Lorrie Goldstein's latest editorial is SUPERB ... as are many of the comments therein. I think some SDA regulars have been active. Poor little James there though, poor little James!

On a lighter note Iowahawk Geographic , the secret lives of climate scientists .

Big Government, Big Business and Big Green don't give a s*** about "the science."

TAX REVOLT!

Lorrie hit it out of the park on this one. No mincing of words. Time for journos like hime to start calling others out.

Oz
Can't disagree. I also plan to e-mail my MP again and If I don't get a response my third e-mail will be to inform him that I plan to spoil my ballot in the next election.

Shouldn't The Lancet be busy estimating deaths in Iraq, or does that only happen when Chimpy McBushHitler is in office?

Shouldn't The Lancet be busy estimating deaths in Iraq, or does that only happen when Chimpy McBushHitler is in office?

Thanks for the link. I have extended and revised my remarks (as a member of congress would say).

Yes I think it is time we pushed back and really let our government know that we are pissed off. I think we should expose all the BIG players supporting AGW (man-made up global warming). The scientists are just the useful idiots. Let's identify all the real drivers - individuals, corporations, banks, NGOs etc.

My $0.02

Agreed Oz! TAX REVOLT!

Cap and Trade. How about Crap and Charade.

...according to studies published this week in the British medical journal The Lancet..
------------------------
Ya, right. After the fiasco that was the Iraqi excess deaths research, who would believe anything published in The Lancet? Seems a companion movement bent on keeping Saddam Hussein in power must have consulted their colleagues in the climate change field for advise on how to cook the data.

At least as troubling is Prentice's column in today's National Post indicating Canada will do what the US does with respect to emission cut targets at Copenhagen. Given the woolly headedness of Obama et al, the targets will so unrealistic as to devastate the Canadian, particularly the Western Canadian economy in the name of fraudulent science. When contacting you MP, include Prentice.

two outbound emails - I won't waste my time with the NDP or the Greeny Weenies.

Sir,

As you might be aware, although such awareness would not be as a result of being informed by the CBC or other mainstream media in Canada, recent revelations of the scientific fraud, the corruption of the peer review process and the falsification of the climate model algorithms by the scientists at the Climate Research Unit in England means that there is serious doubt about the "truth" behind Global Warming.

The released emails and computer code from the handful of key global warming scientists that control the IPCC provide a startling insight into the ethically challenged processes used by these scientists to foster their political agenda and idealistic pursuit of global governance.

The IPCC reports are the basis for the entire Green war against carbon dioxide and these reports are now known to be based on fraudulent science, or in fact no science in point of fact. Science works by one person making a claim, and backing it up with the data and methods that they used to make the claim. Other scientists review the work by (among other things) trying to replicate the first scientist’s work. If they can’t replicate it, it doesn’t stand. Since these CRU scientists refused to allow independent scientists to review their data and computer models, they refused to actually do Science. What they did was self-serving research.

In this case, how can there be a "Scientific Consensus" about Global Warming when there is no Science being conducted?

The meetings next month in Copenhagen are about a massive reorganization of the global economy and re based on the seriously corrupted and highly politicized IPCC reports. The economic impacts for Canadians and the Canadian economy are severe.

Do you know what is in the Copenhagen Accord? Do you know para 41 demands Canada provide a minimum of .7% of our GDP - that right now is about $9.2 Billion to pay for our “Climate Debt”.

Where do you propose we cut $9.2 Billion from our budget to pay this new bill?

Look at the following data and take the challenge. We have to cut in excess of 150, 000 Mt of GhG to meet either the Kyoto 6% of 1990 or 20% by 2020.

Here’s a list of GhG emissions categories to pick form . . go ahead remove GhG’s until you total 150,000.

Electric/heat generation 126 000
Fossil Fuel Industries 70,000
Mining & Gas 23,000
Residential 40,000
Automobile 41, 000
Light Gas trucks 45, 000
Heavy Gas Trucks 6,640
Heavy Diesel Trucks 40,100
Railways 7,000
Off Road Diesel 25,000
Off Road Gas 6,7000
Domestic Aviation 7, 804
Metal Production 13, 800

My solution . . . take every car & truck off our roads, stop every train, ground every plane and tie up every ship.

That will meet the required target and shouldn't have too much of an impact on our economy. Should it.

What does your party plan to do about this.

A simple direct answer please, no political spin.

The release of the Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU) Data has been an interesting read.

It does appear that man made-up global warming is based on a lot of CRUD.

This is stupid. Climate change and CO2 reduction will have negligible effect of other airborne pollutants. This was proven out when NOx and SOx were reduced. CO2 emissions didn't change.

If airborne pollutants are now the reason to fight CO2 then all reason is lost.

Lancet needs to do some real research about pollution control.

Kate, a suggestion - move The Climategate Links to the top of the front page. New visitors won't know to scroll down to the Best of SDA and so won't see it.

Good suggestion.

It is time to draw a line in the sand. The Canadians responsible and complicit with this fraud should be investigated. i.e. Maurice Strong, David Suzuki. The invisible Paul Desmarais.
What good is the CBC to Canadians when they have no mention of the leaked emails.
I want my tax dollars to represent Canadians not liberal special interest groups.
I agree with Joel Johansson of the news blog Proud To Be A Canadian. State-owned or state-run media should be banned in this country, and that notion enshrined in our constitution.

Regards,

A copy sent to both my MP and The PM

I see our PM has announced he is going to attend the one-world, one-government festival in Copenhagen.

On Obama, I am beginning to wonder whether his past ambiguous messages regarding Copenhagen weren't just a calculated strategy.

