Britannia Radio

At last the Great Global Warming Scam is proved to be based on cooking the books, fiddling their figures .  And npw they are protesting at the fact it’s got out - “Methinks they do protest too much”  

Even the Guardian’s pet “warmist” is rattled - - 

“It's no use pretending this isn't a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken by them. Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request. Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.

--George Monbiot, The Guardian, 24 November 2009

That’s astonishing. 

Christina

=========================================

TELEGRAPH 24.11.09

Climate change scientists face calls for public inquiry over data manipulation claims

Leading British climate change scientists are facing calls for a public inquiry after hacked email exchanges appeared to indicate that scientific data may have been manipulated to strengthen the case for man-made global warming.

 

By Matthew Moore

Thousands of documents stolen from the University of East Anglia (UEA) also seem to show that academics on both sides of the Atlantic discussed deleting sensitive emails to evade Freedom of Information requests from climate change sceptics.

Lord Lawson, the former chancellor, led calls for a full investigation into the leaked files, saying that the good reputation of British science was under threat.

 

In one email Professor Phil Jones, director of the university's respected Climatic Research Unit, referred to a "trick" he applied to raw data to "hide the decline" in global temperatures.

The email correspondence also apparently showed that Prof Jones lobbied for the sacking of a journal editor who published papers that questioned the scientific consensus on global warming.

"On the face of it, looks like the raw data was being manipulated in order to prove what they wanted to prove," said Lord Lawson, Margaret Thatcher's former chancellor who has reinvented himself as a critic of climate change science.

"They were talking about destroying various files in order to prevent data being revealed under the Freedom of Information Act and they were trying to prevent other dissenting scientists from having their articles published in learned journals.

"It may be that there's an innocent explanation for all this... but there needs to be a fundamental independent inquiry to get at the truth."

Prof Jones yesterday denied massaging temperature figures, saying that he used the word "trick" to mean "clever thing to do", rather than a deceptive act.

"It is ludicrous to suggest that it refers to anything untoward," he added.

More than 1,000 emails and 3,000 other documents hacked from computer servers at UEA were posted online last week, and immediately picked up by climate change sceptics as evidence of an international conspiracy to blame global warming on human activity.

But academics and climate change researchers have dismissed the allegations, saying that nothing in the emails proves wrongdoing.

Dave Britton, a spokesman for the Met Office which works with the UEA on climate monitoring, said: "We are utterly confident that there was no collusion or manipulation. All the data used was peer reviewed and we are certain it is fully reliable."

Kevin Trenberth of US National Centre for Atmospheric Research is quoted in one email conceding that the lack of evidence for a recent increase in global temperatures is a "travesty".

He said that the correspondence had been selectively leaked and misinterpreted to undermine next month's climate change summit in Copenhagen, where world leaders hope to strike a binding agreement on limiting carbon emissions.

"I'm appalled at the very selective use of the emails, and the fact they've been taken out of context," he said. "It is right before the Copenhagen debate, I'm sure that is not a coincidence."

The overwhelming majority of scientists believe the global warming is real and the result of human activity, but a vocalmajority maintains that the science is not proven.

A spokesman for the Dept of Energy and Climate Change said: “This is a matter for UEA but the evidence for climate change is overwhelming. The UEA conclusions are consistent with two independent datasets in the United States, one at Nasa and one at NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.”

A spokesman for the University of East Anglia attacked the "mischievous" publication of the documents and said it was co-operating with police to determine the circumstances of the theft, which it said included "personal information about individuals".

"CRU's published research is, and has always been, fully peer-reviewed by the relevant journals, and is one strand of research underpinning the strong consensus that human activity is affecting the world's climate in ways that are potentially dangerous," he said.

========================

PJM Exclusive    23.11.09

Lord Monckton Blows the Whistle on the Great Climate Myth:

Viscount Monckton on Climategate: ‘They Are Criminals’

The man who challenged Al Gore to a debate is furious about the content of the leaked CRU emails — and says why you should be, too.

 by Christopher Monckton

This is what they did — these climate “scientists” on whose unsupported word the world’s classe politique proposes to set up an unelected global government this December in Copenhagen, with vast and unprecedented powers to control all formerly free markets, to tax wealthy nations and all of their financial transactions, to regulate the economic and environmental affairs of all nations, and to confiscate and extinguish all patent and intellectual property rights.

The tiny, close-knit clique of climate scientists who invented and now drive the “global warming” fraud — for fraud is what wenow know it to be — tampered with temperature data so assiduously that, on the recent admission of one of them, land temperatures since 1980 have risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures. One of the thousands of emails recently circulated by a whistleblower at the University of East Anglia, where one of the world’s four global-temperature datasets is compiled, reveals that data were altered so as to prevent a recent decline in temperature from showing in the record. In fact, there has been no statistically significant “global warming” for 15 years — and there has been rapid and significant cooling for nine years.

Worse, these arrogant fraudsters — for fraudsters are what we now know them to be — have refused, for years and years and years, to reveal their data and their computer program listings. Now we know why: As a revealing 15,000-line document from the computer division at the Climate Research Unit shows, the programs and data are a hopeless, tangled mess. In effect, the global temperature trends have simply been made up. Unfortunately, the British researchers have been acting closely in league with their U.S. counterparts who compile the other terrestrial temperature dataset — the GISS/NCDC dataset. That dataset too contains numerous biases intended artificially to inflate the natural warming of the 20th century.

Finally, these huckstering snake-oil salesmen and “global warming” profiteers — for that is what they are — have written to each other encouraging the destruction of data that had been lawfully requested under the Freedom of Information Act in the UK by scientists who wanted to check whether their global temperature record had been properly compiled. And that procurement of data destruction, as they are about to find out to their cost, [?] is a criminal offens[c]e. They are not merely bad scientists — they are crooks. And crooks who have perpetrated their crimes at the expense of British and U.S. taxpayers.

I am angry, and so should you be.