September 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

« More Dem-on-Dem violence | Main | Reasons to be thankful »

Nov 21, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"...or, not."

I guess that will depend on how much distraction the Alarmist Tag Team can count on from trusted allies in government and the media.

More here and here.

Key point:

"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."

That refers to Michael Mann's now thrice debunked "hockey stick" nonsense.

Here's where the news apparently broke first.

Noteworthy, in the comments:

"And, you get to see somebody with the name of phil jones say that he would rather destroy the CRU data than release it to McIntyre. And lots lots more. including how to obstruct or evade FOIA requests. and guess who funded the collection of cores at Yamal.. and transferred money into a personal account in Russia[.] And you get to see what they really say behind the curtain.. you get to see how they 'shape' the news, how they struggled between telling the truth and making policy makers happy. [Y]ou get to see what they say about Idso and pat micheals, you get to read how they want to take us out into a dark alley, it’s stunning all very stunning. You get to watch somebody named phil jones say that John daly’s death is good news.. or words to that effect. I don’t know that its real.. But the CRU code looks real."

Tim Ball sums it up:

"Of course the IPCC Reports and especially the SPM Reports are the basis for Kyoto and the Copenhagen Accord, but now we know they are based on completely falsified and manipulated data and science. It is no longer a suspicion. Surely this is the death knell for the CRU, the IPCC, Kyoto and Copenhagen and the Carbon Credits shell game.

CO2 never was a problem and all the machinations and deceptions exposed by these files prove that it was the greatest deception in history, but nobody is laughing. It is a very sad day for science and especially my chosen area of climate science. As I expected now it is all exposed I find there is no pleasure in 'I told you so.' "

Not that something like this will actually stop the True Believers. And I guarantee it won't change a thing for the Dem/Lefty/"Progressive" gang's intent to force Cap 'n Trade down our throats. The debacle that is health care "reform" serves as the model for the process that will be used.

Dave Dobson

How do you usually put it, Bubba?

Oh, yeah. Blah blah, woof woof.

Dave Dobson

Here's an analysis from a statistician that gives Jones the proper chastisement for what he suggested ten years ago, while also pointing out that our understanding of global warming comes from actual data from thermometers, not bloviating denialist windbags.

Andrew Brod

The answer is clear: "or not."


".....our understanding of global warming comes from actual data from thermometers, not bloviating denialist windbags."

Oh, you mean thermometers from Hansen's phony GISS numbers?

Plus, the CRU emails clearly reveal that data supporting natural climate variation signatures have been manipulated down.

This comment from Robert M. at WUWT lists what we now know about the dying scam:


What we have here is evidence that the team has engaged in:

1. Conspiracy
2. Government Fraud
3. Computer Fraud
4. Obstruction of Justice
5. Environmental Law Violations (Falsifying lab data pertaining to environmental regulations) (snicker)
6. Suppression of evidence
7. Tampering with evidence
8. Public Corruption
9. Bribery

Does that cover it?"

Indeed, it does.

Meanwhile, the pushback is as lame as it is predictable.

It's over, Hot Rod. The hoax is completely exposed, whether you like it or not.

Deal with it.


The MSM has picked up on this story which is bad news for GW alarmists, especially when combined with the undeniable facts about warming since 1998. The whole house of cards is on the verge of falling apart on nearly every front, in polls and in politics- not to mention in the actual science.

Those who are hanging on do so because they either believe strongly in the real agenda that the hoax was used to advance or because they just can't bring themselves to admit they were wrong, especially after having been so arrogant and dismissive of those who were skeptical of their theory.

Some of the excuses offered about the "context" of those emails aren't persuasive either. They got caught and it is a very big deal and they know it.

Nobody likes to lose, especially to their most antagonizing opponents. But considering that the actual data is at odds with the models (unless they change the models to explain the data), one has to ask the question:

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

Dave Dobson

I know I shouldn't bother responding, because you guys are both pretty much insane, but can you clarify: you're hinging your triumphal death of global warming on some ambiguous e-mails sent ten years ago from a couple guys at one British research center?

Of course, warming was already well established by this point, and it has continued since then, but how can real data compare to hackers, smugness, and rants?


Gee, Dave, now you narrow your data to just the United States and rely on observations that have not been adjusted for reflective heat. Ad that one little UK research center was used by people like you to amp up the GW hysteria. Now you wish to discredit it? Looks like you're getting backed into a corner. Hopefully in a few years you can admit you were wrong. I know it's going to be tough, but I'll go easy on you.

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?


".....but how can real data compare to hackers, smugness, and rants?"

You will notice that Dobson sidesteps the issue here in order to present something designed to distract attention away from this calamitous turn of events for the Alarmists.

