Dear SDA,

Canada's MSM, such as it is, is now watching. Witness this column by Margaret Wente in the Globe and Mail this am.

Climate science's PR disaster
‘Climategate' brings a long-running and bitter battle into the open

My...you do get around Doug.

From JoNova in Australia.. the hits keep coming!!

http://joannenova.com.au/

History will record December 1, 2009 as the day of the first major political damage to the momentum of the Global Warming Scam.

For the first time anywhere in a major western democracy, a mainstream party is ready to face an election on “climate change” and face the bullies. The Australian Liberal Party have elected a new leader, held a secret ballot and voted 55 : 29
to defer the Emissions Trading Legislation.

If you haven't followed this there was a caucus revolt in the Liberal Party. The old leader who had pledged to follow Rudd and vote for ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme) was voted out as leader by his caucus and a new leader installed. The vote is now postponed and will now likely fail. Rudd will not have his ETS to take to Copenhagen.

Of course this has all happened without the Austrailian MSM noticing.

More on this from wattsupwiththat.com. Also on wuwt, China, India, Brazil, South Africa threaten coordinated walk-out if they are pressured.

How about PMSH pre-emptively walking out right now.

Future generations are going to regard Climategate as tulip mania rolled together with the Salem witch trials. Certainly Mr. Keenan appears to have been subjected to a 21st century version of a witch trial.

Too bad we haven't managed to advance much since the 17th century.

Follow the money, another good Climategate article by the WSJ;

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703939404574566124250205490.html?mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular

Kate:
You cannot be thanked enough for your incredible efforts at exposing this scandalous grift. I just marked my 74 birthday and cannot remember a hoax that ranks with this one. I have four children and several grandchildren and fear for their future. I am so damned mad I can hardly contain myself.
It is shameful to see that Douglas Keenan and the thousands of scientists and researchers like him have been vilified by schemers, liars and the likes of Al Gore and empty-headed commentators on the CBC.
It is the tragedy of our times.
So keep hammering away Kate. We need people like you.

I deeply grateful to people like Douglas Keenan for their acts of courage in the face of fascists who would seek the death of hundreds of millions of the poor people in this world.
We know of course that depopulation of the undeserving underclass is their ultimate goal.
These monsters are as dangerous to humanity as anything we have ever experienced and I thank god we have people this world like Douglas Keenan and Kate who are willing to put themselves out there to stop them.

Great work Doug, keep it up.

I am no expert, but I find it unlikely that a tipping point could exist. Large scale melting would possibly be associated with increased cloud cover due to water vapour (isn't there very little cloud cover in polar regions?). The net effect may be negligible.

Doug, your efforts are greatly appreciated. If you were to set up a fund to take your battles to the courts, I think you could be assured of global support.

The only chance we have of stopping these Watermelons is to have people like you keep exposing them to the light of day.

It is shameful that Mr. Keenan and others of impeccable credentials are excluded from discussing these issues in publications such as the G&M and CBC. Today I inflicted Mr. Monbiot's diatribe on myself (G&M). At great pain to his conscience, he apparently persuaded himself to overcome his scruples about flying, to come to Toronto to chide Canada about the oilsands and its worsening reputation in the world relating to climate policies. A video conference would have served to convey his message and not violated his principles about flying. If there's anything I find more objectionable than a hypocrite, it's a self-righteous hypocrite.

I'm sure he got a good view of the tarsands from Toronto. Also, I expect he prefers that Britain use "untainted" oil from the Middle East. Didn't they just lobby the release of one of the Lockerbie terrorists so as to get in a bit more cozy with middle eastern oil?

Mr. Keenan should contact the Danes, it is my understanding they too have a very old archive of tree rings going packs several thousand years. I've come across it the archeological world where they can date wooden artifacts _to the year_ sometimes.

Perhaps they will be more open?

(thanks to preservation of dead trees - and much else - in bogs.)

I'm just wondering when all of Stephen Harper's fans are going to realize just how dangerous the man is. He's turned the entire cap'n trade in Canada over to China, India, Brazil, Australian liberals, and US conservatives. He'll go along with whatever the status quo ends up being, even if it means Cap'n Trade in Canada.

