To every Politician in NZ and Australia from Malcolm R
Submitted by climaterealists on Tue, 22/12/2009 - 16:34
Dear Madam or Sir,
It is in your interests to look at….
…before NZ signs up for one world communist government - the Copenhagen Treaty.
Computer hackers last week reportedly hacked computers at the Climate Research Unit, CRU, the provider of temperature data used by the UN IPCC. The CRU's head, Professor Phil Jones has personally confirmed in an interview that hacked materials spread on the internet are authentic.
The interview by a New Zealand investigative journalist, Ian Wishart, can be found here: http://www.investigatemagazine.com/australia/latestissue.pdf
Wishart has personally confirmed to me his conversation with Jones.
A summary of some of the hacked e-mails is provided below for you.
The e-mails are now moving into the mainstream media such as the prestigious Wall Street Journal newspaper and into world-wide news networks that feed the local press.
It is not known whether the files were exposed by external hackers or internal whistleblowers.
Background:
The UN IPCC relies for temperature data on the Hadley Climate Research Unit, CRU, a part of Britain's East Anglia University.
Despite previous repeated requests from other scientists to see the CRU's temperature data, the CRU has refused to show the data.
Why - what were they hiding?
When Freedom of Information provisions were recently enacted in an attempt to obtain the data, the CRU suddenly claimed it had lost the data. The world's temperature data relied upon by the UN IPCC, supposedly lost - after fearing legal access by external scientists.
True scientists understand that they have obligations to share their data with others who then test their conclusions to either disprove or validate. Indeed, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) has at least two (2) resolutions stating members should provide 'free and unrestricted' access to climate data.
The e-mails are, understandably, causing a huge flurry among climate scientists.
It was already known that the UN IPCC's claim that humans caused global warming is an unfounded and corrupt fabrication. Secondly, the infamous hockey stick graph (purporting to show sharply increasing temperatures in the 1990's) had long ago been exposed as fabricated by unscientific methods. Those methods enabled a 'hockey stick shape to be produced from almost any set of data'. Two months ago it was exposed that the data was cherry picked and that when the full data set is used correctly, the conclusion differs.
The reality is that no unusual warming occurred from the mid-1970's through to 1998. And since 1998, temperature has fallen.
Last Friday I sent you John McLean's stunning paper documenting how the UN IPCC fabricated preconceived and unfounded reports contradicting climate science. McLean exposed the UN IPCC's culture of corrupting science and manipulating the media and politicians. McLean's paper is supported by many quotes and references, including those from UN IPCC bureaucrats, Chairmen and UN officials.
The hacked e-mails are startling. Given McLean's analysis and fabrications previously given you as papers or as references during the months since May, the e-mails are not surprising. They merely confirm what has been suspected, even known by many scientists, including honest UN IPCC scientists who for many years have dared to speak out about the UN IPCC's corruption of science.
After presenting summaries of individual hacked e-mails below, please find my brief conclusion for you.
The following are what appear to be credible summaries of just some of the CRU e-mails. The bracketed references are the e-mail number in the collection of hacked files. These and more summaries can be found here: http://bishophill.squarespace.com/ under the heading 'Climate Cutting 33'. I've checked a sample of the e-mails against the originals posted at this site: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/21/cru-emails-search-engine-now-online/#more-12978 All the summaries I checked are accurate.
Tim Osborn discusses how data are truncated to stop an apparent cooling trend showing up in the results (0939154709).
