Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ExpandMyMind

The dam is cracking

7 posts in this topic

this is from andrew neil's blog at the BBC. i think it's the first time the BBC has addressed the recent revelations.

The dam began to crack towards the end of last year when leaked e-mails from one of the temples of global warming, the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, suggested that a few sleights of hand were being deployed to hide facts inconvenient to the global warming case. An official investigation into these e-mails is on-going.

But the flood gates really opened after the IPCC had to withdraw its claim that the Himalayan glaciers would likely all have melted by 2035, maybe even sooner.

This turned out to have no basis in scientific fact, even though everything the IPCC produces is meant to be rigorously peer-reviewed, but simply an error recycled by the WWF, which the IPCC swallowed whole.

The truth, as seen by India's leading expert in glaciers, is that "Himalayan glaciers have not in anyway exhibited, especially in recent years, an abnormal annual retreat."

So the 40% of the world's population that relies on the seven major river systems supplied by these glaciers can sleep a little more soundly in the knowledge that their water won't run out in 25 years after all.

Then at the weekend another howler was exposed. The IPCC 2007 report claimed that global warming was leading to an increase in extreme weather, such as hurricanes and floods. Like its claims about the glaciers, this was also based on an unpublished report which had not been subject to scientific scrutiny -- indeed several experts warned the IPCC not to rely on it.

The author, who didn't actually finish his work until a year after the IPCC had used his research, has now repudiated what he sees has its misuse of his work.

His conclusion: "There is insufficient evidence to claim a statistical link between global warming and catastrophe loss."

Yet it was because of this -- now unproved -- link that the British government signed up to a $100 billion transfer from rich to poor countries to help them cope with a supposed increase in floods and hurricanes.

...

Now after Climate-gate, Glacier-gate and Hurricane-gate -- how many "gates" can one report contain? -- comes Amazon-gate. The IPCC claimed that up to 40% of the Amazonian forests were risk from global warming and would likely be replaced by "tropical savannas" if temperatures continued to rise.

This claim is backed up by a scientific-looking reference but on closer investigation turns out to be yet another non-peer reviewed piece of work from the WWF. Indeed the two authors are not even scientists or specialists on the Amazon: one is an Australian policy analyst, the other a freelance journalist for the Guardian and a green activist.

The WWF has yet to provide any scientific evidence that 40% of the Amazon is threatened by climate change -- as opposed to the relentless work of loggers and expansion of farms.

...

But it is now clear that the majority of those involved in the IPCC process are not scientists at all but politicians, bureaucrats, NGOs and green activists.

...

The sceptics may be about to get their first scalp. Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman often wrongly described in the media as the world's leading climate scientist (he's actually a railway engineer), at first attacked those who questioned the IPCC's alarming glacier prediction as "arrogant" and believers in "voodoo science".

He's since had to retract the prediction but can't quite manage an apology -- and is now under mounting pressure in his Indian homeland to resign.

full content: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2010/01/the_dam_is_cracking.html

this man pretty much hits the nail on the head here. i think the IPCC should be disbanded and all involved in this scam charged with fraud. think about it. they have helped con the world out of billions by knowingly using false information. in my book, that is a crime.

the reason i posted so much content of the article is because i haven't seen any threads on UM related to 'hurricane-gate', or 'amazon-gate', both mentioned in the article.

i said at the beginning of the email scenario that this was the beginning of the end. i said more scientists would speak out and more lies uncovered. i did not expect it to happen quite so fast.

i'm just waiting for the next 'gate', so we can throw the IPCC out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

It is possible that the "climate transfers" are a convenient form to bribe the foreign governments for them to be more dactile when dealing with specific companies from overseas. And it is possible that the involved politicians have some vested interest with these companies - thus the tax money may conveniently help to private enterprise. If this is so, then one needs to remember that similar situation in USSR of 1920s resulted in triggering Stalin's repressions - the level of government and corporate theft and corruption was threatening to cause massive derailment of the entire communist idea, so the leadership was forced to shoot and send to Siberia all involved CEOs, scientists, economists, bankers and politicians, completely eliminate private property and install dictatorship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, am I right in saying that the IPCC may have got the whole idea slightly wrong? I can already hear the lighting of torches and the sharpening of pitchforks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve McIntyre's website Climate Audit http://climateaudit.org/ is probably the best source of information for Climate gate.

Why?

-because Steven McIntyre's is the guy the IPCC is frightened of.

Mr. McIntyre along with Ross McKitrick were the two scientists who destroyed Michael Mann's Hockey Stick graph.

Both men are referred to as M&M throughout the 3000 emails...

Attempts to keep important data from them regarding Mann's and Briffa's reconstruction points were deliberately with held from the men.

Even after numerous FOI requests and submissions.

Anybody interested in Climate Gate should find Mr. McIntyres website very informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am actually becoming much less interested in this Climate Gate. It was interesting when the science was still involved, but now we just have another Enron case scaled up. I also think that some scape goats would end up in jail for this, say the scientists who were publishing the support research articles. but hardly the politicians and businessmen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve McIntyre's website Climate Audit http://climateaudit.org/ is probably the best source of information for Climate gate.

Why?

-because Steven McIntyre's is the guy the IPCC is frightened of.

Mr. McIntyre along with Ross McKitrick were the two scientists who destroyed Michael Mann's Hockey Stick graph.

Both men are referred to as M&M throughout the 3000 emails...

Attempts to keep important data from them regarding Mann's and Briffa's reconstruction points were deliberately with held from the men.

Even after numerous FOI requests and submissions.

Anybody interested in Climate Gate should find Mr. McIntyres website very informative.

:lol:

Wrong on two points. Neither are scientists and McIntyre is a quote miner, ergo a fraud, quote mining is right at the top of sin's in science. Secondly, they didn't destroy Mann's reconstruction at all and in the NAS inquiry were found to have miscalculated the data themselves to produce a false result. They were given no credit by either the NAS or the NRS for the role played (much to McIntyre's dismay). And it should be noted that the paper was called

"Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the past millennium: inferences, uncertainties, and limitations"

Not exactly portraying it as a finished result are they.

They were offered raw data too, they just wanted calibrated data, they were refused. Unsurprisingly, most scientists refuse to give out data, especially on projects they are still working on.

McIntyre is only a good source is you enjoy the dishonesty of quote mining.

Regarding the IPCC, yes they are a political body and yes they have made plenty of mistakes, hardly shocking is it.

What is shocking is that not one person on this thread has ever bother to address any scientific data put up. Why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i see you finally reared you head in one of these threads matt.

it only took me calling you on it in another thread for it to happen...

shame that you didn't actually address the article though... no opinion on the fact that your beloved IPCC (the 2500 concensus of scientists, LOL, of whom a massively substantial are not even scientists) have been caught out lying? no?

i've said it before, but there seems to be a distinct lack of opinion on these revelations from our resident global warming whizzes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.