Posted by: adoseofliberty | December 2, 2009

An Inconvenient Fraud

The Hack Heard ‘Round the World

Behold the power of technology.  The same “hackers” that are widely seen as the bane of the digital modern society, costing billions per year by way of identity theft, have in one fell swoop potentially served the greater good in a manner that might well add a proverbial badge of  honor to their enduring disrepute.  These techno-miscreants broke into the archives of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in the UK and posted online more than 1000 emails and over 3000 document files.  The CRU is one of the leading research centers on “climate change” and is frequently referenced by the United Nations and others as an authority on global warming science.

Among other things, the emails illuminate the attempts of some of the scientists to silence and exclude skeptics and opposing viewpoints, to massage, manipulate and even destroy data, and to blacklist journals that don’t jive with their climate change religion.  Phil Jones, director of the CRU, responded to the events: “My colleagues and I accept that some of the published emails do not read well.”  True, most people using email these days are guilty of sometimes cryptic and esoteric language among colleagues and coworkers, the occasional profanity and most don’t even bother about grammar or spelling, but it is obvious that the uproar is about the possibility that the “climate-tracking game has been rigged from the start.”  A message from the anonymous hacker accompanying the posted files read:

We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps. We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code and documents.

Too important to be kept under wraps.” What is truly amazing about this statement, mostly unmentioned in the media, is that a renegade computer geek understands the significance of the validity and accuracy of climate change science more than most politicians and world leaders.

That is correct.  Some anonymous nerd believes that if the United States, alas, the world, is going to craft policy and create laws that will have enormous effects on the economy, from billions of dollars in new regulatory costs to the political favoring of “green” companies, that perhaps there should be a more clear consensus and verification of this so-called “climate science.”  Listening to the news and statements of our leaders these days, however, one can only assume that global warming (or is it global cooling now?) is as real as night and day.  One politician, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican, expresses the concern that all leaders and constituents alike should be occupied with:

“We’re being asked as a Congress to make major changes in American society in energy use,” he said. “The scientists may be able to change their story and do more research, but once Congress passes a law, it will be as difficult to undo the consequences of that law as putting milk back in the cow.”


Bret Stephens tries to tackle what might be the motivation behind what is being called “climategate” in describing the massive amounts of funding being pumped into climate research by governments and science foundations. Mr. Jones of the CRU apparently received some $19 million in research grants between 2000 and 2006.  The European Commission recently appropriated $3 billion for climate research and the United States has several billion dollars lined up for NASA, NOAA’s, and the National Science Foundation.  He argues that this taxpayer-provided fund supply is creating its own demand and that “universities, research institutes, advocacy groups and their various spin-offs and dependents have emerged from the woodwork” to take stake in this new goldmine.

All of them have been on the receiving end of climate change-related funding, so all of them must believe in the reality (and catastrophic imminence) of global warming just as a priest must believe in the existence of God.

These new beneficiaries, their jobs, careers, and livelihoods, are all dependent upon the premise that climate change is in fact a real and imposing threat, the hypothesis they are actively seeking to prove.  Stephens points out that “[t]his is what’s known as a vested interest, and vested interests are an enemy of sound science.”

Richard Lindzen, professor of meteorology at MIT, explains that there is a general consensus on the fact that the globally averaged temperature anomaly (GATA), has gone up by approximately 1.5 degrees since the mid-1800s.  He points out, however, that the quality of the data behind this is poor and that the “little ice age” from the 15th to 18th centuries might be exaggerating the increase.  Nonetheless, greenhouse gases, primarily CO2, have increased by about 30%, which is also generally accepted.  Despite these agreed upon facts, Lindzen declares, “there is no basis for alarm regardless of whether any relation between the observed warming and the observed increase in minor greenhouse gases can be established.”  He goes on to criticize the reports by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and finally states that “the suggestion that the very existence of warming or of the greenhouse effect is tantamount to catastrophe” might well be an even bigger scandal than the one implied by the hacked CRU emails.

The climate summit at Copenhagen is starting to look a lot more interesting these days.

UPDATE 12/3/09: Here is a great summary of Climategate by Lord Christopher Monckton, former adviser to Margaret Thatcher.



  1. […] A Climate Change win, right?  False.  Emissions will still rise significantly and temperatures could increase by 6 degrees Fahrenheit by 2080 (that is, of course, if it in fact turns out that the religious global warming scientists win the prediction lottery, the odds of which hit new lows after Climategate). […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: