Science & Technology

Rant

The vast Global Warming Hoax

Posted 29 months ago|20 comments|1,769 views
Written by
Altruist
Eugene, OR
I am grateful to the hackers that stole thousands of e-mails and then combed through ten years worth to find something embarrassing to the environmental movement. It was a Russian machine, so it was probably a Russian that was hired to do the espionage to damage the environmentalists. The Russians are not too fond of environmental rules, but then again it could have been Exxon Mobile or any of a number of billionaires in this country. The end result of this is that there will be more openness in all scientific research and there will be rigorous re-evaluation of all of the climate research to insure that it is valid. The Science will be stronger for this trial.

During the Bush years, science took a back seat to ideological politicization. Studies were withheld, doctored, or heavily redacted to deny any evidence of Global Warming. The embarrassing e-mails will insure that we do not swing from politicization of the right to politicization of the left. Science should be divorced from politics, and scientists should labor for the pure truth without any preconceived notions that would color their research.

Many on the right believe that there is a vast environmental conspiracy to convince people that mankind has caused the earth’s warming. They believe that scientists must lean toward the environmental viewpoint in order to get government grants and that the government is pushing this viewpoint so that they can justify higher taxes.

The main fallacy with this reasoning is that during the Bush years, anti environmental ideologues were placed at the head of most of the agencies that study the weather, and there was a clear disincentive to write papers or conduct studies that were geared towards Global Warming, and all of the tax breaks went to the fossil fuel industry.

Another fallacy of the hoax conspiracy is that all of the scientists in all of the countries of the world are involved in this conspiracy. In 1997 there were over 5 million “researchers” (scientists and engineers). Since then the percentage of students in the United States going into engineering and science has been going down, but in countries like China and India the number of scientists and engineers have increased tenfold. Many other countries like Japan, South Korea, Germany, have increased their numbers of scientists dramatically. They value education and science more than Americans do. Of these millions of scientists about 84% believe that the global warming is man caused, and about 14% believe that the earth is warming, but that people have a minor part in the increase. To say that all of these millions of scientists are all part of a huge hoax is just plain silly, and it demeans them and is down right insulting to accuse them of intentionally lying or faking evidence.

All of the countries in the world rarely agree on anything, and yet every nation in the world with the exceptions of Saudi Arabia and perhaps Syria do not dispute the science. There is a consensus amongst all of the nations and their scientists, because the facts are so convincing.

Proponents of the Global Warming Hoax conspiracy say to follow the money. OK let’s do that. Let’s determine who would benefit from exaggerating man caused Global Warming and who would benefit by denying Man Caused Global Warming.

Those who would benefit from a deception are the environmental groups. They lobby Congress to save the planet and their contributions and lobbyists are paid from millions of concerned citizens, averaging about $25 a donation None of those citizens would receive any money if there was a deception.

Those who would benefit by denying Global Warming are the entire fossil fuel and power industry. They are receiving tens of millions of dollars in subsidies that they are afraid of losing and they are afraid that they will be forced to reduce their pollution, and will receive competition by clean renewable energy. They stand to gain billions of dollars by denying Global Warming.

When in the entire history of the world has any government, let alone most governments colluded against all of the major corporations in the world?

For every lobbyist on the hill working for the environment there are seven industry lobbyists working against the environment. There are 5 climate lobbyists for each member of Congress. Just in the second quarter of this year the Fossil fuel Industry spent about $36.8 million compared to $2.6 million by the environmental groups. This is a ratio of 14 to one!

Billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch have spent $9 million on direct lobbying and much more indirectly through industry funded groups like the Enterprise Institute. Media mogul Rupert Murdoch, has also conducted smear and disinformation campaigns against the environment and anything Obama. Fox Enterprises, talk radio and all of the Murdoch empire has been mobilized to oppose environmental reforms. The same PR firms that have been hired to spread doubt about the lethality of smoking, asbestos, and many toxic chemicals has now been marshaled to spread doubt about climate change.