Harper is a hack, who will flush this whole country down the AGW toilet if other nations don't take a stand.

When the dust clears and we get away without a carbon tax, you can thank the New Media, Vaclav Klaus, sceptical scientists, and politicians from other countries ... but not PM Harper. Harper wouldn't take a stand on anything if it meant missing a chance at that majority.

True leaders are visionaries who can "explain" their vision to the people ... by talking directly to them. True leaders are also courageous, not slimy hacks who work in the shadows and treat their public like idiots.

We are witnessing perhaps the greatest scandal in history, which involves the theft of trillions of dollars and massive expansion of global governance ... yet our PM plays small-time hackery in Ottawa.

The liberals used to do this ... govern by the polls ... now Harper is simply one-uping him.

The man is dangerous because he has no ideology, no solid foundation, and no true vision other than Ottawa hackery. Liberal/CPC/NDP ... not much difference nowadays.

Interesting that this happened before Copanhagen, accident or design?

My suspicion is the whistleblower pulled the plug just before Copenhagen to extract the most damage before a response could be organized.

Taking a page from Mr. Alinsky and Andrew Brietbart.

Hard to say, Bob. Like the dump of global warming scare stories into media, I question the timing.

Oh wait! Environmental Media Services....

http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/110

Bravo, sir. (And Kate.) Best of luck to you in your efforts.

I've been stranded in the combat zone
I walked through Bedford Stuy alone
Even rode my motorcycle in the rain
And you told me not to drive
But I made it home alone
So you said that only proves that i'm insane

You may be white, you maybe WONG!
But you may just be the lunatic we're looking for!

(Send up to Billy Joel)

On the other hand you may be flying on a WANG and a prayer!

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North"

Globe & Mail is live blogging a debate right now between George Monbiet and Bjorn Lumborg and asking for input. Only 17 comments so far.

Paul you're being a maroon.

First, I hope that no binding treaty is signed regarding AGW EVER.

That being said, you need to consider that the financial penalty for disobedience may/will be costlier than simply paying the hush money upfront. The Americans are looking for any excuse to stop our goods at the boarder and non-compliance with such a treaty would be just that.

Don't get me wrong Paul I'm a "Denier", but you appear to be in denial.

Claude: "These monsters are as dangerous to humanity as anything we have ever experienced".

Here* is The Canadian Monster, "Liberal leader" Bob Rae's Uncle Mo, Maurice Strong*.

"*It is this parallel affinity for authoritarian governments that emerges as the dominant theme in Mr. Strong's essay."

More here**: Mao Stlong writing from Beijing, China.
...-

"*Maurice Strong's authoritarian saviour"

"Our concepts of ballot-box democracy may need to be modified to produce strong governments capable of making difficult decisions."

"Hollywood isn't alone in its anticipation of Armageddon. Writing in the summer issue of World Policy Journal, Maurice Strong - Canada's very own prophet of doom - unequivocally embraces the apocalypse. Straight-forwardly entitled "Facing Down Armageddon: Environment at a Crossroads," Mr. Strong's essay ends with a dire warning. "Human existence is at risk," he says. "We face an Armageddon that is both real and imminent." Yet he implicitly grasps for hope - choosing at any rate not to specify (as the new film 2012 does) the precise day, month and year of the catastrophe.

More so than most people who assert that The End Is Near, however, Mr. Strong gives humanity a provisional way out. Reform democracy, he says, by - more or less - getting rid of it. Although he doesn't say this as candidly as he could have, his exact words leave little doubt: "Our concepts of ballot-box democracy may need to be modified to produce strong governments capable of making difficult decisions." This is not a new argument. In one historic usage, it was deployed to celebrate fascism - because ballot-box democracy couldn't make trains run on time.

