Global Warming Fraud: An Environmental Disaster Of Epic Proportions–UPDATED
November 20, 2009 / 4:40 pm • By Dr. Melissa ClouthierAn environmental cataclysm occurred this week. Al Gore is somewhere howling in psychic pain. Global warming skeptics and any real scientists rejoice: the fable of Global Warming aka Climate Change aka Impending Doom has been revealed for a scientifically manipulated fraud.
Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters has an excellent wrap-up of the story (damning emails, links) and asks this:
For its part, NewsBusters has sent e-mail messages requesting comment from all of the scientists mentioned in this article. None have responded yet.
However, maybe more importantly, with cap and trade legislation currently before Congress, and an international climate meeting happening in Copenhagen next month, the question is what will America’s leading media outlets do with this news.
Should we expect investigative television programs like “60 Minutes” and “20/20″ to be all over this story interrogating the scientists allegedly involved in these e-mail exchanges?
Will America’s press be as eager to find out the truth of this matter as they were in fact-checking former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s new book?
Consider that at the time of this article’s publishing, only FoxNews.com, NPR.com, and WSJ.com have logged printed stories on this subject from this side of the Atlantic.
Will others follow, and if so, how will they report what on the surface appears to be a huge, developing story?
Think of all the people [Al Gore] who stand to make billions should this lie be the foundation for worldwide environmental policy. Think of how the government will invade Americans’ lives to “save a planet” that is in no need of saving. Consider how negotiations between governments will be changed when data gets reevaluated. Hello Kyoto?
The implications of manipulated science of this scale are breath taking. The government funds millions in environmental research. Millions of tax-payer dollars also go for medical research, it should be noted. Public policy is made by the outcomes of this research.
Are Americans supposed to trust so-called scientists, who take money from the government and then give the government self-serving recommendations? This is already a question with government guidelines regarding cancer. Environmental policy is equally pervasive in scope. Each American’s life is depending on the reliability of “science”.
This disaster will mean more than just environmental policy. This disaster calls into question the ethics of government sponsored research and the wall between science and policy.
UPDATED:
Powerline has more about how the alarmists closed ranks when new data discounted the accepted theory:
The story began when Steve McIntyre, the same researcher who was largely responsible for destroying Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph purporting to show unprecedented warming in the 20th century, turned his attention to a famous article published by Keith Briffa of East Anglia’s CRU in 2000. This article analyzed the diameters of tree rings, including rings from an area called Yamal in Siberia, and conveniently generated another hockey-stick shaped graph. You can read an account of the ensuing controversy here. McIntyre’s work appeared to show that Briffa had cherry-picked trees in order to get the result he was looking for. One fact that this story highlights is that global warming alarmists publish their results in scientific journals, but refuse to make the underlying data publicly available so that the validity of their analyses can be checked.
McIntyre’s revelations caused a firestorm of controversy, in response to which the alarmist community circled its wagons to fend off the threat from an outsider. This process can be clearly seen in the East Anglia emails.
And one of my favorite writers on the web, and smartest, Charles Martin, has much, much more.