The idea being that in the final hour he *will* commit the US to the cause, and hence will come out looking like a hero that saved the day.

All eyes will be on the US at Copenhagen. Like all liberals, you can bet Obama and his team are calculating their every more so as to ensure Obama looks heroic.

We can only hope that the whole thing backfires on all of them. In a fair world it would be guaranteed to fail, but you can bet all the players who have a vested interest in the AGW lie will do everything in their power to keep the charade going.

"What good is the CBC to Canadians when they have no mention of the leaked emails."

What good is the CBC ..... period!

Can somebody explain to me how CO2 can cause lung problems? -- you know, when the lungs PRODUCE THE DAMN STUFF! Good lord, truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

Another e-mail off to the PM and my MP this morning.

People, please -- phone, fax, e-mail our politicians. They work for us ... not the other way around. Make our rational voices heard.

CTV at noon announced that Harper is going to attend Copenhagen after all.

Interestingly CTV has yet to cover the farudulent fudged numbers from the Hadley CRU charlatans.

Globemedia's CTV still pimping the "warmist" fraud and by omission of the fraud story, complicit in enabling a world wide tax grab to be hatched by a one-world new bureaucracy at Copenhagen.

Kudos to Lorrie Goldstein for his Sun piece today.

I mentioned Lorrie's Sun piece today when I telephoned the Prime Ministers office.

I now truly believe in man made global warming and no one can deny that there was not global warming or climate change. These people, Gore, Suzuki etc. have the facts and figures to prove it, all man made.

From the UNFCCC (Copenhagen)
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/documents/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf

Just as Lord Mockton pointed out, it calls for a creation of a government to be overseen by the COP (Conference of Parties) who would appear, by my reading, the same people who created this monstrosity.

The first 18 pages are a template of how to sign away our economic future, freedoms and sovereignty:

38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars:

government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on
adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds
and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will
operate as such, as appropriate.

Note: The "government" quote is from the bottom of P. 18

Step 1: De-fund all research by those who have agreed with the CRU.

Step 2: Purge ALL politicians of ALL parties at ALL levels in ALL countries who have voted to fund this massive abomination.

Step 3: Re-write ALL textbooks to remove ALL commentary that supports AGW, and only leave words that expose this massive scandal as "How NOT to do Science."

You are welcome to add steps of your own....

If Obama is going to Copenhagen then Prime Minister Harper has to. Even if we don't want the Co2 tax we will be stuck with it if the Americans impose it. The Americans will be putting Cap and Tax measures on all imports and they are our largest trading partner. If Harper can get face time with Obama maybe he could point out the folly of the Cap and Trade plan. After all Harper studied economics and probably has a pretty firm grasp on the situation.

Personally I'd like everyone to boycott the event but if the big guys are going to be there we should be there just to try and influence a good outcome.

Sent my emails off to the PM, Iggy and my local MPP.

Let's hope they wake up before it is too late.

If the AGW lobby does indeed try to move it onto a human health issue they will be slaughtered like Zulus.

Because if it is indeed a human health issue it can bs far better regulated by controlling the actual pollutants that cause it - Nox, carbon monoxide, particulates etc. Rather than CO2. We already have regs on those things and it would not be difficult to tighten them further if need be. Natural gas would be penalty-free from the get-go and gasoline, diesel and yes, even coal can be cleaned up using various traps and additives. And of course mortality and morbidity stats can be used to argue conclusively whether the billions of cost to incrementally reduce these emissions are really worth the expense or could the money be used to save orders of magnitude more lives on things like reducing infants death from diarreahia (sp).

Let them enter the killing fields...

I just fired off an email to the PM's office with a copy to my MP. I simply asked PMSH to take in the sights, rub elbows with other leaders and, generally, have a relaxing time ... but .... please do not sign or commit to anything that has been dreamt up by these shysters.

Perhaps at this point a pragmatic approach is necessary here.
Hypothetically:
....if Harper kicks over the traces,metaphorically, and publically rejects the KOOLAID.....
...Harper totally rejects KYOTO II....
...OBOZO endorses KYOTO II...

Probable results....
...The US ceases to trade with Canada....
...Canada opens the switches and closes the valves...
...using the KOOLAID momentum...the opposition defeats the government.

...Would OBOZO invade and occupy Canada...with the blessing of ACORN etc???
...Will OBOZO have CIVIL WAR II on his hands??with possibly the military mutinying?

Sadly it appears the evil axis of Democrats, Greenies, ACORN will try to ignore this and brazen it out....hoping CLIMATE_GATE will go away.

Our best and brightest hope is that INDIA/CHINA will not play ball with the conspiracy.

We should start laying pipe towards KITIMAT.

I have it on good authority that Obama is only going to Copenhagen to beg for some money to borrow. He was told by the Chinese last week that the only money they would continue to lend America would be funds to buy Chinese goods, not pay for plant fertilizer.

Obamasiah figures Copenhagen is like a mega one stop begging opportunity for the USA in Copenhagen if so many leaders are in one place at one time.

Such a slippery slope, a bow to a Saudi King, a very deep bow to a Japanese Emperor and BAM! . . there’s Barry standing in the corridors with a cap and a sign saying “Buddy can you spare a $trillion ?”

I also heard that the financial debacle in California has reached such a critical level that Ahhnold has asked to hitch a ride on AF1 and he’ll pretend to be a dancing monkey if Obama will be his organ grinder, musically speaking of course.

Comment 654 by Gavin on the realclimate website thread re the hacked emails:

"A temperature record on it's own does not prove any attribution to a cause. That requires some kind of model - statistical, GCM or whatever, but attribution is a whole different thing."

It's true that a temperature record on its own does not reveal a cause. It can, however, reveal a trend. I have a hard time believing that the relocation of a few weather stations over time and changes to measurement instruments could result in a temperature trend that it so wildly inaccurate that we have to employ "models" to fix the "problem".

What model is this guy talking about anyway? He doesn't say. What kinds of biases and problems are built into that model? A disgruntled computer programmer obviously thought there were plenty. I gather Gavin and the rest of the AGW crowd don't care as long as the model gives the correct pre-determined result.

For the most part, the AGW "models" are based on incredibly complicated mathematical algorithms that few people, let alone their creators, can apparently understand. The main purpose of these algorithms is not to clarify matters, but rather to bury criticism of AGW under an avalanche of baffling scientific jargon.

What I find most telling is that the Hadley researchers were willing to throw away 25 years worth of work, rather than surrender their "data" to outsiders for scrutiny. In a word or two, they were more afraid of possible criminal fraud charges if the truth ever got out.

Here is my message sent to Harper today (Nov. 26):

Dear Prime Minister Harper:

This past week we learned that critical climate data has likely been skewed by dishonest scientists working for the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at East Anglia University in the UK. This is a very important development because the CRU is one of the main sources of temperature data the UN's IPCC uses to make its case that the earth is in the grip of dangerous man-made global warming. If this data is unreliable or even false, as hacked e-mails and documents indicate it probably is, then the conclusions based upon that data are likewise false.

Your government is under pressure from the green lobby to sign a new climate treaty at Copenhagen. They say the treaty is needed because the IPCC says it is. So far you have rightly resisted the rush to sign a new treaty because China and India will not be signatories. The news about manipulated data is an even better reason not to sign.

If we are going to commit ourselves to spend billions on climate mitigation efforts, shouldn't we be reasonably sure that the need for us to do something is real? If this need is based on deliberately manipulated data, how can we trust it? The answer is we cannot.

I urge you, therefore, to set up a process to hear from all sides in the climate debate to determine the true state of climate science. What do we know for sure? What do we not understand? How reliable are the computer models the IPCC uses to predict the future course of climate change?

Based on what we learn from a dispassionate examination of this issue, we can then, as a country, decide what, if anything, we need to do. Perhaps it is useless to spend money trying to mitigate the course of climate change because humans have no significant influence on the earth's climate. Perhaps it is better to focus our efforts on adapting to whatever Nature is likely to send our way.

By all means, Mr. Harper, do not submit to the pressure of the green lobby to sign away our wealth and sovereignty at Copenhagen based on the output of suspect science.

Fred

I'm going to use YOUR letter as a template for mine, as I have a hard time articulating in print, unless of coarse you object.

as to changing Owebee's mind, I feel he is campaigning for his future job, head of the UN or the new one world gov't

we can only hope that congress and the senate are more conscientious of their jobs, (elections and all), and do not pass anything stupid

Global warming is convenient for the politicians. With the massive deficits in the U.S. and Europe - and potentially here as well, cap and tax is seen as at least a partial solution to the problem. Whether it is based on bogus science or not is absolutely irrelevant to the politicians.

I told Harper that if he continues to push this AGW agenda come next election I will turn in my ballot.

My e-mail to the PM below. Others may feel free to use, amend or edit for their purposes.

----- Original Message -----
From: colin.xxxxxxx@shaw.ca
To: pm@pm.gc.ca
Cc: kampr@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:23 AM
Subject: Climategate

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

I write today on the matter of the upcoming climate conference in Copenhagen next month.

As you may be aware (although I would point out, your awareness would not have been informed by the tax-subsidized CBC which has completely ignored the issue), recent leaked information out of the Climate Research Centre in England (CRU) has confirmed what many skeptics such as myself have believed for a very long time. That is, the science underlying the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is a total fraud.

Details out of the leaked information demonstrate the following:

1. Data sets were routinely fudged, altered or amended to produce pre-determined results.

2. Raw data was routinely kept secret (or conveniently "lost") from other scientists wanting to review and attempt to replicate CRU findings.

3. Thuggery and intimidation of skeptical scientists was the norm. Scientists skeptical of AGW were kept from publishing their reports, and/or kept out of the peer-review process. A stable of "friendly" peer-reviewers was kept, making a mockery of the peer review process. Note the self serving circularity here: skeptics were kept from the peer review process, then dismissed by the establishment because their papers were not published in peer review journals.

4. Information in the leak suggests CRU scientists had a hand in the firing of an "unfriendly" editor of a prominent science journal. Another e-mail hailed the death of a prominent skeptic as good news.

All of the foregoing makes it clear (indeed, it has been clear for years, unfortunately the powers that be have ignored it) that what has taken place at CRU has not been science. It has been self-serving make-work that has broken every rule in the book with respect to the scientific method. That this make-work stands to be the basis for a trillion-dollar reworking of the global economy is a disgrace in the extreme. Even more disgraceful is that nowhere in the western world, save few exceptions (e.g. Valclav Klaus), are there any politicians or political parties willing to stand up for the truth, and stand up for the ordinary, middle class taxpayer, and say, "ENOUGH!"

Mr. Prime Minster, allow me to be blunt for a moment: I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore. I have been a supporter of your party since its early Reform Party days. I attended the founding convention of the Canadian Alliance in Ottawa in January/2000. I have provided your party with extremely wide latitude over that last three years as a result of the minority status of parliament, despite discomfort over some issues, primarily the growth in federal spending prior to the recession.

However, on this matter I can brook no latitude. Should Canada sign onto any binding treaty next month in Copenhagen, I will not be voting for the Conservative party in the next election. This is a matter that goes to the core of individual liberty and economic freedom. This has never been about "saving the planet" -- rather, AGW is simply Communism Redux, on a global scale. The Conservative Party needs to stand up for Canada, stand up for individual Canadians, and protect our interests against those that would curtail our freedoms.

With regards,

John Gormely nailed it this morning, and I called it months ago. CC is the new club wielded by governments that are partial to protectionism. This is why PMSH must comply with TOTUS's decision.

There will be a time in the future when the “green bubble” is deemed “too big to fail” by governments regardless of the state of the “consensus”.

AGW Fraud: From the Unabomber to Maurice Strong to Copenhagen:

"it is necessary to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial society".
...-

Copenhagen:

"*We need," says Niels Fastrup of Klimaforum, "to make more fundamental changes in the way we live."

Unabomber:

"Therefore two tasks confront those who hate the servitude to which the industrial system is reducing the human race. First, we must work to heighten the social stresses within the system so as to increase the likelihood that it will break down or be weakened sufficiently so that a revolution against it becomes possible. Second, it is necessary to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial society if and when the system becomes sufficiently weakened. And such an ideology will help to assure that, if and when industrial society breaks down, its remnants will be smashed beyond repair, so that the system cannot be reconstituted. The factories should be destroyed, technical books burned, etc."
http://www.newshare.com/Newshare/Common/News/unifesto3.html#20

*Spiegel
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,663142,00.html

"I'm going to use YOUR letter as a template for mine, as I have a hard time articulating in print, unless of coarse you object."

Please do . . . pass it on.

That the left may now try (however feebly) to make this a health issue is no surprise at all.

Keep in mind that the modern leftist paradigm of using "settled science" against an easily demonized adversary began 16 years ago with the whole second-hand smoke fiasco. That two was proven (in a US court of law no less) to be a fake.

But, because no one wanted to seem like they were defending the act of smoking or tobacco addiction, they shied away from speaking out about the fraud.

The leftists learned a lesson on that battleground. If they could make it appear that there was a "consensus" of people/scientists who believed something, they could advance their cause of social-engineering.

That was the successful experiment that emboldened them to grow from simply having an activity banned from all indoor venues to controlling every aspect of human activity.

Now that they realize the bad-effects-from-temperature-rise angle is likely not going to last, they are retreating to the health ground - look for a special focus on the health of children - because it worked for them in the 90's with SHS.

Having initially called my MP's office 4 days ago (Russ Hiebert)and being advised they were unaware of the issue, I sent numerous email (with links). No answer back. So I called again today. Got Stonewalled. Called Ottawa office. Got Stonewalled.

Anyone else getting this treatment?

The CBC required balanced broadcasting.

Alex Jones (Producer of Fall of the Republic v. Al Gore (Producer of Inconvenient Truth)

and

Dr. T. Ball v. David Suzuki

“ … slashing carbon dioxide emissions also could save millions of lives, mostly by reducing preventable deaths from heart and lung diseases, according to studies published this week in the British medical journal The Lancet."

Lancet has a health and climate change series up this week. None of the studies published (at least in the summaries) said any such thing.

http://www.thelancet.com/series/health-and-climate-change

GYM:

I think what you meant to say was, "I'm going to use Jim's trick to hide my inability to find the words to write what I want to say."

Fred @ 1:36 LOL re; dancing monkeys & Organ grinders.

Sent my emails - already got a form reply back from Ig's office. 'thankyou blah blah blah- it means so much to me blah blah blah'

Yeah so PMSH is going to Copenhagen to get some hopenchangen afterall. Would love it if he stood up and called out the climate fiddlers - but doubter souter.

GogoGoldstein!

A vague and nebulous link to the "pollution", not C02, but pollution, created when fossil fuels are burned for manufacturing, autos etc. Yes, lowering pollution is obviously a good thing (catalytic converters etc.), but linking this to global warming is very, very tenuous....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091125/ap_on_sc/sci_climate_health

Comment at CBC:

"And if someone fudged some data ( which I don't believe) so what? Anyone with eyes in their head, and a grey matter in between the ears, should be able to step outside and see the changes that are happening before our very eyes. There is climate change occurring."

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/11/26/harper-copenhagen-summit026.html

See! We don't need no science!

Yeah there's a "grey matter" problem alright.

Just glanced at Google News and this story was posted 2 hours ago.
"Canada must create a cap-and-trade system that's compatible with the U.S. plan to reduce greenhouse gases - even if no U.S. system actually exists." By no other than Iggy and the Liberal Party.

I say let have an election now. This would be like Dions Green Tax. The final nail in the coffin.

What would possess someone to come out with a Cap and Tax program just when it been discovered that the whole thing is a fraud?

Left a message at the PM's office. Emailed my MP, Prentice and PM 2 days ago. Got an email back from my MP and he informed me he was following the situation. Also emailed Iggy. Dalton McTaxy John Gerritson and my MPP also got an email. My MPP emailed me back 3 times and pushed his AGW theories on me. He's an idiot.

If my memory serves me, the major city air contaminant was tire particles in the air one breaths. Back to the wooden wheel I guess.

“ … slashing carbon dioxide emissions also could save millions of lives, mostly by reducing preventable deaths from heart and lung diseases, according to studies published this week in the British medical journal The Lancet."

