Retired climatologist Dr. Tim Ball on the Global Warming Hoax Nov. 21, 2009
In case you have not yet heard, the scientists behind the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) have been exposed through their own email conversations. At this time, it is not known who or how the emails were obtained, though much speculation has been done. From the servers at the University of East Anglica in the UK being illegally broken into and hacked, to a whistle blower protected by UK laws as well as US laws, to an insider job, a person with legitimate access to the emails have all been discussed. More will be revealed certainly. What is known for certain is that the University of East Anglica and the CRU department there do not deny the authenticity of the emails.
These emails are very clear in several things. The scientists were deliberately changing, manipulating and deleting data. They were delivering data to computer modelers that were designed to give specific results, and were determined ahead of time. They were colluding to delete emails that were under Freedom Of Information Act laws in the UK, and were deliberately adding and removing data to make it appear that Global Warming was continuing, despite blatantly obvious data, temperature measurements, as well as worldwide growing ice sheets in order to continue the myth.
Why would they want to continue the myth?
1) To continue to receive funding from various government and environmental lobby sources. They even sent out emails telling everyone when funding was coming in and where from so that they could line up at the trough. It’s all about the money, and the money right now is for making Global Warming real, even though it most clearly isn’t.
2) To continue to back up the IPCC’s false claims of Global Warming in order to pass such Global Treaties as the Copenhagen treaty. Fortunately for the people of the world, it will absolutely fail this December. It was marked for failure before these emails were made public. Now it’s just that much more certain.
3) Numerous governments across Europe have enacted Cap and Trade schemes that have cost billions in lost GDP to nations like France and Great Britain. The scope of what has been quite literally robbed from the people of those nations is staggering – in the range of hundreds of billions of dollars. The economy of Great Britain is in shambles, and the people of those nations are suffering, their cost of living has gone up so fast that the poverty level has risen past the ability of their governments to write the welfare checks.
Their governments told them this was the best for climate, when in reality they were following pied pipers from the UN the IPCC and the East Anglica University and others who were all quite literally lying through their scientific degrees. All to justify a system of taxation that is nearly as bad as anything instituted during the middle ages – taking money from the people to fund the government class.
4) The entire point of the Copenhagen treaty was to use global cap and trade schemes to take money from 1st and 2nd world countries and give it to 3rd world nations as some sort of recompense for using Carbon, a naturally occurring element, as well as the single most common element on earth.
The single most amazing thing about this whole hoax is the numbers of people that actually bought into it. The amount of money that has been poured into this black hole of corruption is nothing short of astounding. Many people have known this and upon speaking out have been derided as nuts, deniers, ect. Well today is the day for all those who have been telling the truth to stand tall and bask in the glow of “I told you so.” The Global Warming Deniers were right all along. The IPCC data was not only wrong, but deliberately wrong.
The UN, the IPCC and all those who have been pushing this farce are borderline criminals bent upon robbing the American people along with the people of the world, all while lining their own pockets richly. Yes, that means you Al Gore and George Soros, both of whom have made hundreds of millions and an Academy Award off the scheme.
For more info: If you would like to read the emails for yourself, they can be found at: http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php
Comments
Ummm... anyone with a high-school degree knows NITROGEN, not CARBON, is the most common element on Earth (at least, in the atmosphere).
That's why EARTH was mentioned specifically. CO2 makes up between 3-4% of the Earths Atmosphere.
"Dianna says:
That's why EARTH was mentioned specifically. CO2 makes up between 3-4% of the Earths Atmosphere."
ACTUALLY Dianna, its closer to .038% (notice the point before the zero). What are they teaching in school these days?
Perhaps you ought to look up the difference between saying 3% and listing it out numerically as a decimal number, which would be .03. you are mixing up your mathematical figures tjblacken.
No matter what the subject, the ability of a republican kook to keep asserting things plainly and obviously wrong is unshaken...
Fairly clear the author does not understand the science and is just plagiarizing other's work, and not doing a very good job.
As for the stolen emails, their authenticity is in doubt. It is believed some were fabricated by climate change deniers. The stolen info is already hopelessly corrupt, and full of trojans, viruses, etc.
Cotter has written in support of Orly Taitz and made numerous claims that Obama is not a citizen. She is simply not a credible source for anything.
The US has spent 70 billion dollars in grant money to these frauds and they can't predict the climate any better than than farmer's almanac. This fraud must be investigated starting with the democrat stooges who fell for this hoax. Waxman, Pelosi, Boxer, Kerry, Reid, to name a few.