What precisely can our ballot-box democracies not deliver now? Essentially, Mr. Strong says, they can not deliver zero carbon emissions - which he defines as a prerequisite for human survival. Developed countries, he says, must reduce their emissions - measured against 1990 levels - by 95 per cent by 2050, an objective that Mr. Strong himself describes as "daunting." This goal, he says, can be achieved only by "put[ting] aside national considerations." This curious stipulation makes the rescue of the human race impossible. Ballot box or no ballot box, no government can put aside "national considerations" and survive.

If the goal itself is impossible, the financial commitment to reach it is improbable. Mr. Strong puts the minimum upfront cost, paid by the developed democracies, at $1-trillion (U.S.). "Such a level of funding," he says, requires "innovative" means. Mr. Strong proposes UN-levied fees "for the use of the global commons," such as the oceans, the atmosphere and outer space. He proposes, as well, UN-levied financial penalties on countries that fall behind in meeting their emission targets - in the same way, he says, that national governments tax alcohol and smoking.

Mr. Strong, now 80, is a long-time fan of coercive governments - as is, by its charter, the World Policy Journal. It is published by the New York-based World Policy Institute, which champions "innovative policies" that require "a progressive and global point of view." It is this parallel affinity for authoritarian governments that emerges as the dominant theme in Mr. Strong's essay."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/maurice-strongs-authoritarian-saviour/article1367576/

**Mao Stlong from China:

"Facing Down Armageddon: Environment at a Crossroads,"
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/wopj.2009.26.2.25

With due respect, I think Keenan's theory of a "tipping point" is as loopy as a lot of other things I've heard from climate scientists. The earth gets hotter. Ice levels fall leading to more heat, leading to less ice and on and on in a vicious cycle that leaves us all as lobsters boiling in a pot.

If this were true, then the opposite should happen too. World gets colder equals more ice. More ice reflects away heat making it colder still. Pretty soon the planet is just one big ice cube floating around the sun.

There is one slight problem with his theory. Every period in time, be it ice ages or periods of warmth far higher than today have turned around. How did that happen then. It shouldn't have if we accept Keenan's temp reinforcing theory. Temps that are self reinforcing should have headed off in one direction or the other and stayed there by now.

The Earth's climate is not a precariously balanced teeter totter just ready to head off in a killing period of excessive heat or cold because it was given a nudge. There is no narrow degree or two range in which everything is okay and which all hell breaks loose if we get a little high or low of the mark.

Keenan sounds to me like another warmist nutjob. What we are witnessing in his dispute with Wang is one fruit loop screwing over another fruit loop. We would be wise to understand this and withhold any praise. Those of you here who are patting this guy on the back need to give your heads a shake and re-read the nonsense Keenan is proposing.

Homez: You lost the argument the moment you started name calling and didn't make a single point that would counter mine.

Furthermore, "hope" isn't a strategy, it's for O-bots and weak people.

If politicians in Australia, which is far more "green" dominated than Canada, can take a stand, so can Harper. It's so funny to watch conservatives cheering on Australian liberals while their own conservative PM does nothing ... now that's pathetic.

All Harper has got to do is say that in light of the CRU leak, it would be unwise to take a stand at this time because the science is clearly not settled. He doesn't even have to make accusations of fraud ... just simply state that their clearly isn't a consensus. But sadly, that would take leadership ... while he's better at hackery.

Then, being a member of the UN, Canada could begin demanding an enquiry into the CRU leak ... or launch one ourselves. Harper has the nuts to walk out of the UN Humanrights Committee, to chastize Iran, ... but he can't take a stand on AGW.

He's bending us over.

One further point on Keenan. This guys background is as a Wall St. trader. How exactly does this qualify him as a climate expert. What nonsense.

Bob C: Wall Street Traders are likely the best people on the planet when it comes to graphing and plumbing data. If there's a problem in a chart, they'll find it.

"Debate" at G&M. Lomborg is not a skeptic. He agrees that global warming is a done deal. His take on the matter is that instead of devoting resources to reducing emissions and giving money to countries whose emissions are still rocketing because they need to catch up is faulty thinking. He believes that we should just accept the theory and devote resources and research to adaptation. Perhaps he will have modified his message in the light of recent news. But if he sticks to his views, I can see him supporting the transfer of wealth to countries to assist them in "adapting". I'm speculating on the last bit here.

