I have been reading a lot about this un-peer reviewed climate sceptic tom-foolery, and quite frankly, if you are going to a sceptic, hacking into scientists’ emails and making allegations that climate scientists have been with-holding data is not the way to go. Why? Well because you get caught and look like a bleedin’ eejit afterwards.
Climategate is cleared and it becomes apparent that climate sceptics are not seeing their arguments getting heard, so they play dirty.
Climategate, also known as the Climatic Research Unit email controversy began in November 2009 when hackers recovered and subsequently leaked documents from the University of East Anglia’s (UEA) Climatic Research Unit (CRU). As soon as climate sceptics got their hands on them, allegations were made that climate scientists rejected papers that contained results that ‘disproved man-made climate change’. One leaked email said:
From: Phil Jones <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
…I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
Sara Palin called this the ‘smoking gun’ that showed Prof. Phil Jones, Director of the Climate Research Unit trying to hide the decline in temperatures. Sorry Sara, you live on an ice-cube, why do people let you speak in public? This was not true; the only thing being “hidden” was tree ring data that did not match reality.
So now that science has yet again won the battle of scepticism, I’ve been thinking, why are there climate sceptics? Why are they trying to put up such a fight? And what are they hoping to get out of it?
The only conclusion I could come to is that they all bought 8L tank jeeps and since the recession hit the man in the car shop won’t take refunds… what now??.. DENIAL!!!
(John just caught me cracking myself up at the joke *embarrassed face*)
In fact you’ll find that these sceptics jobs are on line when people start mentioning too much CO2 is bad, people who are being paid by large corporate oil companies like Exxon Mobile and *cough* BP.
Another reason is the believe that the UN are conspiring against us – funding scientists to show statistical results that increased carbon emissions is causing 300,000 people year die due to climate change related disasters. From this we are going to pay a steep carbon tax which gets into the hands of those money lovin’ policy makers…. This is what the man from the Sovereign Independent told me, but surely the fact the people are actually dying due to rapid change in weather patterns is enough evidence that our heat trapping greenhouse gases are proving an issue. I’ll never get this New World Order shite.
And lastly, if you are leading a bunch of people who refuse to change and won’t vote for you if they are required to give up certain luxuries in life e.g. foam parties then what can you do but support your people and make them happy by saying :
“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.” –Sarah Palin, dismissing global warming as influenced by human activity, Newsmax interview, Aug. 2008