Lancet has a health and climate change series up this week. None of the studies published (at least in the summaries) said any such thing.

http://www.thelancet.com/series/health-and-climate-change

good comment from the NP comments on why Barry is tripping to Copenhagen . . .

The real reason Obama is going to Copenhagen, is because GoldmanSachs contributed $890,000 to his campaign. GoldmanSachs will make BILLIONS from carbon trading. They own the carbon trading exchange in the USA. www.rollingstone.com/

ALWAYS Follow the money

Having Harper there to give Canada a voice is better than him not being there. It dosen't mean he is going to go along with it.

Who knows, maybe Harper will speak up and be the hero and force the MSM to report something on the fraud.

"I am a skeptic ... . Global warming has become a new religion." -- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
"Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly ... . As a scientist I remain skeptical." -- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years."
Warming fears are the "worst scientific scandal in the history ... . When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." -- U.N. IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.
"The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others. It doesn't have open minds ... . I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists." -- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.
"The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." -- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
"It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." -- U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
"Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." -- Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.
"After reading [U.N. IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." -- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an associate editor of Monthly Weather Review.
"For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" -- Geologist Dr. David Gee, the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer-reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
"Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp ... . Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." -- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.
"Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined." -- Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh, Pa.
"Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense ... . The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning." -- Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
"CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another ... . Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so ... . Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver's seat and developing nations walking barefoot." -- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
"The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds." -- Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

Ian:

Great post...where did you find all that info?

"it's because Big Government, Big Business and Big Green don't give a s*** about "the science."

That pretty much sums up this ridiculous parade. As I watch MPs STILL discuss Copenhagen and carbon emissions as though nothing happened, I wonder if the world has taken crazy pills.

Here is some potential good news. US Senator James Inhofe wants an investigation.

The U.S. Senate's leading global warming skeptic has sent letters to several climate change scientists and to the inspectors general of various federal agencies notifying them to retain breached documents and e-mails that he says prove researchers are manipulating data to make the case for global warming.

The move by Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, is part of his push for an investigation into whether the U.N's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has fudged the science on global warming.

Here: WND is not a place that I would usually reference, but they seem to have complied a nice set of quotes

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=83323

Found a great comment on News Busters.

"The IPCC chefs and their lackeys in the press have cooked the books to create a Soviet casserole of lies, flavored with phony data, suppressed research, bullied colleagues and topped with a garnish of elitist arrogance. And they want us to not only eat it, buy to pay billions for the privilage. They now have all the credibility of a ACORN ethics officer and the public is vomiting at the smell!

Sorry - that should have been "compiled"

Lorrie Goldstein was brilliant to make the link;

Financial crisis was caused by idiots but deemed too big to fail - hence, taxpayer bailouts.

Global warming is a proven fraud but too big to fail ?

IOW, Gore Suzuki disciples will loose their shirts. Tough.

Looks like China has now stepped onto the bandwagon.

A self declared 45% decrease in CO2 as a function of their economy/GDP/whatever.

This will force the US to sign onto this fraud and ensure her demise as a superpower. Brilliant tactic!

Sorry no link as I saw this on the little screen in the elevator at work.

I disagree as the atmosphere is also the earths shield and the thicker the shield the better. CO2 is a good thing.

"CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another ... . Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so ... . Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver's seat and developing nations walking barefoot." -- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

Posted by: Ian at November 26, 2009 2:51 PM

Money quote from Ian's collection:

"CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another. Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so."

That, in a nutshell, is the source of the problem. I've come to the conclusion that the vast amount of money involved in this international rent seeking operation has metastasized into the media as well via personal "green" portfolio investments by media bigwigs, advertising revenue, fear of boycotts from "concerned" green-leaning citizens, etc., with the result that news editors are in a conflict of interest over this story. There's just too much "green" money floating around out there.

There's absolutely no other way to explain the extent to which this story is not NEWS (as opposed to opinion - op eds, editorials, etc) in otherwise sensible outlets like the NP, the WSJ, etc.

The sad thing is, the biggest science scandal in modern history can now never be "news" by definition, inasmuch as, even if the story is eventually covered is won't be new, it'll be old-hat, yesterday's story being drily picked over after-the-fact. The problem with this story being covered almost exclusively by opinion journalists and the contentious blogosphere is that it enables the enviro-moonies to pretend the Hadley revelations are just a matter of opinion, as opposed to fact, even though the fraudulence IS a fact. Among the average non-blogospheric citizens, a would-be game-changing fact can be written off, with apparent public credibility, as just an opinion.

Called PM's office. Secretary not interested in my call as she was too busy eating lunch while I was talking. Got a big ho-hum there.

Called Maurice Vellacott's office in Ottawa. Assistant did not even know that Harper was going to Copenhagen. Not a good sign. At least she listened and took my name and telephone number.

Called Brad Trost's office in Ottawa. Spoke with Murray for several minutes and my concerns will be passed on to Brad. Kudos to Murray for being an SDA reader!

IMHO Canada needs a Sarah Palin to shake up the old Conservative boys and get us back to true Conservative policies.

Harper is now a Liberal and he's lost my vote.

Sorry to go off-topic but the CRTC has approved al-Jazeera.
And something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

There's absolutely no other way to explain the extent to which this story is not NEWS (as opposed to opinion - op eds, editorials, etc) in otherwise sensible outlets like the NP, the WSJ, etc. - EBD

You may want to read the article at Fox News that I posted at 2:56.

Let's see if I got this straight.

The guy who put out the hockey stick ... his name is Micheal Mann. Correct?

It seems to me the MSM has this all wrong.

Should it not be Mann-made global warming to more accurately reflect its element of fantasy?