Marty Wilson says:
Fairly clear the author does not understand the science and is just plagiarizing other's work, and not doing a very good job.
As for the stolen emails, their authenticity is in doubt.
Cotter has written in support of Orly Taitz and made numerous claims that Obama is not a citizen. She is simply not a credible source for anything
=================================
Maybe it is clear to you (to support your predetermined idealistic conclusion). Your ideological bent is very clear however as you don't try to explain the science but try to discredit the author. Sad tactics when you are the one tryng to defend the indefensible.
AGW has never been about any science except political science. Take the current Copenhagen where it has broken down to "we need pledges for hundreds of billions to poor countries" supporting the author's article.
As to Obama's citizenship the answer is easy. Produce a birth certificate. Instead millions of dollars and lawsuits prevail
Sorry Cryos,
Once you ask for Obama's birth certificate you forfeit all credibility.
Marty Wilson says:
Sorry Cryos,
Once you ask for Obama's birth certificate you forfeit all credibility.
===============================
Maybe in your eyes.
The left has very successfully framed your viewpoint as "the truth" but seriously why can't we ask things of our president THAT ALL OF US APPLYING FOR A NORMAL JOB HAVE TO PRODUCE?
McCain was sued, he produced documentation he was born inthe Panama Canal Zone. Why can't Obama?
I feel sorry for people like you who have been lobotimized.
Oops quick typing. Lobotomized* before you try to change the subject.
Again tell us the solid science behind your viewpoints? Oh it is just attacks and consensus huh.
Marty what you fail to realize is that having an open mind about an issue doesn't follow a script or consensus it includes entertaining plausible ideas.
I am not saying Obama is foreign born but he has not produced documentation to show he was born in the US either.
Maybe he was born in the US and is hiding the certificate because a typo in the birth certificate would make it appear he was not and he could be unjustly prevented from becoming president. There are several possibilities.
Closing your mind to believe what you want to believe and prove a predetermined conclusion has no place in science and to think otherwise shows you have no basic understanding of the scientific method.
Ever heard the phrase "carbon-based life form"? You ARE a carbon footprint.
Obama has produced documentation to show he was born in the US and Hawaii officials have verified the same. No matter what additional documentation Obama produced, you kooks would keep squawking "has not produced documentation, has not produced documentation, Polly wanna cracker!". All republicans are lying racist Anti-American traitors.
The only thing unethcial was the stealing of private emails.
How can anyone deny climate change? It takes a warp and twisted mind to insist against all evidence on something that should simply be accepted as a given.
We should argue about what to do about climate change, to deny it is happening is just ignorant foolishness.
If you are against a carbon tax say so, but don't humiliate yourself with such patently absurd claims.
It's clear that this writer no background on the subject she's writing about.
I suggest if you are a Portland civil rights writer you not write about world climate change which is a very specialized subject and requires in-depth understanding. You sound like a twerp in Disneyland, don't embarrass yourself any further.
JJ - Civil rights refers to the rights given to us and protected for us by the Constitution. Not to some single segment of society. The Liberals in government are attempting to pass legislation that will tax the American people in an unconstitutional manner which, with out a doubt is a violation of our civil rights. Congress does not have the constitutional power to impose taxes for environmental reasons, particularly when that taxation won't even come close to achieving its stated goal. Largely because its based on a hoax. Read the constitution and get educated before you lose all your freedom to ideologues out to steal your paycheck.
Acerbic, its not where he was born its who he was born TO. A british father. Even fight the smears ADMITS that he was born under the 1948 British Nationality act: "As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children." from fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html Obama was never a Natural born citizen, he was born under the jurisdiction of two other nations as well as U.S. You cannot have another nation have a claim on you and be a Natural Born Citizen. He is unconstitutional.
D says,
"Congress does not have the constitutional power to impose taxes for environmental reasons"
care to elaborate where you got your info D?
bwahahahahahahahahaha
student: oxygen is the most abundant element on earth (2nd most abundant is silicon) not nitrogen. Nitrogen, a diatomic element, is the most abundant element in the atmosphere. O & Si are found in the crust of the earth largly in the form of silicates (silicon oxides) & O2 is in the atomosphere.
The Mid IR spectra of the atmosphere shows that water is a huge absorber of Infra-red radiation. It intensely aborbs over the range of 4000 -2800 wavenumbers (cm^1) and between around 1100-1000 wavenumbers. CO2, in contrast, has only one narrow & intense peak near 2250 cm-1.