All of these millions of dollars spent on disinformation and propaganda has had its effect. 77% of the people used to believe that global warming is happening and now only half do. Only 39% believe that the warming is man made. Of course this is highly politicized. 75% of Democrats believe global warming is man made and only 25% of Republicans do.

This reflects a recent Pew Poll that indicates a distrust in the news and media sources, with 75% of Democrats preferring CNN and 72% of Republicans preferring Fox News for their information. There is a similar distrust of science on the part of Republicans.

This may also explain why only 39% of Americans believe in evolution, and 20% believe the sun revolves around the earth, or that 55% believe that they are protected by a "guardian angel". Republicans would rather believe Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck with their high school educations than the scientists of the world. They would rather believe Sarah Palin to Al Gore.
Most of the world is aware of the disappearing North Polar ice caps, the Rapid melting of the Greenland Ice Sheets, the melting of glaciers all over the world, the acidification of the oceans, and the accelerating rise in sea levels, and is aware of the human causes, but about half of this country would rather believe that because one scientist out of 5 million was perhaps a little overzealous in his pursuit, that the entire concept of Global warming that has been proven in thousands of research projects is false. It is amazing to me that so many millions of people can be duped by industry propaganda. Only in America!
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
29 months ago: Al.

It is painful to watch a liberal try to think like a conservative. You twist and turn and "trip" to conclusions.

Of course it's Bush's fault.
Of course there was no single liberal/socialist within 100 miles of Washington D.C. when Bush was President.
Of course, there every scientist in the whole wide world but 12 were saying man was causing Global Coooooling... .no... Global Warming..... no.....
(Al. All the real scientist are getting no play and they are being shunned and ignored.)

or Austrialia, or Czechoslavkia, or....

$9 Million huh? How much do you reckon Soros has poured into it? $9 Billion?

HE** YEA, I don't trust scientists. THEY'RE FRAUDS.
We agree on that one.

Ice and glaciers are melting. So #$%^$%#$ What!

Why do you think they call it GREENLAND?




Fingers. You're hanging on by your fingers.
PRevere
PRevere
Brownsville, TX
29 months ago: Check out the Copenhagen Document leaks, this knowledge may save your life! Do what you can with your Government Reps in your country to have these infringements on your life eliminated! You will literally be fighting for your and your family’s existence, Click the videos below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAqqAnUxACY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94KH-WMZuw0

Request that PM Harper DOES NOT sign the Copenhagen Treaty, thereby causing Canadians to lose their Sovereignty and Freedom, email the PM at: pm@pm.gc.ca

Sign the petition to protest the Inaccurate Science measurements that are being used to base the Copenhagen Treaty off of: http://www.gopetition.com/online/32485.html

Check out what Government is doing behind your back at: : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU

Well, it seems Mr. Ehrlich ( another of Obama’s Eugenicist Science Czars who works with John Holdren ) will have his way with humanity if the Copenhagen Treaty will have success. There is your global system, with a globally enforceable mandate- at first to impose carbon taxes upon humanity- later on to do what the eugenicists have always called and planned for: the orderly extermination of at least 80 percent of the global population.

Writer: Btok
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
29 months ago: Red if you don't trust any scientists, then you had better not step outside your log cabin in the woods. Scientists are responsible for every aspect of modern life, including the computer you are reading this with. The food you eat, the clothes you wear, the vehicle that takes you to work, the roads that vehicle drives on, the street lights that control those vehicles, the lights that light the roads, and the bridges, the buildings you work in and just about every other thing you can think of is the results of those scientists you disdain.

