Climategate Review
The Bear on Dec 14 2009 at 8:05 am | Filed under: Global Warming
CLIMATEGATE SCANDAL 12-8-2009
More than 140 scientists challenge UN’s climate claims in open letter
[…]
We the undersigned, being qualified in climate-related scientific disciplines, challenge the UNFCCC and supporters of the United Nations Climate Change Conference to produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous human-caused global warming and other changes in climate. Projections of possible future scenarios from unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation.
Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:
1-Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;
2- Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
3- Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate;
4- Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities;
5- The incidence of malaria is increasing due to recent climate changes;
6- Human society and natural ecosystems cannot adapt to foreseeable climate change as they have done in the past;
7- Worldwide glacier retreat, and sea ice melting in Polar Regions , is unusual and related to increases in human GHG emissions;
8- Polar bears and other Arctic and Antarctic wildlife are unable to adapt to anticipated local climate change effects, independent of the causes of those changes;
9- Hurricanes, other tropical cyclones and associated extreme weather events are increasing in severity and frequency;
10- Data recorded by ground-based stations are a reliable indicator of surface temperature trends.
It is not the responsibility of ‘climate realist’ scientists to prove that dangerous human-caused climate change is not happening. Rather, it is those who propose that it is, and promote the allocation of massive investments to solve the supposed ‘problem’, who have the obligation to convincingly demonstrate that recent climate change is not of mostly natural origin and, if we do nothing, catastrophic change will ensue. To date, this they have utterly failed to do so.
Signed by:
Read more here…
Swedish Scientist Accuses UN’s IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence
If you listen to the global warming alarmists working for the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore, sea levels across the globe are rising at a rate that will eventually doom us all.
According to Swedish paleogeophysicist Nils-Axel Mörner, who’s been studying and writing about sea levels for four decades, the scientists working for the IPCC have falsified data and destroyed evidence to incorrectly prove their point.
Read more News Busters
Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud
Read more here…
A Major Deception on Global Warming by Frederick Seitz
[…]
This IPCC report, like all others, is held in such high regard largely because it has been peer-reviewed. That is, it has been read, discussed, modified and approved by an international body of experts. These scientists have laid their reputations on the line. But this report is not what it appears to be–it is not the version that was approved by the contributing scientists listed on the title page. In my more than 60 years as a member of the American scientific community, including service as president of both the National Academy of Sciences and the American Physical Society, I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report.
Gore Effect
The phenomenon that leads to unseasonably cold temperatures, driving rain, hail, or snow whenever Al Gore visits an area to discuss global warming. Hence, the Gore Effect.
EDITORIAL: The Gore Effect
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Driving snow froze the hopes of organizers of “the biggest global warming protest in history” Monday in Washington. With the government on a two-hour snow delay and the speaker of the House unable to attend because her flight was grounded by inclement weather, shivering protestors gathered on the west front of the Capitol, the latest victims of a climatological phenomenon known by the scientific community as the Gore Effect.
The Gore Effect was first noticed during a January 2004 global warming rally in New York City, held during one of the coldest days in the city’s history. Since then, evidence has mounted of a correlation between global warming activism and severely cold weather.
A year ago a congressional media briefing on the Bingaman/Specter Climate Bill was cancelled due to a cold snap. In October 2008 London saw the first snow since 1922 while the House of Commons debated the Climate Change Bill. That same month Al Gore’s appearance at Harvard University coincided with low temperatures that challenged 125-year records. Tellingly, the average global temperature for each of the 366 days in 2008 was below the average for Jan. 24, 2006, the date Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” was released at the Sundance Film Festival.
Read more from Washington Times
‘Gore Effect’ Slams Copenhagen With Subfreezing Temps
Amidst new revelations of data manipulation by scientists hoping to ‘prove’ global warming, the infamous ‘Gore Effect’ has socked Copenhagen. One intrepid warmist reports that temperatures are hovering just above zero.
It’s so cold that the media center, depicted above, requires that reporters bundle themselves up while inside.
“The Gore Effect” has a long and uniquely entertaining history. In simple terms, it strikes the Warmists whenever and wherever they gather as if Mother Nature herself is mocking the UN’s rapidly disintegrating bunko scam.
UK Daily Mail – Climategate ‘undermines not only the CRU but the UN IPCC’
‘Any scientist ought to know that you just can’t mix and match proxy and actual data,’ said Philip Stott, emeritus professor of biogeography at London’s School of Oriental and African Studies. ‘They’re apples and oranges. Yet that’s exactly what he did.’ Yet even this, Pielke told me, may not ultimately be the biggest consequence of Warmergate.
Climate Depot TV Debate in Copenhagen
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