Those political scientists are so clever. Imagine how much they must have been laughing when the MSM called it man-made global warming.

Geez, the MSM is so easily fooled that I'm starting to take pity on them.

"Harper is now a Liberal and he's lost my vote."

Sparky, here's a serious, entirely non-rhetorical question. I'd like to know your answer.

Suppose for a second that you are a Prime Minister who is:

a) absolutely, comprehensively aware that the multi-billion dollar, rent seeking AGW bullshit is predicated on a lie and propelled by the confluence of activist/world-government rent seekers and a brainwashed-by-the-MSM electorate;

b) in a position where the only way to get elected and to stop this world-game-changing fraud is by keeping the reins of power out of the hands of those who wish to continue to propagate the lie and to take actions to ensconce the vast rent seeking operation that is AGW, and metastasize its influence into all levels of government, both national and international.

I know what I'd do: I'd assuage the fears of those who previously wouldn't vote for me on the grounds that I wasn't "green" enough - and who won't let me stay in power if they believe I'm not "green enough" - while simultaneously stalling for time, waiting for the truth to out and for public opinion to catch up.

This happens to be exactly what the PM is doing.

If Mr. Harper did the bidding of the impatient and angry among us by jumping ahead of public opinion by a few years, if he didn't wait for the public to - as is inevitable - become as aware of the issue as we are (and he is), and the green-friendly Liberals regained power as a consequence, would that help or hurt the bloody, power-seeking AGW rent seekers? I suggest it would hurt the cause big time.

This issue is about getting the word out there, and informing the public (as Kate continues to do) so that people who are *on our side* on this issue can get elected and hold power, and keep the power out of the hands of the fraudulent, greedy rent seekers.

Ripped from AoSHQ : TheAussies get it .

160 Physicists sign anti-AGW petition

The American Physical Society (APS) has "overwhelmingly rejected" a proposal from a group of 160 physicists to alter its official position on climate change. The physicists, who include the Nobel laureate Ivar Giaver, wanted the APS to modify its stance to reflect their own doubts about the human contribution to global warming. The APS turned down the request on the recommendations of a six-person committee chaired by atomic physicist Daniel Kleppner from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

...the petition's signatories claim that "measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20–21st century changes [in climate] are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today". They say that various natural processes, such as ocean cycles and solar variability, could account for variations in the Earth's climate on the time scale of decades and centuries.
"Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate," the petition concludes. It also points to "extensive scientific literature that examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals".

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/40916
Nov 11, 2009

Brent (3:20), fwiw I referred to the NP and the WSJ, not Fox news. Good for Inhofe, though.

The WSJ in particular exemplifies the ongoing relegation of this story to opinion articles, of which there's admittedly no shortage. The only plausible explanation I can think of for this is that which I suggested at 3:07. I wish I could think of another one, but I believe it has to be tied to money in some sense, because the WSJ is otherwise a great newspaper - the best one extant, IMO, and I have no doubt that the editors are privately aware of the huge significance of this story.

Here's Tim Ball on the Climate-quiddick---John Holdren (aka "The Science Czar") connection:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17183

("Climate-quiddick", 'cause, ya know, they both tried to "hide the dip")

Why didn't they just go ahead and say it causes cancer? Did they think the mainstream media would question a little thing like that?

Red Deer journalist released, Robert Picton wins appeal, Climate change and health.
H1N1 wasn't working anymore.
Does anyone else think they are desperatly trying to change the channel.
Remember the coalition?
Its time to go to the streets.
Tea party anyone?

Tonight I'm attending an event for a local federal Conservative Party candidate. I will not embarrass her, as it may be impossible for her to speak outside of the official party line (whatever that is?) but if the opportunity presents itself, I will ask the question of what Harper & co. thinks of AGW now that ClimateGate has erupted.

Thanks Kate, truth is was looking for this on your main page today. Could this info be a side link that comes back to this post for a while even?

It appears the G&M is trying to shut down the comments on their website. But they are doing it behind the scenes by closing down those names that are pointing the global warming fraud out. By clicking on the names of those bringing up the issue, you will very often see "This community member's page is currently being reviewed by our editors."

Censorship is alive and well in Torontostan.

EBD:

I will not comment much on the WSJ.
Here are 2 articles from the Post:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2258373
http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/story.html?id=2262365

Following the money is a good idea and although the MSM is slow and certainly inadequate on the issue, no all have been entirely AWOL on the coverage.

Excellent analysis EBD - our Prime Minister is on our side but he has a big problem just to the south of us. He, like you and I is probably aware that the new fella (and his administration) S. of the border is first and foremost a "Community organizer" who pals around with terrorists and Bolsheviks. The American people, of course, are not on side with the direction their country has taken ..but..he is their elected President. They are in the same boat as we were when we had the bubble headed PET up here. He and his Liberano successors did a lot of damage here in Canada!

This mess is way too big to go away...I think we should bombard all M.P.s to let them know that we know all about this hoax - then not one of them can plead ignorance when this balloon of filth spews all over the world gov, evil, human hating power mongering Communists behind the fraud.

This must be exposed, the Russians back in 1917 were deceived by these same evil human haters - we cannot allow that to happen by being too lazy or fearful to voice our opinions. Our Prime Minister invited all Canadians to contact him re: what we wished him to say in Copenhagen - let him know and let him know about his secretary's poor attitude.

Lorrie, Outstanding!! Thank-you.

Thank-you for the link to the agenda, Ward. Great information Ian.