In the latest news an exhaustive review of all 1079 stolen emails by the AP shows that they don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions. Mark Frankel, director of scientific freedom, responsibility and law at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, also reviewed the communications.
Frankel saw "no evidence of falsification or fabrication of data, although concerns could be raised about some instances of very 'generous interpretations.'"
So the deniers are left with no evidence at all, that the science of man made global warming has been compromised or falsified.
29 months ago: Al, keep talking, sooner or later the truth will come out about global warming, be it yours or mine or a mixture of both. I'm leaning toward a mixture. Global Warming has happened before and will happen again. Same with global cooling.

Greenland's name is in the history books for why it was named Greenland, look it up, doesn’t have to do with Not having ice.

There have been times when there were no glaciers or ice in many parts of the world and the seas were much deeper. It may come to that again. We probably won't be alive to see it. Climate change is perfectly natural so all the fuss is for what purpose? To force mankind to change? To move money from one pocket to another? To make rich countries poor? To make the super rich richer? Money. What easier way to move money from one group to another than to panic the public? If it wasn't money, carbon credits and the IPCC would not be geared to discuss it or even consider it as a method of slowing GHG's. It would be geared to promote alternative energy for all. Entire countries industrial output would be redirected to this end and it would be happening NOW, not in 30 years.

I’m beginning to hear a lot about these conferences being a method of taking over the world by instituting a world government through treaties that give away our sovereignty with out the citizens being allowed to have a say about it. It’s starting to make sense and become believable.

But what do I know?
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
29 months ago: I'm all for the truth coming out. That is what scientific inquiry is all about.
The name Greenland was a real estate scam by Eric the Red. He wanted more people to settle there so he lied and told the folk that it was green and lush,
What you and the rest of the deniers don't understand is that carbon taxes are an insurance policy. If the scientists are right (90% probability) then we should take steps to avoid the catastrophe. This is one of those stitch in time saves nine, things. Cheney said that if there is a 1% chance of terrorists getting nuclear weapons then we should act as if it is a certainty. This is the same. If there is even a smidgen of a chance that our current use of fossil fuels will result in 9 degree warming we have to stop it.
If we are wrong we will have shifted to clean renewable resources and energy and we will have stopped being dependent on Middle Eastern oil that funds terrorism. Seems like a win win situation no matter who is right.
29 months ago: Al.
That's what makes this whole thing so despicable. These scientists sold out their profession. Shame, shame, shame on them. I agree with how important scientists are. That is what makes these scientist that much worse.

Respecting the email, you believe what you want. Global warming or cooling or climate change is a hoax, and history will reflect that.

Mark Frankel is another bold face liar.

29 months ago: Assuming there is a 1% chance we are destroying the world (where there is not) to destroy our economy to guard against that 1% chance is insane and over my dead body (figurately)


If we drilled at anwar and off our coasts, we could tell the Middle East to kiss our shiny, white you know whats. You liberals are keeping that from happening. It's your fault we're funding terrorists.
ProfMandia
ProfMandia
Selden, NY
29 months ago: Well stated, Altruist.

To date, there has not been a single credible journal article that shows a natural cause for the modern day warming while also showing how record high greenhouse gas concentrations are not significant.

NOT ONE.

Do people really believe that the scientists at CRU are able to squelch every scientist on the planet who tried to publish this landmark anti-AGW paper? Is there no sense of the low probability and the large scale of this conspiracy for this to be true?

If one throws out the HadCRU data and all papers by these folks, there is still a mountain of evidence for AGW.

There are many scientists from many fields that have published data that show the effects of global warming and why humans are the primary drivers of this warming. These scientists include some of the obvious: climatologists, meteorologists, geologists, modelers, and oceanographers. Some less obvious include: biologists, marine biologists, zoologists, chemists, astrophysicists, economists, environmental politics reasearchers, and others. I am quite confident that MANY of these folks have NEVER spoken to the CRU folks nor emailed them.

Scott A. Mandia – Professor, Meteorologist, Concerned Citizen
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/
bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: Unbelieveable! Do you people have any independent thinking skills at all? If we were talking about BUSH here you'd be all over it wouldn't ya.

