Climategate 2.0 — The NASA Files: U.S. Climate Science as Corrupt as CRU

[The T]

Climategate 2.0 — The NASA Files: U.S. Climate Science as Corrupt as CRU (PJM Exclusive — Part One) <LINK

Chris Horner filed the FOIA request that NASA didn't comply with for two years. Now we know what took so long. (Click here for the NASA files. This is Part One of a four-part series.)

_______________________________

From the Author of the FOIA Lawsuit Against NASA, and NASA's manipulation of Climate Data. It's a good read. Another nail in the AGW coffin.

 

[Annie]

It may not look like it, but this is substantially edited from the original-long, long piece.

PJM has been all over this and has been getting the attention of both the scientists and the Euro media. Another today, that is analysis of what has been happening in purported 'scientific research' regarding AGW:

Pajamas Media Climategate: The Big Picture

Climategate: The Big Picture
Posted By Charlie Martin On February 19, 2010 @ 12:04 am In . Feature 01, Science, Science & Technology, US News, World News | No Comments

It&#8217;s been less than three months since the Climategate files were first revealed to the world, and an amazing lot has happened &#8212; so much that I think it&#8217;s worth bringing things together in one place.

This is an extension of the &#8220;fast facts&#8221; post [1] I wrote a couple months ago. The facts and threads are now coming together into a narrative, a big picture combining what we learned from the letters and what we have learned since.

The Back Story

The idea that humans are causing changes in the climate is not at all new, going back at least to the Victorian era. But it&#8217;s taken on a lot of political weight since the early 1990s, leading to the UN&#8217;s endorsement of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 (followed promptly by the U.S. Senate rejection of the Kyoto Protocol in 1998).

The Kyoto Protocol was supported by the scientific findings of a UN-chartered group called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC released a series of Assessment Reports (AR), with the most recent to date being the IPCC AR4 in 2007. Each of these ARs has repeated and reinforced the conclusion that the primary climate change is a warming of the average temperature of the earth over the last hundred or so years, brought about primarily by increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) levels. This theory is what is commonly called anthropogenic &#8212; meaning &#8220;human caused&#8221; &#8212; global warming (AGW).

The notion that humans were causing climate change was always more controversial than it was presented by the media &#8212; it&#8217;s hard to make a story out of someone saying &#8220;that&#8217;s silly, we don&#8217;t know enough to say that.&#8221; As time went on, however, the IPCC reports claimed greater and greater certainty, and became the basis for things like Al Gore&#8217;s An Inconvenient Truth. Legal reactions to it became the basis for cap and trade schemes worldwide, and the general reaction became the basis for Al Gore&#8217;s Oscar and his share of a Nobel Peace Prize.

Then the Climategate files [2] came out, and the dominoes started to fall.

The emails showed, clearly, that some of the widely mocked conspiracy theories were true. There had actually been a concerted effort to prevent the &#8220;skeptics&#8221; (or &#8220;denialists&#8221 from getting access to data, and to prevent anyone who didn&#8217;t accept the AGW theory wholeheartedly from being published. If the skeptics were stubborn enough, there were even conspiracies to attack their professional credentials and to effectively eject them from the scientific community. There were even half-joking threats to &#8220;beat the s*** out of them.&#8221;

Once the emails shined a light on the &#8220;climate cartel,&#8221; other things began to show up. It was suddenly clear that &#8220;skeptics&#8221; would be taken seriously, and it became more acceptable to dig elsewhere in the IPCC reports and to publish criticism.

The Science as Science

One primary public relations argument for the warmists has been the threat of the Himalayan glaciers [3] &#8212; which are the source for many rivers in India &#8212; disappearing by 2035. That turned out to be based on a conversation, reported by a journalist, repeated by the World Wildlife Fund [4], and included, without citation, in the IPCC AR4.

...

The Finances of Science

So thanks to the Climategate files and the flood of information that came out following their release, some other interesting points emerged. Dr. Murari Lal admitted [5] that the data was tarted up to be more inflammatory, purely because it was more politically effective. At the same time, long-delayed inquiries into the IPCC and its chief, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, unveiled conflicts of interest.