My hope is that the US Senate would have to ratify any treaty signed by Obama. Sen Inhofe (REP) already has called for an investigation into the CRU fiasco. In 1997 the Senate voted 95-0
on an anti Kyoto resolution. I don't think opinion has changed that much in 12 years; for example, H. Byrd co-author of the resolution remains in office. Unless Obama has some means of bypassing the Senate, the proposed Copenhagen accord could be in trouble. Most Senators are in for the long haul, and have to face electors fairly soon.

email to PM Harper:

Copenhagen : The Emperor has no Clothes

Prime Minister Harper,

It is imperative that Canada does not sign on to the upcoming madness in Copenhagen !

The upcoming conference on Climate Change is reminiscent of the fairy tale "The Emperor Has No Clothes,” by Hans Christian Andersen , but in this case it is the UN IPCC that has no clothes.

In light of the climate fraud uncovered at East Anglia CRU , and now the New Zealand "massaging" of data to show global warming , in all seriousness , how can intelligent people such as yourself even attend the Copenhagen conference with a straight face ?

I have written Minister Prentice about this issue , but his office never replies. Is that because he is too busy conversing with the towers of environmental science : Gore , Suzuki and Maurice Strong ?

Well, I've written my MP, Jim Prentice, and the Prime Minister outlining my concerns and including my full scientific credentials and all contact information to be certain they're aware I'm not some crank. It's certainly time for some push back. This fraud's gone on long enough.

Point taken, Brent (4:19), there has been some news coverage, but it's a pathetic dribble relative to the enormous importance of this story. Many, many pundits and opinion writers at the same dailies have been noting the same thing.

It's akin to, I don't know, WWIII breaking out and coverage of it being relegated to the fifth page, and only every second or third day.

We're talking about a potential massive rewrite, and hobbling, of the western world's economy, and incontrovertible evidence is now coming in that the science that such massive and drastic action has been entirely predicated on - and promoted as "fact" by the MSM - has in fact been conscientiously cooked up by "scientists" with a political agenda, and that scientists have been trying to in effect rub out legitimate scientists in the interests of maintaining this rent seeking international juggernaut. If that's not front-page news, I don't know what is.

I hope Al Gore goes to jail for living off fraudulent means!
And a suitable cellmate?
Dr Suzuki.

Reinforcing the justification for my persistent assertions that the MSM are as a group ..... the stupidest people on the planet.

EBD:

I must disagree with your points. The PM is playing both ends against the middle and is going to get burned.

The Canadian public is anti-AGW and on Harper's side. The position he is taking is politically illogical considering Harper is so close to a majority.

Voters are looking for a principled stance, not fence-sitting. And, by going to Copenhagen, Harper is giving credence to the global warming hoax especially in light of the recent leaks that the AGW data is corrupt.

Harper can make a principled stand when he wants to. Canada pulled out of the UN Human Rights Council and Canada boycotted Ahmadinejad's speech at the UN.

Harper can simply state that there is clearly not a consensus that AGW actually exists, and that he will defer any decision until there is empirical evidence of AGW.

I would suggest that Harper is looking at the revenue opportunities from taxing carbon. He will happily pocket our tax dollars while blaming the Obama administration and the IPCC. This does not bode well for Western Canada.

Thus far, Harper's behavior has not indicated otherwise. Harper is obssessed with getting a majority and he will do anything to buy votes.

Is this not the Liberal Way?

Thanks for responding, Sparky, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't agree that the Canadian public is anti-AGW. I wish it were true, but I think that's an optimistic extrapolation of the sort of views you and I see confirmed every day in the conservative blogosphere. I'd bet the proverbial farm that internal polling shows a very substantial proportion of Canadians to be brainwashed...er, concerned about antropogenic global warming, and that taking a stance against "green" actions would cost the Conservatives big time.

I believe - for what that's worth - that if polling actually showed that the Canadian voting public was substantially in favour of rejecting proposals to limit C02 emissions, this Conservative government would not only act on that, but Mr. Harper would then do a private jig while pumping his fist in the air.

Even if one in ten Conservative voters believe that it's important to take action on climate change,that's enough to hand power over to the Liberals who would not only act on climate change, with all the untold damage that would cause, but would pressure other governments to do the same.

I believe the Prime Minister understands that he can't fight the climate moonies unless he's in power, and that at this point staying in power entails placating, and assuaging the fears of, the - undeniably brainwashed - electorate while stalling and delaying and putting off taking any damaging actions.

Btw, you're absolutely right about the PM's strong stand on Ahmadinejad, but that's not a comparable issue, in that, as far as I know, Ahmadinejad isn't as popular among Canadian voters as "saving the environment" is.

This is a cultural/political battle; as long as enough Canadians who have been brainwashed by a lying, activist media (think CBC/CTV etc) who - literally - have *never* made a case for one second that AGW isn't one-hundred percent real, politicians of any stripe will be forced to *be seen to* act.

Maybe it's the case that you simply know/meet/run into different people than I do, but I'm constantly astounded at how many people not only believe in global warming but are unaware that there's any evidence to the contrary. Blog commenters, and denizens of Conservative blogs, are still a minority of voters. In the meantime, it's better to have a PM who pays lip service to climate change in order to stay in power than to have one who will take ridiculous, economy sapping actions out of a fervent belief in the whole scam.

It's not Harper you have to convince that the science is proven fraudulent thus the taxes are pointless. It's like Golstein said, it's the predatory market speculators driving this eco hysteria to inflate the costs of ALL resource based commodities - they need to be convinced the productive population are aware this con the science quacks and venal Polis are running is at the behest of international market manipulators.