Let me help you with the thought progression...

1) If you are in a position to control the "peer reviewed" journals because you are the guy sitting on top of the database that everyone else uses as a basis, Yes! you can squelch and control what is and isn't published.

2) If your database is the single most referred to source of climate information and you have used unfounded and unaudited methods to alter/adjust/jigger the data then YES! you can cause the community to go in the wrong way.

3) If you can successfully block freedom of information act requests for your data, and only supply it to your "friends" then YES! you can force "phoney consensus".
4) If you can write filter routines that take data and "adjust" it such that even when random noise data is fed into the filter it still produces the "hockey stick" then YES! you can get away with the hoax.

5) if you can arrange things such that by simply agreeing or disagreeing with contrary opinions you can prevent government grants from being awarded YES! you can control the exposure of contrasting data.

6) If you can convince the community to base their trust on the argument that somehow you have the "secret sauce" that permits you to look at one siberian tree and by the size of the rings infer the temperatures the YES! you can hoax the world.

7) If you can suck in some big names who are looking for a way to abscond with big political dollars (i.e. Mr Climate change and Mr head of the UN IPCC) then YES! you have a world wide hoax and conspiracy.



bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: Hopefully you paid attention, because all of that is in the emails. Then if you look at HARRY_READ_ME.txt you will see that it was well known in their community that their data was slop. lastly, look at the Fortran and IDC routines and see the inclusion of hard-coded constants to cause a "hockey stick" graph.

Settled science indeed. The only settled science here is that Democrats and Liberals will do anything to keep from seeing the truth, especially if it means they are wrong and that they have been duped. Admit it, you've been conned. When you pay the increased taxes as a result of your "great climate idea" just remember how you all sat by and defended these people.

If you are intellectually honest, you need to go read the emails and then seriously think about what they mean in regards to the scientific ethics of the people that wrote them.

Then again, you might not want to know the truth eh?
bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: ProfMandia,

Surely you have encountered suppression of a particular view in your career. How long did the Vatican supress the view that the sun was at the center of the solar system? What about the BIG BANG debate? As a climate scientist, can you truly say that the "Science is settled"? What the heck does that mean anyhow? If you are a scientist then you know the Science is NEVER SETTLED, the hypothesis might work for a time, but who knows what will come along? There are 80 scientists in the CRU/IPCC and much bigger conspiracies have been pulled off in the past. How about the 30,000 scientists who signed the petition against AGW?
bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: Last point, If you base a paper on the "gold standard" hockey-stick data, would you be eager to retract it or just hold on to see if the hypothesis holds on? Lots of people look to become fabulously wealthy if the scam can be pulled off. Maybe you should take a look at those emails and see what you are defending?
ProfMandia
ProfMandia
Selden, NY
29 months ago: bigalway50:

Despite what Jones said in emails that he wanted to do, the two journal articles by Soon and Baliunas and McIntrye and McKittrick were NOT blocjed and they WERE included in the IPCC reviews.

There are many fields where scientists are working on evidence for AGW and these fields use MANY datasets that Jones has no control over.

Do the rapidly melting ice sheets and glaciers have access to these emails and joined in on the conspiracy?

Do the various climate models that show GHGs as the dominant forcing mechanism have access to these emails and joined in on the conspiracy?

Do the GISS, UAH, RSS data that show global warming of approximately 0.2C per decade over the past 30 years have access to these emails and joined in on the conspiracy? Certainly Spencer and Christy who run UAH and are well-known skeptics of AGW would not align themselves with AGW and yet their satellite-derived measurements track reasonably with GISS, RSS, and HadCRU. (BTW, 2009 will likely end up being a Top 10 or Top 5 warmest year since 1850)

Does the ocean read these emails and magically increase its heat content?

Does the cooling stratosphere (even accounting for ozone loss) read the emails and join in on the hoax?

