.
If you were an honest person. . .

That's a might big "if" amongst the crowd of people who are subsidized by public money.

Next to go: nutritionists. Please.

.

Strong! And beats Pinocchio graphics...Well done.

Mainstream Media is going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to cover this story, and it's going to take an awful lot of dragging and kicking and screaming. Why? Because they have either been in on the scam, or taken in by the scam, all along. And the preening, pretentious pseudo-intellectuals who populate MSM are oh-so-very loathe to admit they can be hoodwinked and bamboozled just like the rubes and hicks they are (they think) so very, very different from.

There is a legal idea, as INAL I can't put a name to it, which states, all of your evidence shall be considered false if any part of your evidence is proved false, i.e. if you're caught in perjury all of your other evidence is struck out.

Science should, perhaps, consider adopting this attitude.

"...And when somebody, some hero somewhere - inside the organization or out - finally blew the whistle on the party..."

Emails among THEM would be wonderful to see.

I think it's more malevolent than "rollicking asides, nods, nudges and winks". Then again - Stalin, Mao, and Che smiled for the cameras.

Don't piss down my back and tell me it's acid rain...

An agreeable person is one who agrees with you. Keep that in mind.

Not only is this gambit a good one to start opening the eyes of our perhaps wavering friends; but also an opportunity to examine our own lives through the bit and byte trail.

Thanks for yet another insightful post.

The task now before the MSM is how to hide the decline. Of science.

Last but not least, one has to ask the dangerous question. How many more disciplines of science has this lying malaise affected because so many "men of Science" have more to lose personally than science has to gain? The religion of science is in need of it's own Reformation.

What is clear is that the CRU should be shutdown.

If we assume that this "ClimateGate" is nothing, then clearly by the then obvious fact that the "science is settled", we don't need them any more, and the money can best be spent elsewhere. And all you "climate scientists" out there, I'm sorry but you hitched your horse to a wagon that isn't moving any more.

On the other hand, if "ClimateGate" is the worst scientific scandal of the century, these rascals should not be in the business any more.

In light of recent events, I have decided to make public my own data and results, compiled after years of rigorous research and analysis. I do this in the honor of the CRU crew, inasmuch as my conclusions should validate theirs based on the different, yet just as reliable, scientific criteria.

Although I do not have the original data sets, I have concluded that anthropogenic global warming was very likely caused by a guy named Lenny in 1982. Lenny definitely lived in Utah. Or Africa. Or perhaps Asia. QED.

I could explain more, but anyone who quibbles with my work is an obvious denier of everything and believer of nil. Besides, I have a grant proposal to prepare (on a manual typewriter, of course....no need to exacerbate what Lenny hath wrought.)

Ta

Gerard or others in-the-know: If and when you learn of the legal defense fund for the whistle-blower, would you please publish the information immediately? This person is a moral giant and merits our support.

While it is undeniably true that the current crop of eco warriors are hypocritical self serving charlatans, and that algore and his ilk are posturing phonies, there is another ugly truth that must be acknowledged. Like it or not, human activity and rampant overpopulation is killing the planet. The decline in ocean species is not an invention of corrupt scientists. Stand, for example at the intersection of Wilshire and the 405 in los Angeles, and ask your self if this vehicular activity looks sustainable over the millennia. It is not. The earth, however, takes a longer view, and will look at human overpopulation as another failed experiment of evolution. Sorry.

"Mainstream Media is going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming"
I couldn't agree more ELC, there is a battle g for the hearts and minds of the majority. Not only the MSM, but bloggers also: e.g. "Boing, Boing, with its' put-down of anyone who is not a true believer. I'm unsure who will win this epic battle.

Use the comments columns in your local newspapers. Just be aware that if your paper is like mine they'll stop printing AGW stories.

Mike Mann, Phil Jones and a host of others should be placed on a suicide watch. I hope the watch fails as completely as their theory of AGW.

These guys are toast. If I was a AWG alarmist, I'd want them horsewhipped for bringing disrepute to the cause. They have truly beclowned themselves.