Phil Jones says he has used Mann's "Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series"...to hide the decline". (0942777075)
Phil Jones encourages colleagues to delete information subject to FoI request.(1212063122)
Michael Mann (one of the hockey stick fabricators) tells Jones that it would be nice to '"contain" the putative Medieval Warm Period'. (1054736277) [This period has long been acknowledged as being much warmer than the recent peak temperatures of the 1990's and even the 1930's]
Revkin quotes von Storch as saying it is time to toss the Hockey Stick . This back in 2004.(1096382684)
Prior to AR3 Briffa talks of pressure to produce a tidy picture of "apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data". Briffa says it was just as warm a thousand years ago.(0938018124) [This appears to be the politics leading the science]
Jones tells Mann that he is sending station data. Says that if McIntyre requests it under FoI he will delete it rather than hand it over. Says he will hide behind data protection laws. Says Rutherford screwed up big time by creating an FTP directory for Osborn. Says Wigley worried he will have to release his model code. Also discuss AR4 draft. Mann says paleoclimate chapter will be contentious but that the author team has the right personalities to deal with sceptics.(1107454306)
Wigley discusses fixing an issue with sea surface temperatures in the context of making the results look both warmer but still plausible. (1254108338)
Grant Foster putting together a critical comment on a sceptic paper. Asks for help for names of possible reviewers. Jones replies with a list of people, telling Foster they know what to say about the paper and the comment without any prompting.(1249503274)
Jones says he and Kevin will keep some papers out of the next IPCC report.(1089318616)
Tom Wigley tells Mann that a figure Schmidt put together to refute Monckton is deceptive and that the match it shows of instrumental to model predictions is a fluke. Says there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model output by authors and IPCC.(1255553034)
Mann discusses how to destroy a journal that has published sceptic papers.(1047388489)
Mann thinks he will contact BBC's Richard Black to find out why another BBC journalist was allowed to publish a vaguely sceptical article.(1255352257)
Tom Wigley says that von Storch is partly to blame for sceptic papers getting published at Climate Research. Says he encourages the publication of crap science. Says they should tell publisher that the journal is being used for misinformation. Says that whether this is true or not doesn't matter. Says they need to get editorial board to resign. Says they need to get rid of von Storch too. (1051190249)
Letter to The Times from climate scientists was drafted with the help of Greenpeace. (0872202064)
Tom Wigley tells Jones that the land warming since 1980 has been twice the ocean warming and that this might be used by sceptics as evidence for urban heat islands.(1257546975)
Jones says he's found a way around releasing AR4 review comments to David Holland.(1210367056) [AR4 refers to the UN IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report. Thus he's apparently wanting to hide review comments about the UN IPCC report to prevent scrutiny of the UN IPCC's methods]
Tom Wigley say that Keith Briffa has got himself into a mess over the Yamal chronology (although also says it's insignificant). Wonders how Briffa explains McIntyre's sensitivity test on Yamal and how he explains the use of a less-well replicated chronology over a better one. Wonders if he can. Says data withholding issue is hot potato, since many "good" scientists condemn it.(1254756944)
Briffa is funding Russian dendro Shiyatov, who asks him to send money to personal bank account so as to avoid tax, thereby retaining money for research.(0826209667)
Kevin Trenberth says climatologists are nowhere near knowing where the energy goes or what the effect of clouds is. Says nowhere balancing the energy budget. Geoengineering is not possible.(1255523796)
Tom Wigley discusses how to deal with the advent of FoI [Freedom of Information] law in UK. Jones says use IPR argument to hold onto code. Says data is covered by agreements with outsiders and that CRU will be "hiding behind them".(1106338806)
Santer says he will no longer publish in Royal Met Soc journals if they enforce intermediate data being made available. Jones has complained to head of Royal Met Soc about new editor of Weather [why?data?] and has threatened to resign from RMS.(1237496573)
Wigley says Keenan's fraud accusation against Wang is correct. (1188557698)
Jones calls for Wahl and Ammann to try to change the received date on their alleged refutation of McIntyre [presumably so it can get into AR4](1189722851)
Mann sends calibration residuals for MBH99 to Osborn. Says they are pretty red, and that they shouldn't be passed on to others, this being the kind of dirty laundry they don't want in the hands of those who might distort it.(1059664704)
Jones says that UK climate organisations are coordinating themselves to resist FoI. They got advice from the Information Commissioner [!](1219239172) [FoI being Freedom of Information]
Funkhouser says he's pulled every trick up his sleeve to milk his Kyrgistan series. Doesn't think it's productive to juggle the chronology statistics any more than he has.(0843161829)
David Parker discussing the possibility of changing the reference period for global temperature index. Thinks this shouldn't be done because it confuses people and because it will make things look less warm.(1105019698)
UN IPCC reports and the UN IPCC's core claim of human warming are fabrications made with falsities, misrepresentations and unscientific and/or dishonest manipulating of data. As politicians, you have been misled and conned by the UN IPCC.
The Prime Minister and Climate Change Minister have both repeatedly stated that the government's fraudulently named Carbon 'Pollution' Reduction Scheme is based on UN IPCC reports. Similarly, the Garnaut Review assumes UN IPCC reports for its unsubstantiated recommendation.
Thus, the government has no basis for any scheme artificially raising energy prices to Aussie industry and families.
Malcolm Roberts
BE (Hons), MBA (Chicago)
Fellow AICD, MAIM, MAusIMM, MAME (USA), MIMM (UK), Fellow ASQ (USA, Aust)
Tags:
