Sunday, June 15, 2025
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > Columns > Stephane Wuttunee > Column article
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
Stephane Wuttunee

Temperatures rising in Climategate scandal

December 6, 2009 | Comment icon 20 comments
Image Credit: sxc.hu
In less time than it takes for Al Gore to escape a book signing event gone wrong, Climategate has shot its way to the top of choice topics among bloggers, YouTubers, nearly all alternative media, and even a few networks (FOX, ABC, and CNN).

At first, it was thought that hackers were the reason for the computer security breach at East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU), but recent developments suggest that the leak may have originated from within instead. In this meteorological coup d’etat, several thousand E-Mails as well as private documents were grabbed off of private computers within the facility and uploaded to a Russian web server. The leaked E-Mails show how climatologists colluded with one another in doctoring data over several decades to try to give weight to the idea that Homo Sapiens is the species responsible for global warming. In addition to discussions of how to rig data are derogatory statements made by various scientists within the establishment towards opponents of the manmade global warming scheme. Definitely not the kind of media attention one needs less than a week from the Copenhagen Summit, a global climate change conference scheduled to take place in Denmark on December 7th, 2009. And if the main issue on the table is that of setting up planetwide governance of the world’s resources and carbon gas emissions under a single body, then what is actually being set up right in front of our eyes is nothing less than the first one world government.

Shivering yet?

Whether or not the talks in Copenhagen will suffer severe setbacks and opposition from protestors isn’t the real issue. It is whether or not some form of consensus will arise between these various heads of state. Though disguised as a means to redistribute wealth and resources between nations, many believe that monies gained from richer nations via the proposed ‘Carbon Tax’ will simply be diverted into projects affiliated with the establishment of this one world governing body. This kind of thinking would seem ridiculous to ponder if it weren’t for the billions of dollars lost during the recent bank and auto dealer bailouts. No one knows where that money went either.

If all this isn’t enough, there is also the disturbing sociological ripple effect created by the need to redefine what it means to be an ‘environmentalist’. After all, CO2 emissions have been at the forefront of the battle against climate change for so long now that if all the gathered data so far is proven to be flawed…then what are environmentalists fighting for? C02 is not bad but good because plants need it to breathe? Talk about a conundrum!

So how does all this involve UFOs? For decades now, UFO researchers have stated that technologies reverse engineered from offworld crafts by the IMC (industrial military complex) could be used to help solve the globate energy and climate crisis. Are the ‘powers that be’ rolling out their plans for the eventual release of this technology by first reigning in world markets under one roof? Perhaps. It could also be that no release is planned at all and that some very rich individuals simply wish to get richer at the expense of the common person.

Meanwhile, lawyers, politicians, and activists worldwide are sharpening their teeth and claws for what is slated to become the greatest legal battle of the century. With trillions of dollars of taxpayer money as well as the sovereignty of each nation at stake, Copenhagen (and its potentially messy legacy) is just warming up.

Stephane Wuttunee[!gad]In less time than it takes for Al Gore to escape a book signing event gone wrong, Climategate has shot its way to the top of choice topics among bloggers, YouTubers, nearly all alternative media, and even a few networks (FOX, ABC, and CNN).

At first, it was thought that hackers were the reason for the computer security breach at East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU), but recent developments suggest that the leak may have originated from within instead. In this meteorological coup d’etat, several thousand E-Mails as well as private documents were grabbed off of private computers within the facility and uploaded to a Russian web server. The leaked E-Mails show how climatologists colluded with one another in doctoring data over several decades to try to give weight to the idea that Homo Sapiens is the species responsible for global warming. In addition to discussions of how to rig data are derogatory statements made by various scientists within the establishment towards opponents of the manmade global warming scheme. Definitely not the kind of media attention one needs less than a week from the Copenhagen Summit, a global climate change conference scheduled to take place in Denmark on December 7th, 2009. And if the main issue on the table is that of setting up planetwide governance of the world’s resources and carbon gas emissions under a single body, then what is actually being set up right in front of our eyes is nothing less than the first one world government.

Shivering yet?

Whether or not the talks in Copenhagen will suffer severe setbacks and opposition from protestors isn’t the real issue. It is whether or not some form of consensus will arise between these various heads of state. Though disguised as a means to redistribute wealth and resources between nations, many believe that monies gained from richer nations via the proposed ‘Carbon Tax’ will simply be diverted into projects affiliated with the establishment of this one world governing body. This kind of thinking would seem ridiculous to ponder if it weren’t for the billions of dollars lost during the recent bank and auto dealer bailouts. No one knows where that money went either.

If all this isn’t enough, there is also the disturbing sociological ripple effect created by the need to redefine what it means to be an ‘environmentalist’. After all, CO2 emissions have been at the forefront of the battle against climate change for so long now that if all the gathered data so far is proven to be flawed…then what are environmentalists fighting for? C02 is not bad but good because plants need it to breathe? Talk about a conundrum!

So how does all this involve UFOs? For decades now, UFO researchers have stated that technologies reverse engineered from offworld crafts by the IMC (industrial military complex) could be used to help solve the globate energy and climate crisis. Are the ‘powers that be’ rolling out their plans for the eventual release of this technology by first reigning in world markets under one roof? Perhaps. It could also be that no release is planned at all and that some very rich individuals simply wish to get richer at the expense of the common person.

Meanwhile, lawyers, politicians, and activists worldwide are sharpening their teeth and claws for what is slated to become the greatest legal battle of the century. With trillions of dollars of taxpayer money as well as the sovereignty of each nation at stake, Copenhagen (and its potentially messy legacy) is just warming up.

