Spin this my dear Alarmists.....
Climategate just got much, much bigger. And all thanks to the Russians who, with perfect timing, dropped this bombshell just as the world’s leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing us all back to the dark ages.
Feast your eyes on this news release from Rionovosta, via the Ria Novosti agency, posted on Icecap. (Hat Tip: Richard North)
A discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as “Climategate,” continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.
The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.
Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.
Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.
The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.
The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.
The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.
On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.
IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.
The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world’s land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.
Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.
What the Russians are suggesting here, in other words, is that the entire global temperature record used by the IPCC to inform world government policy is a crock.
I'm sure this will all be expained away by the "experts" as some sort of evil trick of Putin. Or that the Russian's aren't all that smart, or whatever...the fact of the matter remains that "scientific consensus" was never either......
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Okay...I admit it. I'm neither as talented, nor as ambitious, as Mrs. S. Weasel, creator of this here work o' geen-yus! Thank goodness she has a very liberal policy on "borrowing" the sweat of her brow! You should really check her out.....the Weasel
Oh yeah...you have to refresh the page to make the charty-thing start all over!
A bit long, but well worth it. His Lordship is just so dang polite when he's proving her to be just another sheeple! Those British guys!
It's instructive, not to mention funny in a "wow, look how stupid that lady is" kinda way, to hear her explaining the basis for her belief in AGW. Basically, it boils down to...
- Greenpeace says so.
- I can't be bothered (cuz I have a REAL life and JOB) to do any checking on my own.
- Greenpeace says so! And so do the "reports" I've read (most likely FROM Greenpeace) that tell me a MAJORITY of all life on earth agree with me!
The money quote?
Lord M:"If you were to discover that everything that I said to you....were true, would you think that, therefore, the organization you believe in has misled you?"
GreenPeace Hippie Lady: "No"
LM: "In other words, even if I prove these things to you, you would still prefer to believe a political line given out by an organization, rather than the scientific facts."
GHL: "No. I would have to look at it myself first..."
But wait a minute hippie-lady....you just got done saying how you couldn't check it out for yourself, due to the rigors of your "job" and "life" (neither of which were apparently important enough to keep you away from your protest...). One would think that if she felt THAT strongly about a situation, she might want to do some checking on her own.....
This is why the whole "Climate Change" scam will not go away.....it's adherents are cultists. Pretty soon some one will break out the spiked Kool-aid!
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Hmmmm.....CO2 is "harmful" to humans, according to the EPA. Doesn't that make plants some sort of evil genius slave masters.....getting us stupid humans to develop all of this industrial know-how just to jack up those CO2 levels? But if we reduce the CO2 levels, won't that mean the plants have less of that sweet, sweet drug they crave? Will they then unleash their reign of terror, a-la "The Happening"? I for one say we better lock up all the trees before they spread their mind-destroying suicide-inducing dust around!