Do the plants and animals read these emails and decide to die off and/or change their migratory habits so that they can support the conspiracy?

I could go on ad infinitum.

Finally, the 30,000 scientists that you refer to are NOT climate scientists for the most part and the Petition Project is well-documented to be a fraud. I have some information on this and other fraudulent/misleading material here:

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/global_warming_denial_machine.html#Oregon_Petition

Conspiracies are certainly more exciting but rarely are they true.
bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: With all due respect I disagree...

Perhaps you should read a little broader than the little AGW community. If so you would see that for the past 8-9 years the global temperatures have been declining, not running away.

CO2 contributions by human sources are but the tiniest fraction of the CO2 released to the atmosphere by volcanic action. The earth has experienced many periods of warming and cooling and we have had almost nothing to do with it.

Arctic ice has been surveyed by satellite and is shown not to be decreasing but increasing, and NASA has had to correct their error (Dr. Hansen at NASA is also implicated via the emails as well). They were "hiding the decline" too.

What happened to the "medieval warming" period that disappeared from the CRU database and then reappeared later when they had been roundly criticized. Remember the mini ice age in medieval times? What about the "coming ice age" in the late 60s and early 70s? Perhaps climate science isn't all that settled eh?

I contend that the "global warming scientists" that you believers claim number 4000 also include many "not exactly climate scientists" either. As a "meteorologist" I presume you would include yourself as a "climate scientist" but are you really and truly one? Are Physicists and geologists, fluids dynamics people not able to understand what is going on? I'd lay their opinions besides those of "climate scientists" any day. BTW, is Algore a "climate scientist" too?

I'm trained in engineering and computer science and have worked with databases my entire career. I know sloppy coding standards and lack verifiable data when I see it. I have taught at the university level and I know full well about tenured faculty and the pressure on them to publish or perish to get grants. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, some of those folks saw something too good to be true and hitched themselves onto that gravy-train?
bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: Before a comment is made, "trained" = BSEE/CS, MSCS (databases), PhD CS (databases)- but not one diploma in "climate science". Guess climate science physics is different from what the rest of us larn'ed.
bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: Just to save folks the trouble of hunting them down...

http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php
ProfMandia
ProfMandia
Selden, NY
29 months ago: bigalways50:

This will be may last post because everything I can tell you is written in my Website. Quite a few of your statements are wrong and I have debunked them here:

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/global_warming_misinformation.html

Nice chatting with you all.
bigalways50
bigalways50
Montgomery, IL
29 months ago: As you wish, but as a fellow scientist I urger you to look at the east anglia email collection where the scientific ethics and integrity of the esteemed CRU and IPCC is on display for all to judge for themselves. Remember, the IPCC is the UN who dearly wants us to bring our money to Copenhagen.

Cheerio!
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
29 months ago: ProfMandia
Thank you for your input and I hope you continue to contribute. I know it is amazingly frustrating to argue logically with people that would prefer to believe irrational arguments.
Bigalways If you were a professor you know that that grant money is difficult to come by where is all the money coming from to spread all of the lies that you think all of the scientists in the world are spreading. Have you ever checked out the salaries if any that environmentalists are paid. Much of the work they do is voluntary because they think saving the planet is worth it. No environmentalist (except perhaps those selling books) is going to get rich through grant money. All of that money goes to the research. Who gives out the money? What vested interest do they have and how will they benefit?
You say this whole conspiricy is so the world's governments can get your hard earned tax money, but even that goes to programs to heal the earth. Nobody gets rich from helping the environment.
If you look at who is funding all of these conspiracies and the phony organizations like the Petition project, you see that the fossil fuel industry has an enormous financial stake in your believing all of their propaganda. These guys have money to burn. Exxon Mobile, one of the largest contributors to the disinformation campaign just had the most profit from any industry ever. You are helping them keep it that way. You are helping the Saudis funnel money to the Wahabbists that are financing 90% of the terrorists in the world.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.