Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?
The GW alarmists appear to have unwittingly confirmed our suspicions: their emails to one another demonstrate that they manipulate data and conspire to keep “skeptics” from being heard.
This from the London Telegraph’s James Delingpole:
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…
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.
Here’s a gem of an email about data manipulation:
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
“Trick?” “Hide?” That’s right. They admit tricking you to hide an apparent temperature decline. Why? Because it doesn’t fit the argument. What temperature decline you might ask? Why the one they have suppressed and the one that the media ignores.
Here’s another email talking about the lack of rising temperatures:
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.
So here are these neutral scientists (Youknow. The one’s that only follow the evidence.) doubting the evidence because it doesn’t fit the argument.
But surly these revered scientists wouldn’t try to hide the facts illegally? Not so fast:
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
But surely these colleagues only disagree on the facts. They’re generally good people and not driven by petty personal gripes? Think again:
One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change sceptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting:
“In an odd way this is cheering news.”
The death of a colleague is “cheering news”? So much for these “worlds leading climate scientists”. I would feel horrible gloating over the death of a competitor. But apparently not these guys.
The nail in the coffin? Here’s hoping so. They’ve tricked us enough.