit and distort facts that do not support your leftist ideology, which, with any objective scientific historical analysis, can be proven to be obsolete and pitifully narrow-minded.

    • The article was written by a member of a corrupt organization with a political agenda. They feed off the ignorant masses to profit from lies and distortions. The only “scandal” is the one fabricated by these right-wing assholes.

  3. So you are saying the emails are fake? What proof do you have of this? And if you cannot supply the proof isn’t your accusations in essence non scientific? I mean we are dealing in facts not suppositions.

    Corruption is not the attempt at exposing the facts of a potential scientific deception nor is it in questioning the integrity of the scientists that are involved.

    Corruption is hiding, omitting or distorting facts that can lead to a decline in the funding one receives from the U.S. Department of Energy.

    Corruption is the attempt to demonize the messenger because you cannot refute the message.

    Corruption in scientific pursuit is obsessive adherence to any ideological constraints, principles or values.

    Facts that do not fit an ideologically driven fantasy are typically dismissed as being unimportant or peripheral to the desired result.

    “Science can only ascertain what IS, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary.” Albert Einstein

    • No, the emails are not fake, but they don’t negate the science, just like the last batch didn’t. The vast majority of scientists agree that anthropogenic climate change is real and causing great harm to our planet and these emails don’t change that in any way.

  4. Are you defending the actions of those primary scientist that are distorting the truth? Which, I thought was the premise of our debate.

    There may be climate change, but the cause? Currently there is climate change on Mars and Jupiter. There was climate change during the dinosaur era. Humans didn’t cause climate change in any of the above. Human related products certainly can add to atmospheric change, but if we eliminate all of them, there will still be climate change on a cyclical basis, and every so many tens of thousands of years or longer, the change will be catastrophic. And who is to say that climate change is not a good thing or part of the liberal doctrine of evolution?

    The emails expose attempts at scientific corruption that undermines the creditability of their findings, one of which alleges that man contributes to the change therefore can stop the change. It cannot, but even if it could, the cost
    would surely collapse our free market (as well as any socialistic!) economy. Now, that may be the underlying goal but not the issue I am discussing.

    As an aside; What do we do that we CAN do? (Again, realizing that the results will be limited, maybe ineffective) I believe in promoting people, and their businesses, that take care of our environment. I believe in regulation that forces people and businesses to stop intentionally polluting our environment. What I am not in favor of is corruption, collusion and unnecessary fear mongering by your environmental god guru gore.

    In the last 15 years Los Angeles has never been cleaner…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: