Climate Change proponents emails and files hacked

[Helen Reyes]

Yes, it's quite the spectacle. The Danish stuff mentions IMF by name too. The Monck and Jones are describing it as an end-run around the UN to have carbon taxes paid directly to the banksters. I think their NWO fears are well founded, with Rompuy and the rest calling this the first step in global governance.

However, the "Danish text" is genuine documented policy, albeit leaked presumably for political purposes.

Monckton's claims have little evidential basis.

Actually, Monckton popularized all the draft versions we know. The first one was a PDF I think Willie Soon found on an obscure IPCC UN website, masquerading as a note from the secretary general, and he sent it to Monckton who sent it on to Alex Jones et al. Monckton is the only one to pry the new draft loose at COP15 as well. The Danish initiative is the intergovernmental "secret annex" to salvage face and "get something done" at Copenhagen despite the debacle.

Speaking of spectacles, did anyone happen to catch any of the opening ceremony? It was odious. Sort of a cross between a Satanic Black Mass and infotainment better left unwatched at the midnight hour.

Just so we get this in the right perspective, and correct me if I mistate it, climategate casts apsersions on one of the 2 centers supplying all the science for IPCC. The other being NOAA, which is also implicated in falsifying data. COP15 is either about instituting a UN overgovernment to conduct tax collection, enforcement and as the first draft Monckton leaked stated, controlling all foreign trade of every member state in order to implement the carbon dioxide reductions undertaken, or it is about a consortium of US-controlled fake banks, i.e., World Bank and IMF, doing the same. Did I miss something?

[Peter Lemkin]

Read the book Climate Cover-Up and it will explain who is behind the hacking and today's 'Denmark Document'....

"Canadian environmental activists Hoggan and Littlemore pull no punches in this spirited indictment of global warming deniers. Their well-sourced research spotlights premeditated prevarications about the threat of greenhouse gas emissions by the oil and coal industry, in league with junk scientists, compliant conservative politicians and unsavory public relations practitioners. Persistent obfuscation of science by these anti-environment players is further abetted, say the authors, by a manipulated media that, in a misguided effort toward journalistic balance, pairs scientific certainty about an encroaching climate crisis with quotations from people who make a living denying it. Readers predisposed to believe the worst about the oil, coal and electric industries will find their fears buttressed by the book's detailed overview of an orchestrated climate coverup by Astroturf (fake grassroots) organizations, right-wing think tank echo chambers, the tens of millions of industry dollars poured into primarily Republican campaign coffers and the PR profession's Orwellian use of language. But global warming skeptics might also be swayed by the detailed dissection of an ongoing campaign to convince the public that climate change is still unproven."

...its the game the tobacco industry invented all over again...

[Helen Reyes]

Read the book Climate Cover-Up and it will explain who is behind the hacking and today's 'Denmark Document'....

...its the game the tobacco industry invented all over again...

Except the tobacco lobby didn't fund the anti-smoking movements. Look, if Big Oil is behind the hacking and leaking of the Danish paper, it means they are funding and propagating both sides of the issue, which is possible, but I doubt it. And I automatically distrust any author who uses the term astroturf with a straight face to refer to fake grass-roots, Pelosi the extreme right-wing republican in the extreme right-wing republican Obama camp ruined any charm astroturf once held by, again, implying that opponents to the Obama health care package were paid mobs. The health care plan that ended up being: get private health insurance or we'll fine you AND put you in jail. See a pattern here? Pretend to represent the people, generate momentum and societal peer pressure, deliver what your financial ologiarchs expect. It's called fascism.

[Peter Lemkin]

Read the book Climate Cover-Up and it will explain who is behind the hacking and today's 'Denmark Document'....

...its the game the tobacco industry invented all over again...

Except the tobacco lobby didn't fund the anti-smoking movements. Look, if Big Oil is behind the hacking and leaking of the Danish paper, it means they are funding and propagating both sides of the issue, which is possible, but I doubt it. And I automatically distrust any author who uses the term astroturf with a straight face to refer to fake grass-roots, Pelosi the extreme right-wing republican in the extreme right-wing republican Obama camp ruined any charm astroturf once held by, again, implying that opponents to the Obama health care package were paid mobs. The health care plan that ended up being: get private health insurance or we'll fine you AND put you in jail. See a pattern here? Pretend to represent the people, generate momentum and societal peer pressure, deliver what your financial ologiarchs expect. It's called fascism.