I knew anthropomoric global warming was a hoax in the mid 90's when I was teaching Chemistry in Context at a state college. After reading many articles for the class it became abundantly clear that the computer models were unreliable (BTW I am a computational chemist). Falsification of data is increasing in the world of science as the financial rewards become greater. I'm glad the fraud has been revealed
If his biological father was Frank Davis does that affect
citizenship?
I think the data was skewed, I think the fact they tried shredding the documents when asked to release them by the freedom of information act is pretty telling.
I think the global warming data that has been built on the foundation of those falisified numbers will be exponentially skewed right down the line.
I think global warming is a scam perpetrated by big corporations and wall street looking for a way to expand their profit margins by selling carbon credits as a commodity at our expense.
I think cap and trade is an excuse for more intrusion by the government and corporations to control your energy use so they have to exercise no control of theirs.
Having said all that I have both solar and wind, believe in recycle, reduce, reuse, my garden is organic, drive an economical car, and there is no reason for the amount of garbage we continually build up in our landfills.
There are just somethings that are the right thing to do. Not as a government mandate, but as responsible human
jayej,
I agree with all your points.
jayej,
I agree with all your points.
ummmmm . . . if you check any scince book it is 0.039% (thats 0.039 percent!) a.k.a 390 ppm (parts per million) expressed numerically as 0.000399
but, when trying to win an argument why resort to facts (truths)
yes...CO2 gas is currently about 390 parts per million (ppm)
As a programmer, I thought it would be interesting to spend some time reviewing the actual notes. If those are the real notes, I have serious questions about the reliability of any data from the CRU model. Something seems seriously stinky in the state of Denmark. Maybe those dissenting scientists who've been crying foul over the past years were actually telling the truth.
yes...CO2 gas is currently about 390 parts per million (ppm)
yes...CO2 gas is currently about 390 parts per million (ppm)
yes...CO2 gas is currently about 390 parts per million (ppm)
Oh Dianna! Quit trying to smear the beautiful dream of a black man being president with stupid little fact like he is not qualified to be POTUS just because he is not a natural born citizen who has no divided loyalties. Its that damn constitution that is the problem and as Obama the English subject says - it is merely a list of negatives preventing the government from doing what it should do FOR us. (For an American, this guy sure doesn't seem to understand our system of government or even sees it as the answer to oppressive governments bent on rendering all individuals as mere subjects of that government. It all sounded so good to me when I was first taught that in school in 1955. When did it become the problem rather than the solution? When someone saw that it precluded them as supreme ruler, I guess.)
Now, go back and toe the line Dianna and quit trying to confuse everyone with facts and laws.
Wendy: It is the lack of evidence that we allude to. It is the trashing of any evidence by the scientists pushing it that explains, to me, the lack of any real opposing evidence to their theory. Where are the scientists who can use science and not conjecture to prove this "obvious fact?" Consensus and science are at opposite ends of the spectrum; one being proof and the other supposition. The lack of evidence to support man-made global warming and the entire "carbon is poison" argument pushes me towards not believing in this idea. I had learned we lived in a carbon based planet, as a child, and to now try to pretend that it is the source of all our problems in the environment seems ludicrous on its face, to me. The fact that these scientists are hiding the news that CO2 is on the rise but the earth's temp is either unchanging or decreasing, tells me to "beware scientists accepting gifts."
alchemist: After reading your post, I looked up the most abundant element on earth. What a different bunch of answers! Wikipedia claims it is hydrogen and helium. Others say that because it is the most abundant in the universe, it follows that it is the most abundant on earth - which sounds foolish to me since there are entire planets made up of that gas, for the most part.
However, after some quick research, it seems that of the heavy elements, carbon is right up near the top. I was taught by my science teacher that it was the most common element in that, when burned, the most heavy element left will be carbon. Obviously there are gasses too, so what is most abundant seems to rely on the eye of the beholder and how he or she measures it. One learns something new every day, if one is somewhat aware, It seems.
"All republicans are lying racist Anti-American traitors."
LOL,let us know when you sober up. Jesus loves you.
I love how posters like Wendy and JJ come and comment on this stuff they clearly no nothing about.
1. JJ, no, YOU sound like a "twerp" saying that Civil Rights has nothing to do with climate change. LOL is all I can think to say!
2. Wendy, read a book. Ignorant foolishness? Yes dear, keep listening to the people who say the world is burning up. In the 70's, it was freezing. BAD SCIENCE. And stealing emails is your concern? Not bilking the entire world with their lies, huh? No wonder you believe the fairy tale.
