Finally, the truth is beginning to be uncovered regarding man-made global warming "research." Sixty-one megabytes of confidential files from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit were released onto the Internet that exposed the lack of integrity and professionalism and the petty vindictiveness of the climate "scientists" who have been promoting the warming hoax for many years.
The scary part is that the information from this "research institution" has been relied on heavily for climate model-building and has been cited extensively in governmental and United Nations reports, which in turn have been used to establish harmful government policy.
Included in this material were more than 1,000 e-mails and 72 documents that are very damaging to the global-warming cabal. Here are quotes from a few them:
"I can't see either of these papers (anti-global warming research findings) being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow, even if we have to redefine what peer-review literature is!"
"Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re AR4?"
"The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty we can't."
"I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CPU temperature station data. Don't any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!"
Here's the best one: "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
I have to quote one of the most disgusting ones. It actually gloats over the death of John Daly, who was one of the original climate-change doubters and founder of the "Still Waiting For Greenhouse" website. The creator of the e-mail commented: "In an odd way this is cheering news." It really doesn't get worse than that.
The need to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions has been a solution in search of a problem for many, many years. Remember, this is the same crowd that said this was supposed to be the answer to global cooling in the 1970s and '80s. Can anyone tell me why these pretenders should be given any credibility this time?
This should give everyone some insight to the predictive accuracy of the "science" being done by these "specialists." They are simply opportunists who, to receive money from the grant-funding gravy train, will say anything their sponsors want them to say.
Even the global-warming alarmists are taken aback by these recent revelations. George Monbiot of the Guardian concedes that these releases "could scarcely be more damaging," and then went on to say, "I am dismayed and deeply shaken by them."
But there are some who willingly ignore these revelations. Thomas Crowly, professor of geosciences at the University of Edinburgh, said, "These leaked files reflect badly on the people who are so desperate to discredit global warming." I wonder how much grant money he has taken to remain blind to debate.
I think most commonsense people should give more weight to what a more prestigious mind, Robert Lindzen, a professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, had to say in an article he wrote for the Wall Street Journal on Nov. 30. He claims, and backs it up, that the science of climate change is far from settled and the over-confident "predictions of catastrophe are unwarranted."
What has been uncovered is unfathomable. As Aynsley Kellow, professor and expert reviewer for a United Nations global warming report puts it, "There is evidence of a willingness to manipulate raw data to suit predetermined results, a resistance to any notion of transparency, an active resistance to freedom of information requests (critical original data input that were willfully destroyed after such requests were made) or quite reasonable requests from scientists to have a look at the data so that it can be verified."
"Fraud and collusion" is a better way to describe these actions.
I want to see what will happen next. Hopefully, this scandal effectively kills the absurd "cap and trade" bill coming before the Senate. Also, I hope this show in Copenhagen proves to be the farce it really is.
The question is whether or not the mainstream media has the integrity to report this news. So far that doesn't seem to be the case.
If all these research efforts do turn out to be bogus, will honest men of science speak out against the lowliest of "scientists" who have cheated to produce a predetermined result?
And lastly, why don't all you climate "experts" work on a model that will accurately predict next week's weather? You can't even do this successfully yet.
___
Tom Sears is a professor of accounting at Hartwick College in Oneonta. He can be reached at SearsT@hartwick.edu. His column appears every other week.