Let it be noted that the source Dobson quotes in the second link comes from someone who is known for his lack of ethics on this issue, which fits in quite well with the CRU revelations.

Let it also be noted that the chart Dobson uses as "proof" of his point on temperatures is successfully refuted here.


"But the satellite data was removed because it was felt the satellite data caused a downward bias."

Let it finally be noted that two members of our local ivory tower community comments reveal that they think the exposure of academic and intellectual fraud that underlies Climate Alarmism is no big deal.

Apparently they value a political, social, and economic agenda more than an agenda of academic and intellectual integrity.

Andrew Brod

Dave, give it up. They're on to us! As you may recall from the last meeting of the global liberal conspiracy, we were told this might happen. And now it has. The righteous deniers have us dead to rights. Woe is us!

And to my fellow Jews: We'd better take greater care with our worldwide banking conspiracy as well. These guys are good. I wouldn't be surprised if they manage to cook up another edition of our elders' protocols.


And to all the Christians: You better take greater care with your national conspiracy to enforce Christianity on the rest of America by daring to participate in the political process and believe in something besides the God of the Left, liberal government. Those guys are good. I wouldn't be surprised if they managed to cook up another edition of "all Christians are extremist kooks because who in their right mind would actually believe in Jesus or oppose abortion" for adoption by the elitist media and to take a subject where no religion was mentioned at all and try to turn it into a cry of anti-Semitism.


That kind of religious baiting can work both ways, Andrew. I'm surprised you played that card. It had nothing to do with the topic and nobody is making the claim in this thread about a Jewish conspiracy that you just threw out there.

A recently completed survey shows Greenland's ice loss is accelerating.


"I'm surprised you played that card. It had nothing to do with the topic and nobody is making the claim in this thread about a Jewish conspiracy that you just threw out there.'

But that's what we've come to expect from people who have nothing of substance with which to support their unsupportable opinions.

Are we not used to that by now?

Andrew Brod

Oh please. Are you guys really that dense? Of course you didn't say anything about a Jewish conspiracy. But the one you're promoting is just as dumb. Do you get it now? What I did is known to many people as sarcasm. I know you're well versed in it, except apparently when someone else uses it.


Yes Andrew, I do get it which is why I threw it back at you. I think it is wacky to equate far fetched anti-Semitic conspiracy theories with a very real scientific debate on global warming and very real evidence that there may have been a very real conspiracy to cover up data. This isn't the first time, as even one of the top IPCC guys recently admitted that the GW theory was also a means to an end so if it's wrong, it won't really matter.

Brandon Burgess

"What I did is known to many people as sarcasm."

--I don't see why you feel the need to use sarcasm unless you are trying to deflect discussion away from the real issue, for whatever reason. Maybe you feel you have been proven wrong, or maybe you aren't so sure about your own position now. Those are usually the circumstances in which I would choose to make sarcastic comments rather than tackle the issue at hand. It works well sometimes, as we've seen over the last week.

Andrew Brod

My last word on this: The point, Spag, is that it's not a "real scientific debate." Would that it were. In fact, this is a debate between scientists and people who either (a) think they know more than scientists or (b) believe the scientists are involved in a conspiracy. Those falling under (a) are adept at taking things out of context, cherry-picking facts and minority opinions, and generally misunderstanding the scientific method. They also misunderstand the role of policy in responding to what we know. As for those falling under (b), well, let's just say they're misguided. In the past I've spent time on discussions like this, but no more. I probably shouldn't have commented on this silliness. So I'm leaving the field to you. If from that you conclude that you've won, that's fine by me.


In other words, Brod has nothing of value to support his little snit fit. That's why he's bailing out.

You can always count on that to happen whenever someone like Dr. Sarcasm starts off a comment with "My last words on this......."


aliens on planet gore look at GW differently:

a) global warming is a misdemeanor hoax

b) global warming is a felony hoax

"that's all i have to say about that" ~ Forrest Gump


@AB "And to my fellow Jews: We'd better take greater care with our worldwide banking conspiracy as well. These guys are good. I wouldn't be surprised if they manage to cook up another edition of our elders' protocols."

I'll contact Evelyn Goldblum at our next Mahjong game to reminder her to control the gold standard before she puts the turkey in the oven. Then we can add another chapter to the eldest protocols and go to the Catskills for a long weekend. Think Buddy Hackett would do an early show?


I'm not Jewish, but you can't go wrong with Buddy Hackett.


Personally, I preferred Uncle Miltie.

Fred Gregory

Ged.. That is a one trick pony that you keep repeating here and on other blogs which doesn't ,make it true.

Here for you is a reliable
Weather prediction

The comments to this entry are closed.