However, it does seem to me that the debate has been stacked again. What we have are divergent views on how to cope with global warming. We are not having a debate abou the theory itself. And with Elizabeth May babbling at ear-breaking volume, it might not be possible to hear the debate anyway. I don't know if I can bear to watch. Perhaps others with a strong stomach will

Bob C.

I do not believe you understood Mr. Keenan's comment about tipping points, he point is that there _may_ be a such a thing where you get a (temporary) run-away condition. ( and in fact I believe the geological record does speak to there being some evidence of sudden, rapid, wholly non antropogenic temperature changes, that eventually recovered, but 100,000+ years is a long time to wait, for us) But that the current state of climate science really can't tell. (especially once IPCC crap & CRUdites are discounted as cranks.)

His further point is that IF the Medieval Warm period was a whole degree warmer than now and then recovered (to the "little ice age"), then we have a century to consider and collect data before we get unduly concerned at current estimated temperature change rates.

Seems like a valid scientific approach: We have a theory (that temperature oscillates and can have excursions based on... something), the theory seems to have quasi-anecdotal validity based on very limited data. Let's study this and see if we can't support or dis-prove our hypothesis.

So long as you aren't changing the world based on your limited data and hypothesis there's nothing wrong with this.

Kind of like proposing a spaced based asteriod diversion program because you THINK that disnosaurs might have wiped out by one, 60 megayears ago. Before you spend gazillions on space launch capacity (which at least might be worthwhile) it's ok to question that hypothesis and see if there aren't other things that might have caused it it and if there aren't other solutions.

Paul: I have no problem with good mathmeticians checking the work of scientists. As you say, who is better qualified to do so. That isn't what we are talking about here. He has set himself up as a climate scientist proposing theories of his own. That is an entirely different kettle of fish. He is unqualified to do more in this field than check the mathmatical work of others, a line he crossed when he conned himself into thinking that that ability made him a climate scientist.

bob: Understood and agreed.

Paul, I reluctantly agree with you. The partisan hack in me wants to think Harper will call bullspit on this whole thing, but the realist in me (the guy I'm not happy with, incidentally) thinks that Harper will sell us out for that majority. Or so he thinks.

Because you're right, if he sinks our economy for Copenhagen, maybe the red blues and blue reds will be more likely to vote for him, yippee, one more Toronto riding, but the "base" (that's us, the hard-working realists) will turn to Reform part deux.

Mr. Harper, you have a golden opportunity in front of you: deliberately turn your back on the Hopenchangens and tell them to go p1$$ up a rope; let them know that you know the "settled science" is a fraud, the socialist wealth-redistribution scheme is in full swing and you will have no part of it. You will hear screaming from the meemies and you may even still come short of your coveted majority, but it's the right thing to do. If you do so, I promise you, you will be respected worldwide and at home. In short, Mr. Prime Minister, this is your defining moment; don't let it get away from you because of a few votes in the rather insular Golden Horseshoe.

Great comments, Paul.
Harper could get ahead of the political dialogue if he had the will to.

As Prime minister, Harper has a bully pulpit and the internet is now loaded with ammo supporting the Normalists who say the Alarmist position on AGW has now been exposed as fraud.

If Harper doesn't get ahead of the Leftists on this before going to Copenhagen, by breaking the ice and preparing the ground for rejecting an economy damaging agreement at Copenhagen, it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone if he fails to make a stand at Copenhagen itself and ends up selling out Canadian interests.

Paul:

Don't get me wrong. I'm happy to hear what Keenan has to say if it is confined to a critique of climate scientists from the stand point of his specialty, mathmatics. He simply doesn't mention anything about an education in any other field of science that would position him to be peddling climate theories of his own.

Poll at Fox news-
Has Research Scandal Changed Your Views of Global Warming?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/12/01/research-scandal-changed-views-global-warming/

Paul

First, I didn't call you a name, I said you are "being a maroon". That is different.

