CRU leaks… meh
December 9, 2009 · By Mark Peters
Just when you thought reasonable people might sit up and take notice of climategate… “hockey stick” graphs… at Copenhagen.
Michel Jarraud at Copenhagen
Confused? Unimpressed? Gobsmacked? Well, follow the money. Lorne Gunter:
The proof that the current climate summit in Copenhagen is not about environment and science, but rather about politics and ideology, can be seen in that fact that two weeks ago, some young computer programmer’s conscience got the better of him and he released computer code and emails exposing the skeleton of climate change. Yet almost no one in Copenhagen is talking about it.
It doesn’t matter that almost no one outside the climate change industry had heard of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia before the release. The CRU’s centrality to the mystery of Eco faith is undeniable. The CRU and GISS — NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies— are two of the four major repositories of temperature records in the world, the only two that show continuing warming and the two that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change relies on for its forecasts of disaster.
Scientists from GISS are also implicated in the torquing of climate data revealed in the recent CRU leaks. This is not surprising given that the head of GISS, James Hansen, is Al Gore’s science guru. He testified on behalf of environmental terrorists who attacked a U.K. electrical station, saying they should not be convicted because their vandalism was in the public interest. He has called coal trains “death trains.”
Nevertheless, delegates in the Danish capital have practically glossed over the CRU “Climategate” leaks. That’s partly because they refuse to let the facts get in the way of their cause, but it’s mostly because Copenhagen isn’t about climate change as a physical phenomenon, but rather climate change as an opportunity to regulate people’s lives and incomes on a global scale (emphasis added).
Regulation == more government == more taxation == more socialism == less freedom.
Update 1 PM EST: A tidy point overlooked by some in George Monbiot’s anti-Canada screed, “A concerted campaign has now begun to expel Canada from the Commonwealth.” This, based directly upon the pseudo-science behind said manufactured “hockey stick” and the foregone conclusions that a) carbon dioxide is absolutely to blame for the highly arguable increase in global temperatures and b) the contestable warming is unprecedented in history c) because of the industrial revolution.
I am inclined to laugh at the absurdity of the effort except for its serious angle, which is an indication of the horribly misguided zeal and incredible moral inversion amongst the AGW faithful, such as Mr. Monbiot. Consider for a moment that Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe was merely suspended from the Commonwealth in 2002 despite its well-documented sham elections, rampant corruption, organized coercion, political assassinations, oppression of political dissent and overall economic oppression of its own people. Canada is a model country to the world in politics and economics with an excellent justice system and a Charter and Constitution that is the envy of many, yet we have a relatively immense oil field in Northern Alberta, the development of which is causing some pollution. This makes us greater sinners than the Mugabe regime.
Ye gods.
Unfortunately something rotten is about to happen in the state of Demark where our so-called “world leaders” are expected to acquiesce to a tax escalating and wealth transferring scam that will immediately and massively increase the cost of goods and services such as gasoline, electricity and most industrial produced products. The increase in the price of Canadian goods would make them less competitive in world markets. Canadian producers will suffer in export markets and domestically in competition with goods imported from countries that do not impose high implicit tax on CO2 emissions. The results of course will be massive manufacturing and service industry job losses leading to a much lower standard of living for us and especially our children..
A Canadian PM more apprehensive pursuant to the economy and welfare of Canadians than he is about his own prospects would enthusiastically and ardently oppose any form of the fraud known as “Cap, Tax, & Transfer” which will devastate the Canadian economy, tens of thousands of our jobs, and diminish our standard of living. Now that communism has been invalidated, “Climatism” is the new “ism” adopted by the extremists as their vehicle to increase taxes and transfer wealth just as Trudeau’s National Energy Program was intended. The inconvenient truth is that the job slaughtering “Cap, Tax & Transfer” scheme that left-plunging Harper and Prentice are about to inflict us is a stealth strategy for enormous, disingenuous long-term, structural tax increases on all Canadian households. “Cap, Tax & Transfer” will evolve around an economic Ponzi scheme that includes an enormous new source of tax revenue to the Canadian government to allow it to continue its current expansion into the private sector, will demolish tens of thousands of high paying manufacturing and service jobs, result in the transfer of political power to the emerging global governance, will be a devastating disasters for our children’s standard of living, and a overwhelming transfer of wealth starting with the Climate Change Fund (CCF) which is being established to transfer at least $10 billion annually to the nations (many corrupt, some communist) of the world who repudiate creating their own wealth.