The tobacco industry invented [or perfected] the promotion [along with PR firms] of projecting doubt, when there was NONE in the scientific community; further in leading Americans to believe that science was just one of many voices on a subject. There was NO debate [doubt] that cigarettes caused cancer. There was [is] NO doubt that climate change now is anthropogenic! I could go on about GM foods, and many other things..... That the corporate fascist control network works [in part] 'both' sides is as they do in funding both 'sides' of the political [non] spectrum in the USA - to have total control. Obama, the USG, Corporate and Financial Powers, Deep Political Powers do NOT want any meaningful changes on climate change [and the profits they make producing it] etc. In my field [and as documented in the book mentioned [astroturf not withstanding!], one has to search for years to find more than two Environmental Scientists that are not owned by the coal, oil, corporate, financial, deep-political, military interests to find ANY who think there is any doubt about the dangers and anthropogenic cause of current global climate changes [and other environmental horrors!]. Of course, they want to control the debate, the spin and the outcome.......was it ever otherwise?...don't be fooled! :ciao:

[Helen Reyes]

Thank you Peter.

As you know, science isn't driven by consensus. I happen to find the arguments and data of people who are working in various scientific fields and who oppose the theory of man-made global warming much more compelling than any of the arguments or data I've seen from the proponents. There might be a consensus within a narrowly-defined new field called Climate Science, but there is a heterogenaity of views among scientists in a variety of fields that study the same things--astrophysics, meteorology, thermodynamics/physics etc.

Just so we're on the same page, so to speak, I do expect rapid climate changes within our lifetime, I just don't think CO2 will have much to do with them. I think CO2 as a generator of global warming is a sort of canard so the vested interests can continue with other types of real pollution that is probably causing the dead zones in the oceans, the North Pacific Garbage Continent, species extinctions in some cases (although the majority of that has to do with land use, as I understand it, not point sources of pollutants).

Astroturf was clever but Pelosi ruined it for me

[David Guyatt]

Look, if Big Oil is behind the hacking and leaking of the Danish paper, it means they are funding and propagating both sides of the issue, which is possible, but I doubt it.

On the other hand it is a well tried technique of certain powerful and influential groups to do just that. By claiming both sides of the argument they are able to limit the boundaries and, at the same time, progress their agenda forward.

This technique is discussed in some detail by Prof. Antony Sutton in his four slim volumes on the Order of the Skull and Bones. The US Bones (many an oil man there btw) has a sister Order in the UK, namely the Oxford "Group" of Rhodes and Milner - and current inheritors. The UK Group absolutely dominated global mining and precious metals during the last century and I am fairly sure it still does.

This to me seems a perfect fit for the oil and gas industry.

After all the nexus we have seen of the US-UK-Vatican right wing network propagating this topic is, to put it loosely, the controlling elite of the ConPublican (or should it be PubliConservative?) political parties.

[David Guyatt]

It's what many of us suspected at the outset; an intelligence agency is thought to have been responsible for the hacking of the emails. I'm curious why Sir David King beievesit was a "foreign" agency rather than a home grown one. But eaving that aside I think he may well have hit the nail on the head when he places the blame on Americans being responsible for financing the hacking. It's right up their street to upload to a Russian server and leave those on the right to claim it was a Russian operation...

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment...85147.html

'Climate emails hacked by spies'
Interception bore hallmarks of foreign intelligence agency, says expert

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Monday, 1 February 2010SHARE PRINTEMAIL
EPA
Dr Rajendra Pachauri



A highly sophisticated hacking operation that led to the leaking of hundreds of emails from the Climatic Research Unit in East Anglia was probably carried out by a foreign intelligence agency, according to the Government's former chief scientist. Sir David King, who was Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser for seven years until 2007, said that the hacking and selective leaking of the unit's emails, going back 13 years, bore all the hallmarks of a co-ordinated intelligence operation – especially given their release just before the Copenhagen climate conference in December.

The emails were stolen from a backup computer server used by the University of East Anglia. They contained private discussions between climate scientists that have embarrassed those involved, particularly Professor Phil Jones, who has stepped down from his post as head of the unit pending an independent inquiry into whether there is any evidence of scientific misconduct. He is not implicated in the hacking.

In an interview with The Independent, Sir David suggested the email leaks were deliberately designed to destabilise Copenhagen and he dismissed the idea that it was a run-of-the-mill hacking. It was carried out by a team of skilled professionals, either on behalf of a foreign government or at the behest of anti-climate change lobbyists in the United States, he said.

"A very clever nerd can cause a great deal of disruption and obviously make intelligence services very nervous, but a sophisticated intelligence operation is capable of yielding the sort of results we've seen here," Sir David said.

"Quite simply, it's the sophistication of the operation. I know there's a possibility that they had a very good hacker working for these people, but it was an extraordinarily sophisticated operation. There are are several bodies of people who could do this sort of work. These are national intelligence agencies and it seems to me that it was the work of such a group of people," he said.