Second, I did make an argument, but I suspect you glossed over it because of your belief that "name calling" by me towards you somehow vindicates your argument. This is not so, it may be poor tact to name call, but it does not disqualify an argument. Name calling is not a proverbial “13th man on the field”.

Thirdly, my argument was/is without going into too much detail for everyone’s sake: "you need to consider that the financial penalty for disobedience may/will be costlier than simply paying the hush money upfront. The Americans are looking for any excuse to stop our goods at the boarder and non-compliance with such a treaty would be just that."

I'm arguing that IF such a treaty is signed by our largest trading partner(s) without us, the NET result will be MORE punitive than simply signing the aforementioned treaty.

Forget the majority! I support western sovereignty, but I also recognize that it is PMSH's responsibility to protect Ontario and the rest of Canada from preventable economic repercussions.

Finally, it is you that hasn't provided a counter argument(not that you have to) except that you win because I called you a maroon, which I deny anyways.

Indiana Homez: Well presented argument. We unfortunately are going to have to go as far as the US. Take heart though, because even if Obama commits to this or that, he still has to get it past Congress. The last time someone tried that the vote was 95-0 against, and that was in good economic times, not at all like the economic climate the States finds itself in today.

Oz, over 12,000 votes and 80% never believed in AGW and still don't.

Hopefully Harper does not sell Canada out to the Marxists.

Bob C - I have already pointed out that the head of the IPCC is a railroad engineer. That apparently has no relevance to his official capacity to pronounce judgement on his critics.

I advise though, that you read the Wegman Report, linked on a lower thread to the end, to understand why mathematicians and statisticians are so vital to this field.

A question for paul.
Should the theory of relativity be discounted because it was developed by a postal worker?

Kate, I am really glad to see this posted--thank you.

I am also much grateful for the many supportive comments.

One commenter had an ad hominem argument.

With regard to the "tipping point" theory, the theory is not mine, and the term is linked in the post: click the link to find out more. (In mathematics, though, the general theory is well developed (attractors): I believe the theory is valid.) A tipping point is a very big concern of many warming advocates.

Ken (Kulak), although I have always held that there is no Global Warming and that there is no Energy Crisis, both issues are linked and driven by Leftists, however I voted that the Research Scandal had changed my opinion on that poll in order to indicate that people should pay attention to the Research Scandal because it is a game changer for fence sitters or Warmists.

Tipping Point

And yet, as bob c has pointed out, Gaia has managed to put the water back into the glass countless times over billions of years.

orvict: Why are you addressing that to me? I've defended Keegan for his ability to plumb the data, especially since he's a Wall Street trader.

As to the rest, there is a great difference in having the expertise to do research and the expertise to test and replicate that research. Mr. Keegan, as I judge it, is perfectly trained to do the latter, but not "perhaps" the former.

Your postal worker would need to be a brilliant physicist to do what you claim, making him not only a postal worker, but a physicist. It's a matter of training and expertise, not vocation.

Douglas J. Keenan:

Not meant as an adhominem argument...rather irreverent humour.

Given that the enveloping "tree ring circus" by Mann et al. has put some serious questions to the 'science of AGW' one would have to admit their is now a 'credibility gap' in the "settled science."

Carry on as you were.

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North"

Mr Gore, from where do you obtain your proof that a 'tipping point' is imminent ?

From my wife, Tipper. Next question.

Kate:

I don't question the importance of mathmeticians to this debate as far as checking what scientists are up to. McIntyre and McKitrick are great examples of that. They've done fabulous work.

I simply question whether that entitles a mathmetician to leap from there into coming up with climate theories of their own. McIntyre or McKitrick were wise not to fall into that trap.

A physicist has much to say about the work of climate scientists as it relates to his or her field of study. It does not mean that have anything worthwhile to say about biology, chemistry etc, etc.

As my sister, who has a masters in micro-biology and a PHD in imneo pharmacology, once said to me in response to my asking what she thought about a show we watched together featuring David Suzuki: Bob, a degree in genetics plus a dollar fifty should buy Suzuki no more than a cup of coffee at the environmental cafe.