...

The owners of the carbon exchanges wouldn&#8217;t be as rich as Croesus &#8212; they would be so rich they could hire Croesus as a houseboy.

There is a third story, and maybe the biggest story, in the political connections and political pull that make the carbon markets work.

Seeing the Big Picture

So what is the big picture?

First, there were the true believers, like James Hansen, whose belief in the need to eliminate industrial civilization far predates the global warming explanation. (There is a side story to be told there as well. What do the true believers really believe? What do they advocate as ways to reduce humanity&#8217;s environmental impact?) These true believers seem to be quite willing to &#8230; adapt their scientific results to make sure that people on the outside are as frightened as possible.

There is another, larger group, who may or may not be true believers &#8212; who can know what is in another man&#8217;s heart? &#8212; but who don&#8217;t seem to worry too much about their own carbon impact, like Al Gore. (Oh, he buys indulgences from his own company, which is one little mercy &#8212; he could conceivably instead say he would have built a bigger house with more carbon impact, and claimed a carbon credit.) A fair number of these people, though, seem to be set up to make an immense pile of money off the carbon markets, and they all seem to have impeccable political connections. This larger group makes sure that the true believers get big grants, and travel to conferences in Gstaad and Tahiti, and have well-financed platforms from which to speak.

It&#8217;s that second group we most need to watch. In the old Soviet Union, these people &#8212; the Communist Party members who received positions of power &#8212; were called the nomenklatura. They weren&#8217;t necessarily the true believers (in fact, a lot of the true Communists, like Beria and Trotsky, ended up dead or in Siberia), but they could mouth the slogans, pass on the Communist Party line, and play the system to get positions and power, dachas, and access to the &#8220;special&#8221; stores that always had sausage, green vegetables, and toilet paper.

And, of course, there is a third group: the rest of us. We are expected to pay the increased carbon offset costs quietly, cold in our darkened rooms, but warm in our hearts because we&#8217;re saving the planet.

 

[The T]

PJM has been all over this and has been getting the attention of both the scientists and the Euro media. Another today, that is analysis of what has been happening in purported 'scientific research' regarding AGW:

Pajamas Media Climategate: The Big Picture

Climategate: The Big Picture
Posted By Charlie Martin On February 19, 2010 @ 12:04 am In . Feature 01, Science, Science & Technology, US News, World News | No Comments

It’s been less than three months since the Climategate files were first revealed to the world, and an amazing lot has happened — so much that I think it’s worth bringing things together in one place.

This is an extension of the “fast facts” post [1] I wrote a couple months ago. The facts and threads are now coming together into a narrative, a big picture combining what we learned from the letters and what we have learned since.

The Back Story

The idea that humans are causing changes in the climate is not at all new, going back at least to the Victorian era. But it’s taken on a lot of political weight since the early 1990s, leading to the UN’s endorsement of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 (followed promptly by the U.S. Senate rejection of the Kyoto Protocol in 1998).

The Kyoto Protocol was supported by the scientific findings of a UN-chartered group called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC released a series of Assessment Reports (AR), with the most recent to date being the IPCC AR4 in 2007. Each of these ARs has repeated and reinforced the conclusion that the primary climate change is a warming of the average temperature of the earth over the last hundred or so years, brought about primarily by increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) levels. This theory is what is commonly called anthropogenic — meaning “human caused” — global warming (AGW).

The notion that humans were causing climate change was always more controversial than it was presented by the media — it’s hard to make a story out of someone saying “that’s silly, we don’t know enough to say that.” As time went on, however, the IPCC reports claimed greater and greater certainty, and became the basis for things like Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Legal reactions to it became the basis for cap and trade schemes worldwide, and the general reaction became the basis for Al Gore’s Oscar and his share of a Nobel Peace Prize.

Then the Climategate files [2] came out, and the dominoes started to fall.

