The Climatic Research Unit email controversy (also known as “Climategate”)[2][3]began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) by an external attacker.[4][5] Several weeks before the Copenhagen Summit on climate change, an unknown individual or group breached CRU’s server and copied thousands of emails and computer files to various locations on the Internet.
The story was first broken by climate change critics on their blogs,[6] with columnistJames Delingpole popularising the term “Climategate” to describe the controversy.[7]Climate change critics and others denying the significance of human caused climate change argued that the emails showed that global warming was a scientific conspiracy, in which they alleged that scientists manipulated climate data and attempted to suppress critics.[8][9] The accusations were rejected by the CRU, who said that the emails had been taken out of context and merely reflected an honest exchange of ideas.[10][11]
The mainstream media picked up the story as negotiations over climate change mitigation began in Copenhagen on 7 December.[12] Because of the timing, scientists, policy makers, and public relations experts said that the release of emails was a smear campaign intended to undermine the climate conference.[13] In response to the controversy, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), theAmerican Meteorological Society (AMS) and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released statements supporting the scientific consensus that the Earth‘s mean surface temperature had been rising for decades, with the AAAS concluding “based on multiple lines of scientific evidence that global climate change caused by human activities is now underway…it is a growing threat to society.”[14]
Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.[15] However, the reports called on the scientists to avoid any such allegations in the future by taking steps to regain public confidence in their work, for example by opening up access to their supporting data, processing methods and software, and by promptly honouring freedom of information requests.[16] The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged throughout the investigations.[17]
Extract taken from: Wikipedia
Global warming skepticism grows among scientists
- CLIMATE CHANGE
- FEBRUARY 15, 2013
- BY: LORRAINE YAPPS COHEN
- Subscribe
global warming hoax
Credits:
public domain
Republican newsletter
RELATED TOPICS
In the controversy over climate, a new consensus is emerging among scientists.Global warming alarmists won’t like it.
A peer reviewed survey of over a thousand scientists revealed that 64% do not believe that human activity is causing the planet to heat up. A mere 36% march to the mantra of cataclysmic warming, according to Forbes. It appears that a new consensus is forming that does not support the claims of the alarmists’ so-called consensus that the science is settled.
Skepticism on catastrophic climate changecaused by humans is on the rise. Disbelief in the trumped-up rhetoric is growing. No more does the favorite fear of global warming advocates prevail among the cognoscenti of science. That changes in climate are caused by humans and is a serious concern are views simply not held by the majority of the scientists surveyed.
The Forbes report noted that the surveyors themselves showed an alarmist bias in terms of the questions posed and terms used. They called those who question climate change “deniers,” likening them to the people who deny that the Holocaust happened. Not only is this savagely unfair, it is simply not right.
When scientists themselves are polled for their beliefs, we get to know what scientists think rather than what bureaucrats think.
We now have meteorologists, geoscientists and engineers all reporting that they are skeptics of an asserted global warming crisis, yet the bureaucrats of these organizations frequently suck up to the media and suck up to government grant providers by trying to tell us the opposite of what their scientist members actually believe.
The science remains unsettled among scientists, despite the catastrophic claims of the media and the bureaucrats who make money from the hoax. The rest of us can believe a lie when it’s repeated often enough, but real scientists just don’t do that.
CANADA COVERS CLIMATEGATE – Rex Murphy Exposes New World Order Climate Change Scam
Here is a written transcript from his comments on CTV dec.4/09
Transcript of Climate Change: Science or Politics?
“When Jon Stewart, the bantum rooster of conventional wisdom, makes jokes about it you know Climategate has reached critical mass. Said Stewart: ‘Poor Al Gore, Global Warming completely debunked via the very internet he invented’.
“Stewart was half joking, but Climategate is no joke at all. The mass of emails from the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University let loose by a hacker or a whistle-blower pulls back the curtain on a scene of pettiness, turf protection, manipulation, defiance of freedom of information, lost or destroyed data, and attempts to black list critics and skeptics of the Global Warming Cause.
“Now the CRU is not the only climate science advisory body but it’s one of the most influential and feeds directly into the UN Climate Panel on Climate Change. So let’s hear no more talk of the science is settled when it turns out some of the scientists behave as if they own the very question of global warming, when they seek to bar opposing research from peer review journals, to embargo journals they can’t control, when they urge each other to delete damaging emails before freedom of information takes hold, when they talk of ‘hiding the decline’, when they actually speak of destroying the primary data, and when now we do learn that the primary data has been lost or destroyed. They’ve lost the raw data on which all the models, all the computer generated forecasts, graphs and projections are based. You wouldn’t accept that at a grade nine science fair!
“Now CRU is not the universe of climate research but it is the star. These emails demonstrate one thing beyond all else, that climate science and global warming advocacy have become so entwined, so meshed into a mutant creature, that separating alarmism from investigation, ideology from science, agenda from empirical study is well neigh impossible.
“Climategate is evidence that the science has gone to bed with advocacy and both had a very good time. That the neutrality, openness and absolute disinterest that is the hallmark of all honest scientific endeavor has been abandoned to an atmosphere and a dynamic not superior to the partisan caterwauls of a sub average Question Period.
“Climate Science has been shown to be, in part, a sub branch of Climate Politics. It is a situation intolerable even to serious minds who are on side with Global Warming such as Clive Crook who wrote in Atlantic Magazine about this scandal as follows, ‘The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering’.
“Climate Science needs it’s own reset button, and Climategate should be seen not primarily as a setback, but as an opportunity to cleanse scientific method. To take science away from politics, good causes, and alarmists, and vest climate science in bodies of guaranteed neutrality, openness, real and vigorous debate, and way from the lobbyists, the NGO’s, the advocates, the Gores, and professional environmentalists of all kind.
“Too many of the current leadership on Global Warming are more players than observers, gatekeepers not investigators, angry partisans of some global re-engineering rather than humble servants of the facts of the case.
“Read the Climategate emails, you’ll never think
of climate “science” quite the same way again.
of climate “science” quite the same way again.
“For the National, I’m Rex Murphy.”
No comments:
Post a Comment