The latest scientific evidence clearly illustrates that the climate has not changed in the last eleven years, and that the so-called “climate change” is a socialistic hoax to transfer wealth. Therefore, at this time our PM must not annihilate the Canadian economy just to please the left-wing extremists who insist on higher taxes and wealth transfers. British climate expert Anthony Cary reports that “climate science is in its infancy….only fools or rogues pretend to be sure of what is going on……Our climate models are barely predictive”. Therefore reasonable people would think that the first step must include research and informed discussions rather than relying on erroneous computer models which are based on left-bias assumptions and manipulated data by some rogue “scientists”. Step two would mandate the private sector including the investment community, possibly with tax incentives, to research, develop, produce, and implement technology necessary, such as carbon capture and sequestration, to resolve any climate problems that might be scientifically and legitimately confirmed to be acute
It is becoming increasing transparent that the so-called “climate change” panic is nothing more than a deception by far-left wealth redistributing advocates. Unfortunately Canada does not have a small-c fiscal conservative PM, nor are small-c conservatives represented in the Conservative Party or the Canadian Parliament, so Harper will likely fully partake in this swindle which will begin slaughtering the Canadian economy.
machiavelli,
With the CBC gleefully reporting our government’s Fossil Award, giving Greenpeace much more coverage than they deserve and referring to our nation as being ‘dirty’ because of the oil sands I have to assume that Harper is waiting for the skeptics to catch up with him.
Already there are more Canadians (and Americans) unsure of this science than there are believers but that’s never stopped the MSM from attacking anyway.
I don’t think anything will come of Copenhagen and over the next year the battle against this world-wide mass hysteria will get down and dirty. At that point I fully expect the Conservatives to be at the vanguard.
If they aren’t then I will be truly pissed.
neild: i sincerely hope your right.
i have knocked this around in my tiny little head for a while now as to what i can do to avoid being hit by such a devastating policy. each time i think about it the only solution i can think of is revolution, the bloody kind. this is after all a war of ideology with both sides of this debate firmly entrenched into their respective churches, the “deniers” church of common sense and the alarmists church of nazi-commie copiers.
pay down your debts, dont buy nothing new lest it be a gun (purely for protection everyone!!!!!), lots of food lots of water, and be ready when the economy takes a nosedive by the time this treaty is enacted.
I’m knocking off an email every day to my MP, Enviro Min Prentice and Mr Harper.
I keep throwing Tony Abbott from Australia at them, new opposition party leader(their “Liberal” = our “Conservative”), elected on an internal revolt of his own party’s stated support for their minority governments(Rudd et al) version of the Cap and Trade, killed the bill on vote and they just went out and won the next 2 bye elections. If the bill is re-introduced and flops again, I believe Rudd has to call an election of both parliament and senate, some think Abbott may have the numbers to be in charge if that happens.
I like how he talks,
“TONY ABBOTT: Well Tony, I’m on the record on all of these things and I refuse to be terrified of the future. I think that humankind has been pretty good at coping with the challenges that we’ve been given.
If you look at Roman times, grapes grew up against Hadrian’s Wall – medieval times they grew crops in Greenland. In the 1700s they had ice fairs on the Thames. So the world has been significantly hotter, significantly colder than it is now. We’ve coped.
I don’t say there aren’t problems, haven’t been problems, might not be problems, but I refuse to be terrified of the court” (court seems to be in reference to the Inquisition) http://www.abc.net.au/lateline.....748161.htm
Hey, what do you know, a politician saying something reasonable. I told Haper et al that they needed to have someone stand up soon and say something in line with this, not that I expect that anytime soon. I do expect the backlash to be spectacular, but I may be deluding myself that this will gather enough critical mass.
and what do you know, NOAA has great ice core data, great post for perspective for the climate newbie, you won’t see it gracing the covers of Nature, or any IPCC report, well maybe the last 800 years, but never the whole thing, LMAO. http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3553
This is for Machiavelli,
The following was posted by “Barry” in the Ottawa citizen 49 minutes prior to your post (9:11 am on december 9)
http://communities.canada.com/.....03440.aspx
“The latest scientific evidence clearly illustrates that the climate has not changed in the last eleven years, and that the so-called “climate change” is a socialistic hoax to transfer wealth. Therefore, at this time our PM must not annihilate the Canadian economy just to please the left-wing extremists who insist on higher taxes and wealth transfers. British climate expert Anthony Cary reports that “climate science is in its infancy….only fools or rogues pretend to be sure of what is going on……Our climate models are barely predictive”. Therefore reasonable people would think that the first step must include research and informed discussions rather than relying on erroneous computer models which are based on left-bias assumptions and manipulated data by some rogue “scientists”. Step two would mandate the private sector including the investment community, possibly with tax incentives, to research, develop, produce, and implement technology necessary, such as carbon capture and sequestration, to resolve any climate problems that might be scientifically and legitimately confirmed to be acute
It is becoming transparent that the so-called “climate change” panic is nothing more than a deception by far-left wealth redistributing advocates. Unfortunately Canada does not have a small-c fiscal conservative PM, nor are small-c conservatives represented in the Conservative Party or the Canadian Parliament, so Harper will likely fully partake in this swindle which will begin the dismantling of the Canadian economy.”