The emails showed, clearly, that some of the widely mocked conspiracy theories were true. There had actually been a concerted effort to prevent the “skeptics” (or “denialists”) from getting access to data, and to prevent anyone who didn’t accept the AGW theory wholeheartedly from being published. If the skeptics were stubborn enough, there were even conspiracies to attack their professional credentials and to effectively eject them from the scientific community. There were even half-joking threats to “beat the s*** out of them.”

Once the emails shined a light on the “climate cartel,” other things began to show up. It was suddenly clear that “skeptics” would be taken seriously, and it became more acceptable to dig elsewhere in the IPCC reports and to publish criticism.

The Science as Science

One primary public relations argument for the warmists has been the threat of the Himalayan glaciers [3] — which are the source for many rivers in India — disappearing by 2035. That turned out to be based on a conversation, reported by a journalist, repeated by the World Wildlife Fund [4], and included, without citation, in the IPCC AR4.

...

The Finances of Science

So thanks to the Climategate files and the flood of information that came out following their release, some other interesting points emerged. Dr. Murari Lal admitted [5] that the data was tarted up to be more inflammatory, purely because it was more politically effective. At the same time, long-delayed inquiries into the IPCC and its chief, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, unveiled conflicts of interest.

...

The owners of the carbon exchanges wouldn’t be as rich as Croesus — they would be so rich they could hire Croesus as a houseboy.

There is a third story, and maybe the biggest story, in the political connections and political pull that make the carbon markets work.

Seeing the Big Picture

So what is the big picture?

First, there were the true believers, like James Hansen, whose belief in the need to eliminate industrial civilization far predates the global warming explanation. (There is a side story to be told there as well. What do the true believers really believe? What do they advocate as ways to reduce humanity’s environmental impact?) These true believers seem to be quite willing to … adapt their scientific results to make sure that people on the outside are as frightened as possible.

There is another, larger group, who may or may not be true believers — who can know what is in another man’s heart? — but who don’t seem to worry too much about their own carbon impact, like Al Gore. (Oh, he buys indulgences from his own company, which is one little mercy — he could conceivably instead say he would have built a bigger house with more carbon impact, and claimed a carbon credit.) A fair number of these people, though, seem to be set up to make an immense pile of money off the carbon markets, and they all seem to have impeccable political connections. This larger group makes sure that the true believers get big grants, and travel to conferences in Gstaad and Tahiti, and have well-financed platforms from which to speak.

It’s that second group we most need to watch. In the old Soviet Union, these people — the Communist Party members who received positions of power — were called the nomenklatura. They weren’t necessarily the true believers (in fact, a lot of the true Communists, like Beria and Trotsky, ended up dead or in Siberia), but they could mouth the slogans, pass on the Communist Party line, and play the system to get positions and power, dachas, and access to the “special” stores that always had sausage, green vegetables, and toilet paper.

And, of course, there is a third group: the rest of us. We are expected to pay the increased carbon offset costs quietly, cold in our darkened rooms, but warm in our hearts because we’re saving the planet.

I've read that one too. Thanks for putting it here. Thanks for the contribution. And to those reading this thread? PJM has many links about this subject.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

NASA could teach the CIA a thing or two about lying

Since they no longer have a legitimate space based mission, they should dump all their data onto their website, including the raw, unretouched pictures from Mars and the Moon, then quietly go out of business

 

[The T]

Climategate 2.0 — The NASA Files: U.S. Climate Science as Corrupt as CRU (PJM Exclusive — Part Two)

Horner looks further into the NASA emails, and finds stunning examples of politicized science and institutional hypocrisy. (This is Part Two of a four-part series. Read Part One here.) Update: Don't miss Chris Horner's PJTV interview here.

_________________________

Continued. So some of you think NASA is beyond reproach? Guess again. They're sucking off the Government TIT as any agency does...ENJOY

 

[Old Rocks]

Here we go again. NASA, NOAA, all the scientific societies in the world, all the national academies of science of all the industrial nations, and all the major universities are in on one big conspiracy to fool the likes of T and Frank.