Oz, I agree that both issues are linked and debated with myself on how to vote. One of my daughters and her husband are in that NDP anti-capitalist crowd and were yapping about "peak-oil" ten years ago and Global Warming. Thank goodness the other three kids have not drunk the cool-aid. Of course since then many different types of energy reserves have been discovered including a recent good quality coal discovery east of Prince Albert. They were looking for diamonds.

It is amazing how few of our neighbours still have not heard about the explosive events of the unearthing of the fraud. Most pay little attention to the "news" and watch CBC or CTV.

But it bought him 'world fame' because of the friggin CBC !!

Paul

First, I didn't call you a name, I said you are "being a maroon". That's different.

Second, I did make an argument, but I suspect you glossed over it because of your belief that "name calling" by me towards you somehow vindicates your argument. This is not so, it may be poor tact to name call, but it does not disqualify an argument. Furthermore, I declare you LIBERAL for playing the “Name-Calling Card”.(kidding)

Thirdly, my argument was/is without going into too much detail for everyone’s sake: "you need to consider that the financial penalty for disobedience may/will be costlier than simply paying the hush money upfront. The Americans are looking for any excuse to stop our goods at the boarder and non-compliance with such a treaty would be just that."

I'm arguing that IF such a treaty is signed by our largest trading partner(s) without us, the NET result will be MORE punitive than simply signing the aforementioned treaty. Forget the majority! It's the governments responsibility to protect Ontario and the rest of Canada's economy. Also, it’s difficult to take your high and mighty tone seriously when your original statement is this: “Harper is a hack, who will flush this whole country down the AGW toilet if other nations don't take a stand.”

Flushing the country down the toilet is sure a good strategy to obtain the coveted majority isn’t it? Hmmm… checkmate indeed./sarc

Finally, it is you that hasn't provided a counter argument(not that you have to) except that you win because I called you a maroon; which I deny anyways.

oops, double post
sorry

Mea culpa.

Einstein’s position at the Swiss Patent Office became permanent, although he was passed over for promotion until he "fully mastered machine technology".[26]

Over to Bob.

Lord Monkton discussed Obama signing this treaty and even though it may be rejected by the American Congress it would still be binding in many ways under his signature alone. As a person who has written policy and designed many treaties and documents for Thatcher and others Monkton believes this treaty is unique in many ways. It is the only one he has ever seen that mentions the word "government" i.e. in setting up a world government where money would be taken up front from countries and used to fund this world governing body, pretty scary stuff.

As Lorrie Goldstein stated the fix is in, the science means nothing and in his view, never did.

As Lorrie Goldstein stated the fix is in, the science means nothing and in his view, never did.
~Dave

As far as the politicians go, Goldstein is probably correct, but if citizens see a major drop in their quality of life the science is going to matter to those citizens.

ron in kelowna:

You're quite right. In the area of the environment that does not touch directly on genetics, David Suzuki's opinions are no more valid than what someone sitting at the end of the bar might have to say. In the case of Keenan, it is a service to us that he pointed out the fraud of Wang. I'm more than with him to that point and congratulate him for his efforts. He lost me though when he started proposing theories of his own. I would suggest that whether or not there would be a temp spiral, that cold equals ice, which equals more cold which equals more ice etc, etc, that this would more properly fall to the expertise of other scientific disciplines that deal with the physical interactions of things. That is beyond a straight mathmatical background. Clearly, that ice ages and warm periods come to an end seems to argue against a self reinforcing temp spiral.

If we have locomotive engineers running the IPCC then I have no problem with Wall Street financiers challenging climate sciences. Many of us have hobbies and interests that are not related to our occupations, but the expertise and knowledge we obtain in a lifetime provide valuable tools when we pursue other activities.

Steve McIntyre was a mining engineer. Bjorn Lumborg is a statistician. Suggesting that these people and the many Keenans should not contribute in the the scientific advancement of knowledge is how we got into this mess in the first place. Suggesting science is the bastion of academics is akin to making journalists the sole reporters for all media.

