Are the “Climate Change” Emails a Tempest in a Teapot?
For “climate change” skeptics like me, the recently revealed emails from scientists who aggressively have promoted the current political doctrine are very telling. Not surprisingly, those at the center of this controversy are claiming that the words we have read mean nothing, and that governments must continue their environmental policies – or else.
A gaggle of scientists, journalists, academics, and politicians have been telling us for years that unless governments can push through policies that will end modern life as we know it, then “global warming” will, uh, end modern life as we know it. Another way to put it is that unless the governments of the earth agree with one another to commit suicide, we are going to die.
Perhaps, the best analogy for this entire affair is the Wizard of Oz’s telling Dorothy and her friends to “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.” When scientists explain in private emails how they try to make sure that only their views are published in academic journals, but now tell us they really are just trying to keep “bad science” out of the discourse, then one only can conclude that this is an update of the famous movie scene.
As one who has published a number of academic papers, I can recognize a rigged system, and what Americans have had foisted on them for the last decade is fraudulent. However, we need to understand how the game is played and how the outcomes are fixed.
In 1998 three researchers published a paper that claimed that for thousands of years global temperatures had held steady, but in the last century, as people allegedly released more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, world temperatures suddenly shot upward, creating the infamous “hockey stick” effect. For environmentalists and politicians like Al Gore, this was a godsend. We had “proof” that human beings were causing “global warming,” and unless something was done now, we were going to burn up the earth.
A decade earlier, NASA scientist James Hansen had testified before Al Gore’s Senate committee that not only had “global warming” arrived and that it was human-caused, but the drought that hit much of the U.S. farm belt that summer was a direct result of that warming. (That the next summer was relatively cool and wet also was attributed, perversely, to warming. In fact, the True Believers have attributed every cold day and every snowstorm to the same thing: global warming.)
The “hockey stick” was all that was needed to move the process from creating mass hysteria to “doing something,” which has meant draconian environmental policies that already are creating perverse economic effects. Not surprisingly, Gore made the “hockey stick” the centerpiece of his An Inconvenient Truth documentary, which won him both an Oscar and the Nobel Peace Prize.
However, the “hockey stick” itself had huge problems. The first was that other scientists could not replicate the results using the same data. When one publishes a paper with statistical analysis, one is supposed to make the data available so that others can try to find the same results, which is a powerful tool in keeping researchers honest.
It turned out that the mathematical algorithm used to transform the data was created in a way that no matter what one put into the equation, one received the same results. This is fraud, pure and simple, but because the “hockey stick” resonated with environmentalists and their political allies, it became the centerpiece for anyone who wanted to claim that modern economies are killing the planet.
Furthermore, governments have rigged the game by funding most “climate science.” How likely are they to finance studies that don’t justify the political class’s ambition to control the lives of others?
Hansen suggests that the executives of energy companies be tried for crimes against humanity and nature because they have given the public “misinformation” about global warming. And Gore has called for them to be charged with securities fraud for denying its severity.
Their “science” may be a joke, but these people are dead serious about imposing their will.
Comment by Tallahassee DC on 2 December 2009:
Perhaps this will also give pause to those who criticize chiropractic because it is “not scientific”. Chiropractic researchers have produced a plethora of preliminary studies over the last two decades, but we have come as far as we can in the academic ghetto where we are confined by deliberate political maneuvering on the part of organized medicine. Caught in a “Catch-22″, we are not included in scientific academia because we are not scientific, and we are not scientific because we do not have any published studies in scientific academia.
Comment by humanpersonjr on 2 December 2009:
I fail to see any connection between the AGW scam and chiropractic, but, whatever…
The great big Climate Change scare might be nearly over, thanks to a few brave individuals:
McIntire and McKittrick
Watts
Monckton
Horner
Anonymous Hacker (probably Whistleblower)
All take a bow. We owe each of you a debt of gratitude.
Pingback by Tempest in a Teapot « thak’s cool links on 2 December 2009:
[...] The Freeman | Are the “Climate Change” Emails a Tempest in a Teapot?. More on the global warming debacle. [...]
Comment by Bill Reed on 2 December 2009:
Just as nothing dissuades environmental-cases, nothing, it seems, embarrasses them either. But, then again, their ideological progenitors weren’t embarrassed to find that Stalin, whom they had enthusiastically and wholeheartedly supported, had apparently broken far more “eggs” (20M – 70M for Mao) making his utopian “omelet”, than they had imagined.
If they’ve never apologized for that; if that was not enough to give them pause in their support for socialism; if that was not sufficient to cause embarrassment and shame, I don’t think we should hold our breath waiting for them to learn anything from this latest ploy to impose their will on their neighbors.
This is what happens when the people accept the governance of (and elect!) co-dependent dysfunctional narcissists. Their continued election is symptomatic of the failure of our education system: another example of their handiwork. Not only is their purported “science” rigged, so is the education system they’ve subjected us to.
Comment by OneCitizenSpeaking on 2 December 2009:
If nothing else, the leaked e-mailes serve to suggest that the peer-review process was not a stamp on scientific certainty, but a publishing process subject to editorial whim. In addition, we can see the data being tortured and stored in similar-named and highly confusing datasets without additional notations as to the origins, contents, formats and prior mathematical manuipulation. We are also finding the some of the raw data has been accidently discarded for reasons of “space” although the data in electronic format would have conveniently fit in a closet. In the final analysis, we cannot allow public policy to be created on the manipulation of a specious hypothesis used to drive a political agenda.
Comment by Donald Coder on 3 December 2009:
Fraud and religious zeal have been evident to anyone with a scientific background and curiosity. Tragically, the power of government greed for control and tax dollars are now moving this hoax along with remarkable success. It will be difficult and perhaps impossible to bring reason and evidence to a position of leadership. Donald M. Coder, MD, PhD
Comment by Ed on 3 December 2009:
The problem with science today is that too much of it is funded by government. Funding goes to research topics that politicians favor, and politicians favor research that convinces us to give them more and more of our money and liberty. Government should not fund any scientific research whatsoever.
Comment by FUC on 3 December 2009:
Mr. Anderson how did you find out about the fraudulent algorithm.
Comment by Anson Panz on 3 December 2009:
Mencken had the appropriate take on chiropractic– http://www.chirobase.org/12Hx/mencken.html