Yessiree, it's them evil grays in the hollow moon. But I am sure that T can ram them with that flag pole, and Annie can cheer from the background.

And in the meantime, the glaciers continue to melt. Each decade continues to be hotter than the last. The sea level continues to rise, rise faster than the 'alarmists' worst estimates.

But our good brothers and sisters here that know so much more than real scientists will continue to deny any of this is happening, all the while insisting on the existance of a hollow moon and vast conspiracies. What a damned hoot!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Here we go again. NASA, NOAA, all the scientific societies in the world, all the national academies of science of all the industrial nations, and all the major universities are in on one big conspiracy to fool the likes of T and Frank.

Yessiree, it's them evil grays in the hollow moon. But I am sure that T can ram them with that flag pole, and Annie can cheer from the background.

And in the meantime, the glaciers continue to melt. Each decade continues to be hotter than the last. The sea level continues to rise, rise faster than the 'alarmists' worst estimates.

But our good brothers and sisters here that know so much more than real scientists will continue to deny any of this is happening, all the while insisting on the existance of a hollow moon and vast conspiracies. What a damned hoot!

There is far more real scientific evidence that the Moon is an artificial, hollow satellite than there is for AGW

Spin the Wheel and tell us how hot it will get

 

[Old Rocks]

The wheel has been spun. We have exceeded the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2 already. So we can just set back and see what the next 30 to 50 years brings us.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The wheel has been spun. We have exceeded the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2 already. So we can just set back and see what the next 30 to 50 years brings us.

You have to stop letting your Church do all of your thinking

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. You are the one that grabs the whingding theories and diseregards what real scientists write.

No, there is no evidence at all of a hollow moon. And overwheming evidence for the damage that we will do to ourselves by creating a rapid climate change.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

The wheel has been spun. We have exceeded the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2 already. So we can just set back and see what the next 30 to 50 years brings us.

You have to stop letting your Church do all of your thinking

Old Crocks doesn't do any thinking, and allows no one to think for him. He "feels."

His pat answers now are "Trust the government" and "yeahbut."

 

[CrusaderFrank]

LOL. You are the one that grabs the whingding theories and diseregards what real scientists write.

No, there is no evidence at all of a hollow moon. And overwheming evidence for the damage that we will do to ourselves by creating a rapid climate change.

Your auto-posts always disregard any prior conversation we've had; you're a trained parrot squawking exactly what your Church taught you.

 

[The T]

Here we go again. NASA, NOAA, all the scientific societies in the world, all the national academies of science of all the industrial nations, and all the major universities are in on one big conspiracy to fool the likes of T and Frank.

Yessiree, it's them evil grays in the hollow moon. But I am sure that T can ram them with that flag pole, and Annie can cheer from the background.

And in the meantime, the glaciers continue to melt. Each decade continues to be hotter than the last. The sea level continues to rise, rise faster than the 'alarmists' worst estimates.

But our good brothers and sisters here that know so much more than real scientists will continue to deny any of this is happening, all the while insisting on the existance of a hollow moon and vast conspiracies. What a damned hoot!

The only damned 'hoot' on this thread is your denial that the tables have been turned on -YOU-...and you are now wearing the shoes of DENIAL that you so tried to fit upon those of us that knew this was all a sham from the outset.

But please continue. Your hollow rantings are good entertainment.
Knock yerself out bub.

 

[The T]

Climategate 2.0 — The NASA Files: U.S. Climate Science as Corrupt as CRU (PJM Exclusive — Part Three) <PJM

It Continues:

(On December 31, 2009, NASA finally provided the Competitive Enterprise Institute with the documents I requested from them with an FOIA in August 2007. My request asked NASA to release their internal discussions regarding a series of errors in their claims of warming U.S. temperatures caught by Steve McIntyre. NASA had stonewalled my request for more than two years.)