Unless you are prepared to plant your feet, say "no more, no further" to the pillage from big government, big money and big green, you may as well bend over and take it without Crisco like the zombie Gaia cult are.

Letters are a start but without the weight of mass punitory action, they're meaningless.

Just emailed Harper Prentice and Day.

after emailing harper and my mp I received a reply from a harper bumboy that my email was redirected to prentice, and I got no reply from my mp.
I'm still of the opinion that the GreenDreamies need an even more massive lightningbolt to snap them out of their windmill-pinkballoon-perfectworld mindset,.. amazingly.

Fly your so right.

Sent my emails days ago, and I'll be calling the PM's office tomorrow.

I agree Harper is walking a tightrope right now, and it is premature, although gutsy, to speak out and call it BS.

If PMSH did that, the MSM Horde, and the leftists of the country would have a civil war, and, we would see the leftys get elected.

Right now, PMSH is saying all the right things to keep the Moonbats at bay. Suzuki is quiet, as is Dizzy Lizzy and their wingnut followers. That's fine with me.

And, as stated above, I understand, although I do not like, some of the stances the gov. has taken, but in a minority world, some issues have to be bent on, otherwise, say hi to Minister Layton!

Colin, thanks for the letter, I'm sending a copy as well, to various politicos, even though I know Campbell is braindead, and Penner is an envirowacko. They need to know the jig is up too.

Our CBC (ptu) awakens and what do they report..."Hackers skewed climate-change emails: scientists"
Late, distorted, off-topic and misleading.
Apart from that, this is one helluva bit of serious investigative reporting.
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/11/26/climate-change-hack.html

"Hackers skewed climate-change emails." In other words, in airing out dozens if not hundreds of examples of extreme misconduct and fraud, they "skewed" the emails by not including emails that don't show misconduct and fraud.

It's so weak. It's like someone has been caught on forty different video cameras robbing forty different banks; his lawyer stands up in court and says, with a straight face,

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client is innocent. I will prove over the course of this trial that the police were selective in choosing videos they believed could be used to make my client look bad, and that in doing so they completely skewed the evidence."

"Look at this video, for example, showing my client buying a pack of gum - paying for a pack of gum - in a Seven Eleven and then walking calmly out. Why, I ask you, did the police not include this video in the evidence? Why is the prosecution trying to skew the results by selecting only those videos that show my client in an unfavourable light?"

Wow. "Hackers skewed climate change emails."

Sickening, unprofessional coverage from the CBC. A complete abnegation of their duty as journalists. They cost the taxpayers a billion a year, and we get this? You always know it's coming, but you never get used to it.

Sorry for the delay in getting back to your 5:23 comment, EBD. It is Thanksgiving here and we just had our evening meal and some family time.

I think we all know about the bias of certain institutions regarding this matter; however, we have indeed had higher expectations for others. I submit that this was never truly about the science. I have never been a true AGW denier - I have been a skeptic in the true sense of the word. In essence, the only thing that I had been convinced was that the science most certainly had never, ever been settled on the matter.

As one who was able to partition the science (undetermined) from the political applications (Kyoto, etc), I had always felt that there was some other angle to the politics. No other vast change has been based on such incomplete conclusions. In the wake of the CRU data release, the quietness of some and outright denial of others who were/are supporters of radical political change based on at best undetermined science suggests to me that the science part of the "climate change" angle will be quietly abandoned but the political angle will proceed unimpeded. Yes, it is a money angle.

I have a small request. As someone with posting privileges at SDA, would you consider starting a thread with this 96 minute Youtube video with Christopher Monckton done on October 14 in St. Paul, MN. Please remember this was done before the CRU data release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0

The video references a Powerpoint display which may be found here:

http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/monckton_2009.pdf

In the last few minutes of the video, he references a copy of the Copenhagen Treaty that might be signed in December. I am not sure if I have a correct link to the treaty but I provide a draft of one here - further searching may reveal a more accurate copy of a suggested treaty:

http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/seasia/en/press/reports/ngo-copenhagen-treaty.pdf

Thanks for this little exchange this evening. I will look for your response tomorrow because I need to get back to my family and our guest has arrived. I respect whatever decision you make regarding the Monckton video.

EBD - I posted a response. It got caught in the filter - probably too many links.

Well i did my part i send a personal e-mail to Mr.Harper as well as Mr.Prentice let the chips fall where they may . God have mercy on us.

Paul in calgary.

Just checked on your comment Brent - too many links. I didn't want to arbitrarily take one out. Try reposting with one less link.

I feel a rap song coming on. I call it
The Crimatologist:

Hey man lay cool
I'm a member of the Had Cru
Do as I say or I diss you
You will be fired, not hired
You publications will expire
Be with the Cru
They wil take care of Yu

"Every Breath You Take" indeed:

Health Reform is not about your health, but the health of the government. And Global Worming is not about the health of the planet, but again about the Health of The Planners.

The Environment is everywhere, except your body. So they have Enviro-Care to control the outer world and Health Care to control your innards.

The un-Constitutional mandate forcing you to purchase insurance is essentially a tax on existing, on breathing air, if you will.

And Cap & Trade is a tax on exhaling, now that they’ve declared your CO2 breath a Toxic Waste dump. And that was even before you had a cocktail.

In other words, they want to tax, regulate and control us when we’re breathing in …and tax, regulate and control us when we’re breathing out. Coming…and going.

That’s beyond “convergence”; it’s tyranny. And it must be defeated.

I read the letter posted here by Colin in BC, and used parts of it in my own e-mail to PM Harper and my own MP.