We have a couple scenarios that could be played out here.
Hopefully the easiest is that you used another handle and that you copy pasted the same text word for word from another one of your posts and that you just post the same opinion across multiple blogs.
Another scenario is that the timing on the sites are not accurate and that someone ripped you off. If this is the case, I’m just bringing it to your attention.
Another scenario is that you plagiarized a post on another site and used it here.
By the way, I did some minor fact checking and I’m having trouble finding any reference to Anthony Cary as a climate expert. What I have found is that he’s the British High Commissioner to Canada, and tends to debate points from the right on climate change.
Here’s a short summary of Anthony’s background.
About the High Commissioner
Full Name: Anthony Joyce Cary
Date of Birth: 1st July 1951
Married to: Clare
Children: Three sons (1978, 1980, 1983) One daughter (1985)
2003-2006: Stockholm, Ambassador
1999-2003: Chef de Cabinet to Chris Patten, European Commissioner for External Relations
1996-1999: Washington, Counsellor Political and Public Affairs
1992-1996: FCO, Head of European Union Department
1989-1992: Deputy Chef de Cabinet to Leon Brittan, European Commissioner for Competition and Financial Services
1986-1989: Kuala Lumpur, Head of Chancery
1984-1986: Private Secretary to Malcolm Rifkind and subsequently Lynda Chalker
1982-1984: FCO, European Community Department
1980-1982: Harkness Fellow at Stanford Business School (taking MBA)
1978-1980: FCO, Policy Planning staff
1975-1978: Berlin, British Military Government
1973-1975: FCO, South Asia Department.
Simply put, he’s not a climate expert.
I don’t think that the movement to have Canada expelled from the commonwealth is particularly serious. It’s an idea that has been tossed out there to see if it can grow a life of it’s own. I saw it on yahoo.com this morning and it looked like tabloid journalism.
To my knowledge, the only people that have publicly called for the expulsion of Canada from the commonwealth are the Polaris Institute and Greenpeace.
Personal views aside, I don’t think anyone has ever been ‘expelled’ from the commonwealth. There have been some suspensions from time to time though.
RD
I hope you are correct; that Monbiot’s “concerted campaign” truly lacks any momentum or heft.
You are also correct about Commonwealth expulsion, however I think the point about the morally inverted world of environmentalists stands. The Oil Sands do not make Canada the moral equivalent of Mugabe’s Zimbabwe.
I agree with you, but, I think the notion Monbiot is putting forward is even more ludicrous because he isn’t even indicating that the oil sands are the moral equivalent of Mugabe’s thuggery. Zimbabwe was merely suspended, these are calls for Canada to be expelled.
The way I see it, if the tar sands were found in the English countryside, they would also be exploiting it much to the chagrin of the rest of the world.
It’s not the supply of oil that is the problem, it’s the consumption. Give me an adequate alternative for transportation, and I will use it. I’m currently putting my family of 4 in a Corolla, and I think that this is a big step since I used to drive a minivan in the past.
To change gears a bit, I’m surprised there hasn’t been much reaction to my observations about Machiavelli’s post.
The major outrages being used by the right at the moment is the apparent dishonesty in the handling of climate-data ie climate gate. Kettle meet pot…
You guys want an honest discourse here afterall…
RD
A fair point about the tack taken by Monbiot, Canada apparently beyond the pale of Mugabe’s regime.
We drove a 4-door Honda Civic until the birth of munchkin 3. This precipitated an upgrade to an Odyssey because of the impossibility of fitting three car seats across the backseat of the Civ. Although I endorse mining the Oil Sands, I, like you, take as much care as possible to reduce consumption. We sold our dream home in the country and moved to the city to drastically cut down on travel and avail of public transit.
RE your response to Machiavelli — I’ve been waiting for him to address the matter. Perhaps if he doesn’t respond within a few days I’ll track down his email and give him a shout. Until then I reserve comment, as I suspect are most.
“Until then I reserve comment, as I suspect are most.”
I’m still working on that.
New years resolution….
RD,
I didn’t respond to your response to machiavelli, as I didn’t think there was a whole lot to add. It was nice that you brought some research to the discussion.
I was concerned it was going under the rug. This individual has posted some explosive stuff in the past and now I’m starting to wonder what he’s about. I’ve suspected there was a concerted effort to get talking points in blogs and comment boards across the net and this looked like one of those situations. Ever read the editorial section and see familiar names week in week out?
It’s unfortunate that the only research I brought had to do about Anthony Cary and not actual climate change research.