The pace at which the hokum of global warming has begun to crash and burn is absolutely stunning. The timing, with the big UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen only weeks away, only makes this that much more delicious.
Indeed, no less an authority than Al Gore himself apparently sees the writing on the wall, and has abruptly cancelled his celebrated speech at that event.
Wow. This is really astonishing. But the light of truth is a powerful thing, and the hacked e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia simply cannot be put back in the bottle or explained away.
Leading climate researchers at the CRU, a powerfully influential source of the UN’s own information for reports on so-called climate change, were undeniably engaged in corrupt science.
The best available summary of all this, by the way, has been prepared by Britain’s Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, in a devastating 43-page report. (It’s a PDF download.)
The report answers every attempt to explain away the content of the e-mails, particularly the claim that the “trick” used by Phil Jones to “hide the decline” was merely a bunch of scientific colloquialisms, and not really evidence of anything nefarious.
That, Monckton demonstrates convincingly, is a complete lie:
The true meaning of Professor Jones’ “trick” to “hide the decline” in the data proxy series from 1960 onwards is all too clear from the three above examples. The real purpose of Michael Mann’s Nature trick (one of the many artifices and devices that the Team had used in fabricating the graph that had falsely abolished the medieval warm period) was to “incorrectly imply the reconstruction [from the tree-ring proxies] is more skilful [i.e. accurate as a representation of pre-industrial temperatures] than it actually is”.
Why does this matter so much? The reason is that if a “divergence” or discrepancy exists not merely between the magnitudes but even between the signs (i.e. the directions, towards warming or cooling) of measured temperature trends on the one hand, and those derived from tree-ring proxy data from the 1960s onwards on the other, then discarding only the post-1960 figures will have the effect of concealing that, during much of the period when instrumental temperatures are available to demonstrate the extent to which parallel tree-ring proxy data for the same period are producing accurate temperature reconstructions, the tree-ring proxies are producing flagrantly inaccurate and erroneous temperature reconstructions. In short, the tree-ring proxies are no good, as the UN had long stated, but the “Nature trick” was intended to “hide the decline” – and did so, until the whistleblower came along.
The very existence of a “divergence” between proxy and instrumental data covering the same period betrays a potential serious flaw in the process by which temperatures are reconstructed from tree-ring densities. If the relationship between proxy and instrumental data breaks down beyond a certain date, then any honest men of science would instinctively question whether the relationship was sound even before that date.
The entire basis for the Team’s purported abolition of the medieval warm period, and hence for the UN’s assertion that today’s temperatures are unprecedented in at least the last 1000 years, was false. And the Team’s attempt to “hide the decline” in the tree-ring proxy data compared with the post-1960 rise in instrumental global-temperature data, so as to conceal the inadequacy of the tree-ring proxies on the basis of which it had tried to abolish the medieval warm period, was – and there is no other way to put this – scientific fraud.
The excuses Democrats and the mainstream media are using to cover this up become more comical by the day. Yesterday, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California) tried to claim that the issue here is the dishonesty and possible illegality of the method by which the e-mails were obtained.
Look. It may very well have been dishonest and illegal. But let me ask you a question: If a Peeping Tom sees a man murder his wife, is the wife any less dead because the Peeping Tom wasn’t supposed to be looking?
Nations across the world are getting ready to completely reorder the industrial economy because of “global warming,” and this entire endeavor is based on the reliability of these scientists. I don’t care how they got busted. If they are frauds – and they clearly are – then you don’t pass cap-and-trade and all the other nonsense based on their word.
Yet even now, the Obama Administration is pushing ahead as if nothing has happened. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, doing his best Baghdad Bob imitation, insisted on Wednesday that there is simply no one who questions the “consensus” that global warming is man-made.
On a certain level, this kind of obliviousness is astounding. But as I wrote yesterday, it’s par for the course when the official establishment sees the entire basis for its big agenda coming apart at the seems, and they can’t imagine what else to say.
Even so, Australia’s version of cap-and-trade went down in flames this week, as even that nation’s left-wing lawmakers recognize that they can no longer defend the “scientific consensus” nonsense they had hoped would justify the massive, international takeover of private industry across the globe.
And as James Delingpole reported in the UK’s Telegraph yesterday, the whole idea of cap-and-trade has already become corrupted in Denmark, which is probably no surprise considering that one of the concept’s architects was the late Enron CEO Ken Lay.
There is no point in attempting to hide my glee here: The crash-and-burn of global warming is one of the most welcome political events I can ever remember. As I wrote yesterday, it is right up there with the collapse of communism and the Soviet Union. And along those lines, the media and public officials seem similarly reluctant to come to grips with it.
I recall that on the day the hammer and sickle came down from atop the Kremlin for the final time, it was only the third story reported on NBC Nightly News. It was as if this wonderful development was simply too much of a shock to the MSM’s system, and they couldn’t deal with the fact that the world as they had always known it was changing forever.
The collapse of global warming is a little different insofar as the media and Democrats have a lot invested in its perpetuation. All the big-government, high-tax, statist policies that both desire were depending on global warming to provide an excuse for passage. They won’t give it up easily.
But it’s becoming increasingly clear by the day that they’re not going to have much of a choice. Frauds, once exposed, unravel quickly. And while the MSM would undoubtedly cover this up if left to their own devices – just as they would have covered up the Lewinsky affair without Drudge breaking it – the Internet will make it impossible for them to do so.
Global warmists are now bemoaning that “deniers” are using the East Anglia e-mails to cast aspersions on their dogma. Damn straight. So-called deniers shouldn’t do anything but turn up the heat, if you’ll pardon the phrase.
This is the time to expose, mock, ridicule and attack, attack, attack global warmists and their fraudulent proposition. These people were attempting to use this nonsense to justify some of the most nefarious public policy proposals the world has ever seen. We now have proof that they were liars, and global warmists’ attempts to claim otherwise become more laughable with each new revelation about what was in those e-mails, and with each new analysis – like that of Christopher Monckton – of what the e-mails really demonstrate.
This is no time to let a wounded beast get up off the ground.