The apostles of the religion of anthropogenic global warming desperately want people to believe their flimsy theory about the earth warming due to human activity is based on science, “settled science” they tell us, where there is “consensus” of all scientists with no disagreement in the scientific community.
We already knew that was total bunk, since there are more than 31,000 scientists who are on record stating they don’t buy the theory of anthropogenic global warming. There are several groups of scientists who have gone on record in different areas of the world against this silly theory, and while AGW true believers desperately want us to ignore these scientists, the facts are difficult things to ignore.
Besides, the whole idea–when compared to the power of the sun and historical data of natural, cyclic climate change going back thousands of years–just doesn’t pass the smell test of credibility.
Then came the leaked emails, computer code and other documents from the Climate Research Unit in Englad a few weeks ago, and the lid was finally off their sealed pot of stonewalling propaganda. We got to see first hand their own talk of using “tricks” and “fudge factors” in their climate models to “hide the decline” in recent temperatures. We also found out they had trashed a lot of their raw data and could no longer produce the original information upon which they base their summaries. How convenient.
At first there was silence, as AGW acolytes struggled to come up with a way to explain away their obvious duplicity. Then came the weak protests that “trick” didn’t really mean “trick” and “fudge factor” really didn’t mean “fudging” and so on. And of course there were the protests of, “Well, this is an isolated incident. This doesn’t affect the other AGW data out there.”
We knew that was still more bunk, as other AGW promoting agencies including the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) were using the CRU’s data. Also, if CRU was playing tricks and fudging data, what reason did we have to believe they were the only AGW apostles who would be so dishonest?
Well now some Russian climate officials have come forward stating that the data they handed over to the Hadley Centre in England has been cherry-picked, leaving out as much as 40% of the cooler temperature readings and choosing the hottest readings to make it appear things were warmer than they actually are (regardless of whether the temperature is human-induced or natural).
Even as socialists work feverishly for an accord to limit the freedom of the people and to transfer large amounts of our property to others (otherwise known as “theft”) in Copenhagen, this new ClimateGate scandal explodes onto the pages of the British newspaper the Daily Express:
But experts at the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis say the British dossier used statistics from weather stations that fit its theory of global warming, while ignoring those that do not.
They accuse the Met Office’s Hadley Centre of relying on just 25 per cent of Russia’s weather stations and over-estimating warming in the country by more than half a degree Celsius.
Last night, leading global warming sceptic Dr Fred Singer, of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, said: “I have long suspected that this selective fiddle took place but have not assembled all the evidence.
“We know, and have published, that between 1975 and 2000 the number of weather stations was reduced from nearly 7,000 to only 3,000 with many of them in the former Soviet Union.
“The effect of this would be to produce an artificial temperature trend which we don’t see in the satellite data. So the warming of the past 30 years is likely to be an illusion.”
See also the video report below on this latest climate scandal.
It is interesting that the land area covered by Russia is huge (about 10% of the land area of the earth), and if these Apostles of Deception are tossing out vast amounts of “inconvenient” data, this throws off temperature calculations for the entire planet.
Investors Business Daily also had this on the scandal:
The IEA unfortunately does not offer English-language versions of its reports on its Web site. However, Andrei Illarionov, IEA founder and editor of the report, is also a senior fellow at the free market Cato Institute and talked to IBD about the report’s conclusion.
“The Hadley Center as well as the CRU … about a week ago, put up on a Web site the data they used for calculating global temperatures,” said Illarionov. “It looks like that, based on this information, the (climate researchers) selected particular (meteorological) stations on the Russian territory and rejected using some other stations. (The report) is an analysis of what stations have been used, what stations have not been used and based on this analysis it looks like the real actual temperature dynamics .. . in Russia, that is the increase in warming, have been artificially increased by 0.64 degrees Celsius.”
According to an analysis of the report in the Russian daily business newspaper Kommersant, the stations cover most of Russia but the Hadley Center used only 25% of the stations in its reports, typically ones closer to large population centers. The data from the unused stations reportedly did not show any substantial warming trends.
Incidentally, the Daily Express piece said that in a recent poll of their readership, 98% believed they were being conned about global warming.
This theory of AGW didn’t pass muster with common sense, solar activity, or historical data even before the CRU and Hadley Center were revealed to be monkeying with data. Now it should be abundantly clear that the bilge being fed to us about evil capitalist activity destroying the planet should be summarily and solidly rejected.