Stephane Wuttunee Comments (20)


<< Previous story
Passage
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #11 Posted by questionmark 16 years ago
The climate debate is one-sided. You can't show that skeptics are funded. Without funding you can't expect the skeptics to publish and conduct research. Just show one group that is known to be skeptical and continues to receives funding, then you will have won the debate. A, you want individuals funded who are climate skeptics, say that from the beginning. Lets see, we have Wolfgang Thüne, his climate skeptic study W. Thüne, F. Singer, F. Seitz, Helmut Metzner, "Treibhaus-Kontroverse und Ozon-Problem was funded by the Symposium der Europäischen Akademie für Umweltfragen Leipzig, funded by ... [More]
Comment icon #12 Posted by embarrasment 16 years ago
A, you want individuals funded who are climate skeptics, say that from the beginning. Lets see, we have Wolfgang Thüne, his climate skeptic study W. Thüne, F. Singer, F. Seitz, Helmut Metzner, "Treibhaus-Kontroverse und Ozon-Problem was funded by the Symposium der Europäischen Akademie für Umweltfragen Leipzig, funded by the European Union. BTW, they are still funding him despite his contrary views. That is off my head now, if I were to check I'd probably come up with a few more. Who is funding Wolfgang Thüne? The EU isn't a funding agency, neither is a symposium.
Comment icon #13 Posted by questionmark 16 years ago
Who is funding Wolfgang Thüne? The EU isn't a funding agency, neither is a symposium. A place called EUROPÄISCHE AKADEMIE FÜR UMWELTFRAGEN, who in turn gets its money from the EU and the German government and the sale of ecology related print media. Complete address for inquiries: Straße / Nr.: DERENDINGER STR. 41 PLZ / Ort: 72072 TÜBINGEN Land DEUTSCHLAND Telefon: 07071-78783
Comment icon #14 Posted by embarrasment 16 years ago
A place called EUROPÄISCHE AKADEMIE FÜR UMWELTFRAGEN, who in turn gets its money from the EU and the German government and the sale of ecology related print media. Complete address for inquiries: Straße / Nr.: DERENDINGER STR. 41 PLZ / Ort: 72072 TÜBINGEN Land DEUTSCHLAND Telefon: 07071-78783 Are you sure these are funding agencies? I mean like the Nation Science Foundation, or the Army Research Office. You gave me the name of an academy (EUROPÄISCHE AKADEMIE FÜR UMWELTFRAGEN) and a political entity(the EU) and the name of a symposium. A funding agency is a very specific thing. I need th... [More]
Comment icon #15 Posted by 16 years ago
A place called EUROPÄISCHE AKADEMIE FÜR UMWELTFRAGEN, who in turn gets its money from the EU and the German government and the sale of ecology related print media. Complete address for inquiries: Straße / Nr.: DERENDINGER STR. 41 PLZ / Ort: 72072 TÜBINGEN Land DEUTSCHLAND Telefon: 07071-78783 Good start, still no smoking guns though. I seem to recall that old Bush Junior meddled in funding and what he would allow his government to put its name to. There are also extensive lists of subresearchers funded by big oil companies, who never seem to manage to get their work published but splash it... [More]
Comment icon #16 Posted by questionmark 16 years ago
Are you sure these are funding agencies? I mean like the Nation Science Foundation, or the Army Research Office. You gave me the name of an academy (EUROPÄISCHE AKADEMIE FÜR UMWELTFRAGEN) and a political entity(the EU) and the name of a symposium. A funding agency is a very specific thing. I need the name of the FUNDING AGENCY for Wolfgang Thüne. The government funding for research in Germany are centrally forked out by seven ministries and divided among the research institutes and academies according to a key agreed by the officials of the German States with an institution called Deutsche ... [More]
Comment icon #17 Posted by embarrasment 16 years ago
The government funding for research in Germany are centrally forked out by seven ministries and divided among the research institutes and academies according to a key agreed by the officials of the German States with an institution called Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. The European funding happens in exactly the same way. The people deciding on who gets the money are the individual academies, such as the one discussed above. The project in which each institution chooses to put its money is up to each one individually. The only condition is to have a study at the end of the funding with a con... [More]
Comment icon #18 Posted by Mattshark 16 years ago
Not really. In my particular field I can only name 4. All the groups in my department have the same funding agencies. The department chair of my university could only name 2 when I asked him to whom I should apply for fellowship money. Funding money isn't easy to get. Can you find one research group that had been funded to disprove global warming, or has received money for their debunking? Well no, you never try prove or disprove things in science. What is your field that can only find 4 sources of funding, from governments alone they have multiple sources. No funding isn't easy to get, that's... [More]
Comment icon #19 Posted by questionmark 16 years ago
I still see no link. Treibhaus-Kontroverse und Ozon-Problem was a symposium not, a study by Wolfgang Thune. Let's say Europäische Akademie für Umweltfragen is a funding agency and it funded 'Treibhaus Kontroverse und Ozon-Problem', which was a symposium. It's clear Wolfgang Thüne contributed to the symposium, but where is it explicit that he is being funded by Europäische Akademie für Umweltfragen. For instance, scientists go to conferences all the time and give their opinions on things. The conferences(or symposiums)always have sponsors, but the sponsors don't necessarily spend more than... [More]
Comment icon #20 Posted by Caesar 16 years ago
This is a great article and its clear that this is all about money.


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


 Total Posts: 7,767,980    Topics: 325,011    Members: 203,757

 Not a member yet ? Click here to join - registration is free and only takes a moment!
Recent news and articles