The reference to Obama's nationality was very effective in derailing this conversation - I might use it myself next time I see someone seriously try and re-introduce the global-warming mantra.
Lol, so where did these bogus e-mails come from? It even states in the very first paragraph: "until I am told otherwise I have no reason to think the text on this site is either true or false." What does that even mean!? Many of the claims are also "alleged" or "apparent." I would use more reliable information if you're going to put inflammatory opinion stories like this out there on a "news" source such as Examiner. Your article is far too full of opinion to be considered journalism. It reads a lot more like a bad blog than an actual, "impartial" news item. The fact that you have Ann Coulter listed under required reading is the final nail in your coffin. Please stop being a part of the misinformation and only write about what you actually understand yourself. You're not qualified to tell us what to think. Thank you.
Has anyone else noticed that when republikooks make their claims about what these purported emails supposedly "reveal" or "prove", they never include any direct quotes from the emails or any references to back up their claims?
Hi lggy,
I am so glad you were inspired to learn more about chemistry (my favorite subject ). Knowledge is power and if you arm yourself with it you will be better prepared to spot propaganda and you won't need to resort to personal invictives to "win" your argument as some who post on this website are doing(not you lggy).
TO ALL....civility is a MUST if you want to be heard and understood. I hope to see more of it at this website.
Climate change is a Marxist hoax.They have been exposed.
WORLD'S LARGEST SCIENCE GROUP REJECTING MAN-MADE CLIMATE FEARS
www.newswithviews.com/Morano/marc104.htm
CitzenScott,
Thank you for the link. I read the article and have forwarded to those whom I know would be interested in reading it. While I'm not sure that GW is a Marxist hoax, I am convinced it is a hoax or at least an exageration. I can also confirm the furor over C&ENews editor Rudy Baum's comments. I belong to the American Chemical Society and I have the C&ENews issues in question. In addition, many of my colleagues in physical chemistry do not think AGW and it associated hysteria is scientifically sound.
What is world's largest "science group"? Is it about the usual thing when republikooks boast about how many scientists deny climate change by counting as scientist anybody who took two semesters of theology at Jerry Falwell's "university"?
acerbic,
The American Chemical Society is an world wide organization of chemists. Most have Ph.D. in chemistry and are published many times over in refereed journals.Many have done 1 -3 years of post-doctoral fellowships. Many have 7 years of post-baccalauriate education and are experts in physical, organic, biochemical, analytical, inorganic, and polymer chemistry. They include both industrial and academic chemists. To be a member you must be nominated by another member and you must verify your training in chemistry.
www.petitionproject.org/
Signed it a year ago
There's no doubt that republikooks lie about everything all the time but sometimes it's just not immediately obvious what exactly is the lie. In this latest case it is the claim that The American Chemical Society is "REJECTING MAN-MADE CLIMATE FEARS". If you actually go to their own website instead of a republikook liesite, you can see their policy position at portal.acs.org/portal/Navigate?nodeid=135 (link "Climate Change Science Letter") which says:
"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver. These conclusions are based on multiple independent lines of evidence, and contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science."
The world's largest science group of course includes some kneejerk wingnuts who automatically reject that but it's still the position of the socie
...ty. :-)
acerbic,
That's the whole point. Rudy Baum, the editor, holds that position, however, the main stream member of the ACS (scientists all) do not. After Mr. Baum published his editorial in C&ENews he was bombarded with letters from the membership outraged that he took the position that the science was decided. Grassroots chemists were very angry that the ACS Board took a position that many members did not agree with.
Acerbic, if you want to be viewed as a thoughtful contributor to this debate I suggest you refrain from stereotyping, name calling and accusing those who disagree with you of nefarious things. That is a sure sign that either you really don't understand the underlying principals of the topic or you are aware that your rebutals are meritless.
Are you trying to claim now that Rudy Baum is the only one in the society holding that position? Funny how that position letter is not even signed by him on behalf of ACS but by Thomas Lane, the president of the society. A couple of wingnuts can of course create quite a letter bombardment but if the majority of the members really were opposed to the policy statement, I'd imagine they would change their leadership. Not happening.
Good Grief Acerbic!.. Believe what you want. I know a hopeless case when I read one. The truth will become evident very soon dispite your denials. ......Did you ever take a chemistry or physics course? Don't answer that... I'd rather not know.
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!