The truth is out there. It can't be ignored much longer.

AWG = AGW. Also, AWB = Average White Band for you youngsters out there.

The tool makes me preview, and still I can't get it right. Oy.

I am a long-time skeptic of Global Warming alarmism. When I first saw the famous "hockey stick" graph, my FIRST reaction was "where's the Medieval Warming Epoch and the Little Ice Age?" I pointed this out to friends and co-workers and was ignored as they raved about the world-saving efforts of Al Gore. Now we know that Mann and Jones DELIBERATELY concealed those politically incorrect bits of data. Also we now know that the proxy data they cherry picked for that graph showed a DECLINE (this is the "hide the decline" issue) when plotted over the last 20 years, so they THREW OUT that data and replaced it with temperature readings from weather stations that are both heat-biased due to urban heat island effects and we know from the "Harry_Readme" file that the data from those stations was pure unadulturated garbage. But higher-temperature garbage. The combinatin of throwing out the inconvenient truths of the MWE and the LIA plus replacing the DECLINING portion of the proxy data with artificially heat-biased NEW data produces a beautiful hockey stick. This isn't science, this is three-card monty played on a trillion dollar scale.

When their scheme began to be challenged we also see from their emails that their reaction was not to shine the light of truth on their work, but to crush dissenting opinions through backroom shenanigans such as pressuring publications to fire editors (who were fired) and to not publish scientific papers from anyone who did not toe the AGW line.

As this led to legal requests for data, analysis and source code, we see from these emails that the response again was not to shine the light of truth on their work, but to instead ILLEGALLY conspire to destroy data (data which has been coincidentally "lost" to us now).

The only reasonable conclusion that any objective observer can take from this is that Jones, Mann, et. al. are corrupt, their work is a fraud and any conclusions you can draw from their work has to be thrown out entirely. They should be prosecuted for the crimes they have committed and they should have their doctorates revoked and should be immediately removed from any and all scientific panels, groups, associations, etc.

Now, does that mean that the climate is not warming? Of course not. It just means that you can't trust ANYTHING these people did.

But the unfortunate reality is that these fraudulent criminals provided the HUGE BULK of the "science" that has driven worldwide government policy at the UN, the EU, the USA and everywhere else in the world. To say that they are only one data set and that other data sets agree with them is to reveal a deep ignorance about how climate science has been done over the last three decades. The reality is that the fudged and manipulated data that Jones, Mann and their minions provided is present in 90 - 95% of the "alternate" data sets that are out there. In reality there IS NO alternate data that can be used to recreate their efforts. To recreate their work would require going back to the TENS OF THOUSANDS of data collection points and regathering the raw data all over again. This is a HUGE undertaking, but it is the ONLY way that we can trust any climate science going forward.

There is only one rational approach to this issue. Climate science needs to be put under the same scrutiny as other critical areas of science that drive life-altering policy decisions. They need to be under the same scrutiny as pharmaceutical, medical, nuclear and aerospace research is held to. Data must be preserved as originally collected. Any manipulation of that data must be documented fully. Computer models must have transparent source code. Those models must be able to pass quality assurance tests to ensure the code itself does not have bias.

Finally, those models must be able to take the data from prehistoric up until the year 2000 and accurately predict temperature increases or decreases from 2000 to 2010 before ANYONE makes any policy decisions based on what those models predict about 2010 - 2030.

Of course, all of that assumes that TRUTH is actually the goal. As I have learned over the past few decades when debating this issue with others, TRUTH has never been the goal. The goal is now and always has been to cripple the economic engines which drive this world in order to "save the world" from industry.

This will probably go down in history as the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the human species. And deservedly so.

I heard the new head of the EPA dismiss this scandal saying that there is copious amounts of data from US Scientists to support the global warming bunk. I've not seen this addressed anywhere in the blogosphere. Not knowing much about it myself, I'm wondering if anyone has a suggestion where I might find this.

Every weekend i used to pay a quick visit this web page, as i wish for enjoyment, since this this web page conations actually fastidious funny information too.