Well, with the recent scandal on global warming (aka, Climategate,) I guess everyone is coming to their senses right? The teachers are telling all the kids about the scandal and the White House finally realizes the "scientists" have been cooking the books. Whew. Here's some excerpts from this article, by Andrea Peyser, which illustrates how much impact the recent fraud exposure has had on our institutions.
When did global warming turn into a forced religion?
My daughter came home from school recently with a spring in her step and a song on her lips. With no foreshadowing -- or time to call an exorcist -- out came this chilling refrain:
" . . . You can hear the warning -- GLOBAL WARMING . . . "
By the time her father and I removed our jaws from the floor, we had learned that:
A) All the kids had been coerced into singing this catchy ditty, which we called "The Warming Song," at a concert for parents.
B) Further song lyrics scolded selfish adults (that would be us) for polluting our planet and causing a warming scourge that would, in no short order, kill all the polar bears and threaten the birds and bees.
C) There was no deprogramming session on the menu. And no arguing allowed.
The international "Climategate" scandal is now moving into its third week. And reaction from folks on the scientific and political left -- or is that redundant? -- who treat global warming as a cult in which naysayers must be crushed has been depressing:
Total denial.
The scandal began when someone hacked into the server at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, England, and uncovered a cache of messages between leading warming gurus. These e-mails revealed guys deeply frustrated by planetary temperatures that, stubbornly, had refused to rise in some time. Were they afraid of losing their scientific juice? Or their funding?
So, as the e-mails prove, the scientists did something about it. They cooked the books to exaggerate global warming.
Of course! How can you scare the bejeezus out of little kids and small animals if you can't make the mercury move a millimeter? Simple. You lie.
But while one rival scientist predicted the shocking revelations would blast a "mushroom cloud" over theories of climate change, that has not come to pass.
The Obama administration's "climate adviser," Carol Browner, totally ignored the smoking e-mails, and attributed the scandal to "a very small group of people who continue to say this isn't a real problem, that we don't need to do anything."
"What am I going to do?" asked Browner. "Side with the couple of naysayers out there, or the 2,500 scientists?" -- who've drunk the Kool-Aid. "I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists."
Ha ha ... "... a couple of naysayers..." That's what we are ... "naysayers." Get it ... you're in the minority ... never mind what the polls say ... just listen to them. Perhaps they'll get the message next November at the ballot box. Well, they'll never get the message but I really don't care if they do ... I just want them to go home ... utterly and completely defeated.
Oh, and what about the media? Here's their take so far ... "Climategate? What Climategate?"
Hey, here's some fresh info (excerpts) from Frank, over at IMAO:
When did global warming turn into a forced religion?
My daughter came home from school recently with a spring in her step and a song on her lips. With no foreshadowing -- or time to call an exorcist -- out came this chilling refrain:
" . . . You can hear the warning -- GLOBAL WARMING . . . "
By the time her father and I removed our jaws from the floor, we had learned that:
A) All the kids had been coerced into singing this catchy ditty, which we called "The Warming Song," at a concert for parents.
B) Further song lyrics scolded selfish adults (that would be us) for polluting our planet and causing a warming scourge that would, in no short order, kill all the polar bears and threaten the birds and bees.
C) There was no deprogramming session on the menu. And no arguing allowed.
The international "Climategate" scandal is now moving into its third week. And reaction from folks on the scientific and political left -- or is that redundant? -- who treat global warming as a cult in which naysayers must be crushed has been depressing:
Total denial.
The scandal began when someone hacked into the server at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, England, and uncovered a cache of messages between leading warming gurus. These e-mails revealed guys deeply frustrated by planetary temperatures that, stubbornly, had refused to rise in some time. Were they afraid of losing their scientific juice? Or their funding?
So, as the e-mails prove, the scientists did something about it. They cooked the books to exaggerate global warming.
Of course! How can you scare the bejeezus out of little kids and small animals if you can't make the mercury move a millimeter? Simple. You lie.
But while one rival scientist predicted the shocking revelations would blast a "mushroom cloud" over theories of climate change, that has not come to pass.
The Obama administration's "climate adviser," Carol Browner, totally ignored the smoking e-mails, and attributed the scandal to "a very small group of people who continue to say this isn't a real problem, that we don't need to do anything."
"What am I going to do?" asked Browner. "Side with the couple of naysayers out there, or the 2,500 scientists?" -- who've drunk the Kool-Aid. "I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists."
Ha ha ... "... a couple of naysayers..." That's what we are ... "naysayers." Get it ... you're in the minority ... never mind what the polls say ... just listen to them. Perhaps they'll get the message next November at the ballot box. Well, they'll never get the message but I really don't care if they do ... I just want them to go home ... utterly and completely defeated.
Oh, and what about the media? Here's their take so far ... "Climategate? What Climategate?"
Hey, here's some fresh info (excerpts) from Frank, over at IMAO:
Those Climategate e-mails are pretty bad for climate science. Here are some of the most incriminating excerpts I’ve found:
“We need volunteers to help strangle baby polar bears so we can leave their corpses out for great photos on the devastation of global warming.”
“Because of the increased scrutiny, we’re going to have to ask you all to stop using Ouija boards to confirm your findings.”
“One of the denialists found out that the data for my conclusive proof of global warming was corrupted because cats like to lay on the temperature sensors. We may need to redefine “peer review” to keep his paper from being published. Also, when in science is it okay to murder?”
“The data seems to suggest that most of the warming comes from some large heat source that floats over the earth daily. What the hell could that be?”
“It ends up one of the glaciers is melting because we left a space heater on it. We need to go fetch it and kill the Eskimos who saw it.”
“So how long until we should say the earth is doomed if people don’t do as we tell them? If we use too short a time, people will think we are already doomed and not do anything, and if we use too long a time they won’t care. I’m going with ten years. That’s worked well for the last twenty years.”
“On second thought, delete all e-mails that reference Al Gore. Let’s pretend we don’t know him.”
“So we all agree we are now so certain about global warming we don’t need to waste time collecting data and can just make the numbers up?”
Posts
1 comment:
I found this comment on Timesonline.co.uk, and decided to post it here
Remittance Man wrote:
If nothing else this illustrates why the CRU should be disbanded and its staff fired in disgrace.
The sole purpose of the unit was to collect and analyse climate data. As an engineer I can conceive of no legitimate reason why a reputable scientific institution would ever throw away raw data that was the very foundation of its existence.
As for the "no room at our new building" excuse, what sorts of numpties do these people take us for? Maybe the new CRU headquarters was a bit small but for crying out loud! If this data is the only reason for your unit's existence you bin the coffee machine, the comfortable furniture, the comfortable secretaries, whatever to make space. If that's not enough, you rent space - five minutes on Google will reveal hundreds of companies offering secure storage facilities for hard data and electronic stuff. It's not as though the budget was tight.
Quite frankly I can only cnclude that this whole "the dog ate my homework" routine is nothing but a smkescreen to cover up a greater sin than stupidity - deliberate sabotage.
December 1, 2009 1:06 PM GMT
Post a Comment