Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud?
Top climate scientists discuss hiding contrary data, marginalizing dissenters
Posted: November 20, 2009
11:27 am Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Officials at a key
global warming
research center in the United Kingdom have authenticated a series of
e-mails and other documents apparently taken from their computer system
by a hacker, but they cannot explain what scientists in internal
exchanges meant by references to a "trick" that would "hide the
decline" of global temperatures nor by instructions to delete contrary
data.
Author James Delingpole writes in a London Telegraph column the most damaging revelations indicate climate-change scientists may have "manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause."
According to the Australian Investigate magazine, the 62
megabyte Zip file with documents, e-mail exchanges and other
information from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit
apparently was posted by an unidentified hacker on a Russian web
server.
One e-mail said: "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 (sic) from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
Another expressed internal doubts: "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."
Further, an e-mail exchange suggested the suppression of
information: "Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re
AR4? Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment – minor family
crisis."
"And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications
discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer
review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in
which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank,
whose views do not have a scrap of authority."
He cites an e-mail: "This was the danger of always criticizing the skeptics for not publishing
in the 'peer-reviewed literature.' Obviously, they found a solution to
that – take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we
have to stop considering 'Climate Research' as a legitimate
peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in
the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers
in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or
request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the
editorial board …What do others think?"
Delingpole observes the world "is currently cooling; electorates are increasingly
reluctant to support eco-policies leading to more oppressive
regulation, higher taxes and higher utility bills; the tide is turning
against Al Gore's Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. The so-called
'skeptical' view is now also the majority view."
Phil Jones, head of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, confirmed to Investigate magazine the documents appeared authentic.
"It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days
ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads
of data files and e-mails," he said.
"It's completely illegal for somebody to hack into our system," he told the magazine
But Jones denied there was any attempt to mislead or conceal.
"They're talking about proxy data going further back in time, a
thousand years, and it's just about how you add on the last few years,
because when you get proxy data you sample things like tree rings and
ice cores, and they don't always have the last few years," he said.
Jones said he could not recall what he meant when he wrote about a plan to "hide the decline."
In the e-mail, dated 10 years ago, Jones wrote: "Once Tim's got
a diagram here we'll send that either later today or first thing
tomorrow. 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
[sic] from1961 for Keith's to hide the decline. Mike's series got the
annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH
land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for
1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999
with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998. Thanks for the
comments, Ray. Cheers, Phil Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit."
The documents also included a message dated last month from Kevin Trenberth to Michal Mann about the "U-turn on
climate" by Britain's BBC News.
"Well I have my own article on where the heck is global
warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken
records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4
inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal
is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The
low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record
low. This is January weather (see the Rockies baseball playoff game was
canceled on saturday and then played last night in below freezing
weather)."
Despite the advocacy of a financially vested former vice
president, Al Gore, and others, public opinion about whether mankind is
causing an ultimately catastrophic rise in global temperatures is
shifting.
U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas,
has urged members of Congress to consider the joint opinion of nearly
32,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s, who believe humans
likely have little or nothing to do with any "global warming."
The Petition Project,
launched some 10 years ago when the first few thousand signatures were
gathered, has steadily grown without any special effort or campaign.
But in the last few years, and especially because of the release of
Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth," the campaign has been
reinvigorated.
"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled
science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the
claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to
public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed.
Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect
claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," project
spokesman and founder Art Robinson has told WND.
Robinson, a research professor
of chemistry, co-founded the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and
Medicine with Linus Pauling in 1973, and later co-founded the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.
Paul cited the petition results in his statement to Congress.
"Our energy policies must be based upon scientific truth – not
fictional movies or self-interested international agendas," Paul said.
"They should be based upon the accomplishments of technological free
enterprise that have provided our modern civilization, including our
energy industries. That free enterprise must not be hindered by bogus
claims about imaginary disasters."
The petition states: "There is no convincing scientific
evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other
greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause
catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the
Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence
that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial
effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
Robinson has warned of serious political and economic consequencesof assuming "global warming" results from mankind's actions.
"The campaign to severely ration hydrocarbon energy technology
has now been markedly expanded," he said. "In the course of this
campaign, many scientifically invalid claims about impending climate
emergencies are being made. Simultaneously, proposed political actions
to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of
Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in
poorer countries," he told WND.
Warned Paul, "Above all, we must never forget our contract with
the American people – the Constitution that provides the sole source of
legitimacy of our government. That Constitution requires that we
preserve the basic human rights of our people – including the right to
freely manufacture, use, and sell energy produced by any means they
devise – including nuclear, hydrocarbon, solar, wind, or even bicycle
generators.
"While it is evident that the human right to produce and use
energy does not extend to activities that actually endanger the climate
of the Earth upon which we all depend, bogus claims about climate
dangers should not be used as a justification to further limit the
American people's freedom," Paul said.