More than 1,000 emails, and some 2,000 documents, were stolen from a university back-up server where remote access is difficult. This represents a small fraction of the total number of emails for the period from 1996 to 2009, suggesting they had been selected for the most incriminating phrases relating to possible scientific misconduct and breaches of the Freedom of Information Act. The leak of the emails in the weeks running up to the climate change conference in Copenhagen appeared to be carefully timed to destabilise the meeting.

"I don't think that it's a coincidence that the stealing of the emails from the individuals involved in East Anglia was put out for publication one month before Copenhagen. That wasn't a coincidence," Sir David said. "The emails date back to 1996, so someone was collecting the data over many years. It looks like possibly the work of an intelligence service. What it was was a very well co-ordinated part of a campaign. It was a difficult piece of work to get that done.

"I've no inside knowledge except for the fact that I did work with our [intelligence] agencies, and the American agencies, that I have some experience," he added.

The existence of the stolen emails came to light on 17 November when someone tried to load them onto the RealClimate website run by climate scientists, including Gavin Schmidt of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Dr Schmidt said that the hackers were using a legitimate computer based in Turkey as a proxy server but the attack could have been launched from another computer anywhere in the world.

He attempted to disable the hacking operation as it was taking place, but was prevented several times before finally succeeding because the hackers had penetrated deep into the website's database software. This required considerable skill and knowledge which an opportunistic hacker would not have had, he said. "That requires some kind of monitoring-tool set-up and required them to have more access than you would get by simply logging into the blog," Dr Schmidt said.

Two days after the attempted RealClimate hack, the file of stolen emails appeared on a server used by a company called Tomcity operating from the Russian city of Tomsk in Siberia. However, again, the uploading could have been done by someone operating a proxy server anywhere else in the world.

Experts have suggested that loading the email file onto a Tomsk computer server may have been a clumsy attempt to lay a trail to the door of the Russian intelligence service, which has since denied any involvement in the hacking incident. Some commentators in Russia have said that China had more to gain from destabilising the Copenhagen conference than Russia.

Sir David said, however, that it was not possible to dismiss the possibility of Russia's involvement. "If it was a job done on behalf of a government, then I suppose there is the possibility that it could be the Russian intelligence agency," he said.

"If it was a maverick group then I suppose it could be the Americans, but I am hazarding a guess as much as anyone else. The only thing is, I've worked within government and I've seen this in operation," Sir David added. "It was a sophisticated and expensive operation. In terms of the expense, there is the American lobby system which is a very likely source of finance. Right now, the American lobbyists are a very likely source of finance for this, so the finger must point to them," he said.

Norfolk Constabulary is conducting an investigation into the hacking but said yesterday it would not comment on speculation that a foreign intelligence agency was involved. The University of East Anglia also said that it could not comment.

[David Guyatt]

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/1...scientist/

Global Warming in Last 15 Years Insignificant, U.K.'s Top Climate Scientist Admits



The embattled ex-head of the research center at the heart of the Climate-gate scandal dropped a bombshell over the weekend, admitting in an interview with the BBC that there has been no global warming over the past 15 years.


The embattled ex-head of the research center at the heart of the Climate-gate scandal dropped a bombshell over the weekend, admitting in an interview with the BBC that there has been no global warming over the past 15 years.

Phil Jones, former head of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, made a number of eye-popping statements to the BBC's climate reporter on Sunday. Data from CRU, where Jones was the chief scientist, is key evidence behind the claim that the growth of cities (which are warmer than countryside) isn't a factor in global warming and was cited by the U.N.'s climate science body to bolster statements about rapid global warming in recent decades.

Jones's latest statements seemed to contradict the CRU's data.

In response to the question, "do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically significant global warming?", Jones said yes, adding that the average increase of 0.12C per year over that time period "is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods."

Jones is nevertheless 100% confident that the climate has warmed, he stated, admitting that the Climate-gate scandal has undermined public confidence in science. The scandal has worn down Jones as well: Since the e-mails emerged -- and were subsequently posted online at http://www.EastAngliaEmails.com -- Jones has stepped down from his position, been forced to admit that he “misjudged” the handling of requests for information, and even acknowledged contemplating suicide.

Jones also allowed for the possibility that the world as a whole was warmer in medieval times than it is today -- a concession that may also undermine theories that global warming is caused by man.

In addition, Jones admitted that an overall lack of organization, and his poor record keeping and office-tidying skills, had contributed to his reluctance to share data with critics, which he regretted.

"To say when you're the record keeper for the globe's temperature that you're not a good record keeper, well, that's going to come back to haunt you for a long, long time," Pat Michaels.of the Cato Institute, a public-policy think tank, told Fox News.

For more information, see the full interview at BBC News.