The Keenan hypothesis of a "Tipping Point" may appear ludicrous on the face, but scientific hypotheses are meant to be challenged. Part of the challenge would be to produce data that would destroy his hypothesis, which is all he wanted in the first place. Subtle, that.

One further thought. I have been recently working with neighbors in my community with the installation of green energy projects. Collectively we look like a bunch of country hicks, but individually, we include a senior scientist(retired) from a major power utility, landowners with intimate and hands on knowledge of the local ecology, a long serving big city councilor(retired) with political connections throughout the province, and several enthusiastic housewives whose singular expertise is to know everyone in the community. Working together is a humbling experience. (And the email exchanges between us often include the writng of Lorrie Goldstein, David Warren, Anthony Watts, SDA, and others)

It is all what you know, and who you know.

It is all what you know, and who you know.
~john

Nah.
It isn't who you know or what you know, it's who you blow.
Proof of that is the CRU peer review gatekeeper conspiracy.

Oz, just got my smart meter installed here in Toronto and I know from reading and listening to people who have them I expect a huge rise in my electricity costs. To get the rate I now have to cook our dinner I will have to begin using the stove after 9 o'clock.

McGuinty has brought in all sorts of taxes and will bring the HST next year along with carbon taxes yet do we see people marching in the streets. No, we see the Liberals reelected easily in recent by-elections in Toronto as some ridings had a 13% voting rate. Unemployment in the private sector continues to rise.

McGuinty's policies drove Ontario into its first have-not status in its history.

There has been a significant drop in our quality of life yet as usual Canadians mumble but do nothing. We preach to the converted here at SDA, without a doubt one of sthe best blogs in NA, yet even though I hope I am wrong even climategate it may be too little too late.

if citizens see a major drop in their quality of life the science is going to matter to those citizens.
~Oz

There has been a significant drop in our quality of life yet as usual Canadians mumble but do nothing.
~Dave

I won't begin to argue the difference between the words "major' and significant" with you, Dave, but let me point out that I said that the science is going to matter to citizens and they don't yet know that there is no scientific justification for a significant or major drop or change in their quality of life.

When citizens do find out, and they will, then we can talk about marching in the streets.

This story is how the corruption gets to NASA and NOAA.

They pretend that it is safe to ignore UHI based on the fraudulent paper.

Looks to me like the New World Order is going ahead with this and will tolerate no interference from anyone. Last time I heard of this was with Hitler and the world mobilized.

Is it time again?

John:

You didn't read my posts carefully if you think I was saying that mathmeticians should have nothing to do with this issue. Their work is vital in terms of checking the calculations of climate scientists and determining whether the conclusions they reach are based on good or bad math. Once they start advancing their own theories though, theories that are outside their area of expertise, they are on very shakey ground.

One example that comes to mind; a friend of mine is an architect. I asked him whether he makes use of mathmeticians to check his numbers and he said absolutely. When I asked whether that meant that a math expert was therefore capable of constructing a building, the answer was an emphatic NO.

Same thing applies to the person in an operating room who administers the medicine to you during an operation. Without him or her, you're going to wind up dead. That does not mean however that you should be trusting him to wield the scalpel. That is what the surgeon is for.

I would suggest to you that whether such a thing as a temp spiral exists or not, it would be far more in line with the expertise of a someone trained in phyics, a qualification to which Keenan laid no claim.

So thanks to Keenan for using his math training and exposing Wang as a fraud. Beyond that though, I'll take his other opinions witha grain of salt.

Bob C said, "He is unqualified to do more in this field than check the mathmatical work of others, a line he crossed when he conned himself into thinking that that ability made him a climate scientist."

Normally, I would agree with you. However, a "science" based on computer modelling is not a science in my book. It is more akin to glorified palm reading which I believe that anyone can try so have at er!! Let's all predict what the climate will do in, say, 50 years because the truth is that anyone could be right.

An interesting tidbit:

Maurice Strong was President, Chairman and CEO of Petro-Canada from 1976-1978.