A principal theme of these NASA emails — and one that is illuminating in its exposition of advocacy and hypocrisy at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) — is the insistence that what turned out to be a false warming of 0.15 degrees in the U.S. record is meaningless, even if covering merely seven years (2000-2006, as opposed to a decadal or longer trend).

_______________

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Here we go again. NASA, NOAA, all the scientific societies in the world, all the national academies of science of all the industrial nations, and all the major universities are in on one big conspiracy to fool the likes of T and Frank.

Yessiree, it's them evil grays in the hollow moon. But I am sure that T can ram them with that flag pole, and Annie can cheer from the background.

And in the meantime, the glaciers continue to melt. Each decade continues to be hotter than the last. The sea level continues to rise, rise faster than the 'alarmists' worst estimates.

But our good brothers and sisters here that know so much more than real scientists will continue to deny any of this is happening, all the while insisting on the existance of a hollow moon and vast conspiracies. What a damned hoot!

You realize that working off of demonstrably doctored data is pointless? We have the fact that they have been moving the data points south and to the shore away from the north and center. Stations that urbanize aren't corrected or are deliberately misconnected? it is their own data that shows they are lying to you.

 

[The T]

Here we go again. NASA, NOAA, all the scientific societies in the world, all the national academies of science of all the industrial nations, and all the major universities are in on one big conspiracy to fool the likes of T and Frank.

Yessiree, it's them evil grays in the hollow moon. But I am sure that T can ram them with that flag pole, and Annie can cheer from the background.

And in the meantime, the glaciers continue to melt. Each decade continues to be hotter than the last. The sea level continues to rise, rise faster than the 'alarmists' worst estimates.

But our good brothers and sisters here that know so much more than real scientists will continue to deny any of this is happening, all the while insisting on the existance of a hollow moon and vast conspiracies. What a damned hoot!

You realize that working off of demonstrably doctored data is pointless? We have the fact that they have been moving the data points south and to the shore away from the north and center. Stations that urbanize aren't corrected or are deliberately misconnected? it is their own data that shows they are lying to you.

Yep. And it's given a black eye to NASA, and Science in general. What's been accomplished here? A farm of skeptics...and why would they do this?

 

[Ragnar]

The emails show the hypocrisy, dishonesty, and suspect data management and integrity of NASA, wildly spinning in defense of their enterprise. The emails show NASA making off with enormous sums of taxpayer funding doing precisely what they claim only a “skeptic” would do. The emails show NASA attempting to scrub their website of their own documents, and indeed they quietly pulled down numerous press releases grounded in the proven-wrong data. The emails show NASA claiming that their own temperature errors (which they have been caught making and in uncorrected form aggressively promoting) are merely trivial, after years of hysterically trumpeting much smaller warming anomalies.

NASA has their own Enterprise?

As you examine the email excerpts below, as well as those which I will discuss in the upcoming three parts of this series, bear in mind that the contents of these emails were intended to prop up the argument for the biggest regulatory intervention in history: the restricting of carbon emissions from all human activity. NASA’s activist scientists leave no doubt in their emails that this was indeed their objective. Also, please note that these documents were responsive to a specific FOIA request from two years ago. Recent developments — combined with admissions contained in these documents — beg further requests, which have both been already filed and with more forthcoming.

FOIA + the internet = Awsome

It's srtange but back when I was in college "Political Science" meant something else completely. We had to study History, Economics, Constitutional Law etc etc. Now it means stack the deck with HACKS and do some scaremongering bullshite to serve the masters agenda. Thank you all Gore!

Ooo... btw... NOVA on PBS is now running a show on Blue Hole cavediving and it was pretty good. They took stalagtites and measured climate (and much else) over more than 50k years (don't remember the exact number) but anyway there was evidence of at least 5 "possibly rapid" warming events with the most recent I think about 1000 years ago. (or put another way, manmade my ass)

If you can't catch the show on it's rotation, it's available to view online.
NOVA | Extreme Cave Diving | PBS

 

[The T]

The emails show the hypocrisy, dishonesty, and suspect data management and integrity of NASA, wildly spinning in defense of their enterprise. The emails show NASA making off with enormous sums of taxpayer funding doing precisely what they claim only a &#8220;skeptic&#8221; would do. The emails show NASA attempting to scrub their website of their own documents, and indeed they quietly pulled down numerous press releases grounded in the proven-wrong data. The emails show NASA claiming that their own temperature errors (which they have been caught making and in uncorrected form aggressively promoting) are merely trivial, after years of hysterically trumpeting much smaller warming anomalies.

