More lies from the global warming crowd

I know liberalism is an illness but I did not realize it would drive people to lie and cheat to such an extent. By now, we have all heard about Climategate where so called academics were caught hiding data and denying access to publication by scientists who held differing views but hot off the press, there is another lie uncovered that was told by Al Gore.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/copenhagen/article6956783.ece

It is too bad liberals cannot accept views other than those that support their own theories on global warming because this subject really is important and deserves to be researched in a proper manner.

Alas, there is good news. The lies have discredited their movement to the extent that the Copenhagen Conference will likely not produce any landmark resolutions.

As an aside, just think if this moron, Al Gore, had become president in 2000, that is a scare!

Comments

[Rick Barnes]

Plat, this has gone far beyond just liberalism. The concept of global warming and prevention of it has turned into a billion dollar industry. Just yesterday I was listening to a radio program talking about the owners of a battery company. They openly admit that they are aware a lot of the global warming hype they push has been disproven or is questionable at best but because they make money off of it they help promote it.

Look at Al Gore as another example. His net worth because of government laws he and his buddies have helped draft has jumped from a couple million to nearly 1 billion dollars.

It's all about the dollars and cents.

[Platy]

Richard, you are so right sir! The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the liberal mainstream press has taken the global warming side in the debate. Without a free press, global warming science and economics is not challenged. The good news is that even without the mainstream media, people are beginning to see what a fraud people like Gore, Mann, Hanson et al are.

Platy

[Platy]

Here is a piece that speaks about the global warming team not playing fair with Russian temprature measurements.

http://en.rian.ru/papers/20091216/157260660.html


Russia affected by Climategate

A discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as "Climategate," continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.

The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.

Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.

Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.

Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world's land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.

[Nonplussed]

Umm, Platy: You might want to check into the character that runs the Institute of Economic Analysis, Andrei Illarionov, before you start quoting it as a source for anything. He is hardly a disinterested observer.

[Platy]

Possibly but until the source data is provided to other scientists, we just don't know the truth.

Platy