Maybe I should’ve deleted ALL the emails!

I really thought this period of time would always be remembered as some of the most dismal days in American history. Make no mistake, these are dark days. Unemployment is nearing an all-time high and there is no end in sight. Our President cannot make a decision whether he wants to win the war on terror or what he wants to call it. Debt is running out of control and the Congress is about to pass new health care legislation that the American people have said loudly they don’t want and don’t need.

But as dark and ominous as all of those things are (and I just scratched the surface), I am sure I will remember this year as the time when the global warming hoax was finally revealed. For the last year, I have been detailing the rapid decline of the believability of the global warming/climate change proponents. (If you type “global warming” in the search box, you can read the others.) But the latest shot across the bow is probably the fatal one. In case you haven’t heard, someone (we don’t know for sure who. Maybe a hacker, maybe a whistle-blower on the inside) uploaded a package of files detailing the subterfuge exercised by the scientists involved in the hoax. These files, including over a thousand emails and several thousand other documents, originated at the Climate Research Unit of the East Anglia University in Britain (CRU). This lab has been at the forefront of the global warming hoax, working closely with the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In fact, most of the emails refer to “AR4” which is the IPCC’s shorthand for their Fourth Assessment Report. The IPCC has been the major panel which has been pushing the idea of man-made global warming for decades now.

So now you know the “who” of these documents, here’s the “what.” I have read some of the media’s examples, but I have decided to use some of my own. I have by no means read ALL of the documents in the folder labeled “FOI2009.” But I have read enough that the tone is clear to me. For example, in one email, Phil Jones, the director of the CRU, writes to Michael Mann, an American climatologist who also does a sizable amount of work for the IPCC. He says:

Mike,
This is for YOURS EYES ONLY. Delete after reading – please !  I’m trying to redress the balance. One reply from Pfister said you should make all available !!  Pot calling the kettle black – Christian doesn’t make his methods available.  I replied to the wrong Christian message so you don’t get to see what he said. Probably best.  Told Steve separately and to get more advice from a few others as well as Kluwer and legal. PLEASE DELETE – just for you, not even Ray and Malcolm.

Cheers
Phil

There are other references like this in other emails. Phil encouraging people to delete emails of conversations they’ve had. This to me is important for a variety of reasons. In the US, and now in the UK, there is legislation called the Freedom of Information Act. That is, anyone doing work for the government must keep a papertrail of their communications so anyone who requests them may see what their government is doing with taxpayer dollars. Since Mr. Mann works for a state university (at the time of the email, he worked for the Univeristy of Virginia and now works for Penn State), he would of course be required to keep this papertrail. Mr. Jones is covered by the same legislation in the UK. To me, someone as well respected as Jones and Mann colluding to delete emails in violation of law says there must be something in those emails incriminating enough to risk their going to jail! So that begs the question, what are they trying to prevent us from finding out. One thing is for sure, this deosn’t need context to be understood. If someone is requesting emails to be deleted in violation of law, they’re trying to cover something up. . .period! And remember, these are not underlings or interns or flunkies. These are the big-wigs!

In another email between Mann and Jones, the subject of providing data to independent researchers comes up. Stephen McIntyre, a climate researcher from Toronto, had asked for the underlying research for his so-called “hockey stick” graph. For a complete explanation of the “hockey stick” issue, check Wikipedia. Basically, Mann and Jones were trying to show the aggressive nature of global warming by producing a graph with a sudden and dramatic rise in temperature beginning in the 90’s. The problem was that is there aren’t accurate records of temperature before the 1800’s. So. . .they made them up. I mean. . .estimated them. McIntyre (among others) didn’t like their estimations and wanted them to back up their graph with data. Here’s Mann’s conversation with Jones after receiving McIntyre’s querie:

Phil,
I would immediately delete anything you receive from this fraud. You’ve probably seen now the paper by Wahl and Ammann which independently exposes McIntyre and McKitrick for what it is–pure crap. Of course, we’ve already done this on “RealClimate”, but Wahl and Ammann is peer-reviewed and independent of us. I’ve attached it in case you haven’t seen (please don’t pass it along to others yet). It should be in press shortly. Meanwhile, I would NOT RESPOND to this guy. As you know, only bad things can come of that. The last thing this guy cares about is honest debate–he is funded by
the same people as Singer, Michaels, etc… Other than this distraction, I hope you’re enjoying the holidays too…

talk to you soon,
mike

While this isn’t necessarily incriminating, it does reflect an underlying animosity for anyone whose opinion they disagree with. They apparently don’t feel that their data could stand up to scrutiny so they demonize anyone who wants to review their work. Peer review is typical in the scientific community, but not with these guys. As I read over the emails, there are several people who express difficulty with their assumptions. Their responses are never straightforward.

However, the smoking gun appears to be an email Jones wrote saying, “I’ve just completed Mike’s (Mann) 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.” Again, I’m not sure we need any context for this. If a scientist, no not just a scientist, the head of the most important climate research unit in the world, says he is using a “trick” to “hide” a decline in temperatures, that’s a very important piece of information. At best, it means that global warming theory is far from “settled science,” as we have been told by Al Gore and others for many years now. At worst, it is fraud perpetrated on the entire world by a cabal of unethical “scientists” for more than thirty years!

Make no mistake, they will not go quietly into that good night. There is too much at stake here. We are talking billions of dollars in research grants worldwide not to mention the lawsuits, threats of criminal prosecution and professional reputations. Well, perhaps the professional reputations are beyond repair at this point, we’ll see. I just hope that as we begin a new decade, we can get politics out of the laboratory and back into the gutter where it belongs!

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

One response to “Maybe I should’ve deleted ALL the emails!

  1. Pingback: Can I recycle the last thirty years of my life? « An American Idiot

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s