NASA has their own Enterprise?

As you examine the email excerpts below, as well as those which I will discuss in the upcoming three parts of this series, bear in mind that the contents of these emails were intended to prop up the argument for the biggest regulatory intervention in history: the restricting of carbon emissions from all human activity. NASA&#8217;s activist scientists leave no doubt in their emails that this was indeed their objective. Also, please note that these documents were responsive to a specific FOIA request from two years ago. Recent developments &#8212; combined with admissions contained in these documents &#8212; beg further requests, which have both been already filed and with more forthcoming.

FOIA + the internet = Awsome

It's srtange but back when I was in college "Political Science" meant something else completely. We had to study History, Economics, Constitutional Law etc etc. Now it means stack the deck with HACKS and do some scaremongering bullshite to serve the masters agenda. Thank you all Gore!

Ooo... btw... NOVA on PBS is now running a show on Blue Hole cavediving and it was pretty good. They took stalagtites and measured climate (and much else) over more than 50k years (don't remember the exact number) but anyway there was evidence of at least 5 "possibly rapid" warming events with the most recent I think about 1000 years ago. (or put another way, manmade my ass)

If you can't catch the show on it's rotation, it's available to view online.
NOVA | Extreme Cave Diving | PBS

Nice attempt at deflection but epic fail to address the points.

Come back when you learn to focus and address the issue.

 

[Ragnar]

The emails show the hypocrisy, dishonesty, and suspect data management and integrity of NASA, wildly spinning in defense of their enterprise. The emails show NASA making off with enormous sums of taxpayer funding doing precisely what they claim only a “skeptic” would do. The emails show NASA attempting to scrub their website of their own documents, and indeed they quietly pulled down numerous press releases grounded in the proven-wrong data. The emails show NASA claiming that their own temperature errors (which they have been caught making and in uncorrected form aggressively promoting) are merely trivial, after years of hysterically trumpeting much smaller warming anomalies.

NASA has their own Enterprise?

As you examine the email excerpts below, as well as those which I will discuss in the upcoming three parts of this series, bear in mind that the contents of these emails were intended to prop up the argument for the biggest regulatory intervention in history: the restricting of carbon emissions from all human activity. NASA’s activist scientists leave no doubt in their emails that this was indeed their objective. Also, please note that these documents were responsive to a specific FOIA request from two years ago. Recent developments — combined with admissions contained in these documents — beg further requests, which have both been already filed and with more forthcoming.

FOIA + the internet = Awsome

It's srtange but back when I was in college "Political Science" meant something else completely. We had to study History, Economics, Constitutional Law etc etc. Now it means stack the deck with HACKS and do some scaremongering bullshite to serve the masters agenda. Thank you all Gore!

Ooo... btw... NOVA on PBS is now running a show on Blue Hole cavediving and it was pretty good. They took stalagtites and measured climate (and much else) over more than 50k years (don't remember the exact number) but anyway there was evidence of at least 5 "possibly rapid" warming events with the most recent I think about 1000 years ago. (or put another way, manmade my ass)

If you can't catch the show on it's rotation, it's available to view online.
NOVA | Extreme Cave Diving | PBS

Nice attempt at deflection but epic fail to address the points.

Come back when you learn to focus and address the issue.

The quotes are from the link in the OP and the issue is the misuse of science (fraud) for the purpose of advancing unneeded social dogma by argument through intimidation.

I mentioned the NOVA episode because it's current and a case that can be made for reading, watching and learning about these issues with an eye toward reading between the lines. (using the science and dropping the propaganda)

What do you think the issue is?