http://www.thetelecrapurinal.com/news/2009/12/russian-scientists-go-public-climategate-is-true-un-scientists-doctored-data/

Yet another massive blow to this criminal cabal of elitists, scientists, and their zombie minions.

admin’s note: I fixed your typo.

http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php

Complete with names and a summary of their qualifications. Remember that your pro AGW crowd boasts over 3,000 scientists. The anti AGW scientists are in excess of 31,000. The science is in. AGW is a hoax.

Stacey you said: “links to ‘evidence’ that climate change does not exist”

I do not have any. I agree that climate change exists but I do not agree that anthropogenic climate change is an issue, or if it is, it is negligible.

I believe that climate change is a naturally occurring event on a cyclical scale, driven by the sun.

But it does not matter what any of us ‘believe’. The real issue is faked data, omitted data, changing modeling software to get the desired result. This is Climategate.

According to these lead researchers own data, which they hid, shows that for at least the last 10 years world temperatures have been declining. Further there is no correlation between rising world temperatures and CO2. In fact as CO2 has continued to rise temperatures have begun to drop. This was hidden too as it broke the pattern of their ‘belief’. This is the scandal.

The leaked emails and computer code prove that these guys misrepresented their data.

Now using the pseudo-science, step in Al Gore as a front man for the Banksters and Fraudsters…yes the same ones who hijacked our economy have also hijacked the environmental movement.

They did this to push forward an agenda of cap-and-trade that will tax us for trillions of dollars. Al Gore and his partner David Blood, of Goldman Sachs fame, are set to be a carbon-swap middle men/brokers. They will make billions.

Then you have CEO’s of big oil jumping on board…why would they do this? Because with cap-and-trade they can increase pollution and declare themselves green at the same time.

Take for example Marvin Odum, President of Shell Oil, who will invest millions in wind and solar farms. The low carbon footprint will yield these ventures an excess of carbon credits which Shell can use to apply against their oil production declaring them a green company while increasing emissions. He has advertised that they need to boost oil production by 50% to meet global demand. Without cap-and-trade he can’t have his cake and eat it too.

Also if they do not get enough credits from their own initiatives they will be able to buy them from another company, with Al Gore making a commission as middleman.

NOW THE KICKER:

Finally the Marvin Odum’s of the world, the Oligarchs, Al Gore, David Blood, Goldman Sachs, the whole financial sector are calling for Carbon Derivatives to spawn a whole new industry. They will be able to speculate on Carbon Futures and it will become a commodity just like oil. There is billions, if not trillions at stake.

This is just one more chapter in the Casino Gulag Economy and I am surprised you and Max never caught this one. It all ties together.

The political high drama of the Coalition’s internal battle is a microcosm of how the climate change issue is playing out in the real world.

It was no surprise Kevin Andrews lost yesterday’s vote to call a leadership spill for the Liberal Party. But he made a fair fist of it, getting 42 per cent of the vote, despite being a surprise fringe candidate never previously considered for leadership.

Andrews also made a fair fist of explaining the rationale behind his run, stating the obvious truth that Liberals fare best electorally when combining economic liberalism with social conservatism. The majority opinion of the party room, as opposed to Malcolm Turnbull’s locked-in shadow cabinet, was that the Senate should ”reject or postpone” the Government’s carbon pollution reduction legislation and send it to a Senate committee to evaluate the impact of the most significant piece of economic re-engineering in Australia’s history.

It would have provided some transparency for voters, and Turnbull and the Coalition breathing room, and denied Prime Minister Kevin Rudd his prize for the Copenhagen climate summit next month.

To Andrews, party-room opposition to the scheme was simply ”reflecting a clear view of Liberal Party members, supporters and members of the public” about the consequences of this heavy new tax. Politicians should ”respect . . . the wishes of the Australian people”. What a refreshing thought.

The political high drama of the Coalition’s internal battle is a microcosm of how the climate change issue is playing out in the real world. After a long period in which a lazy public contented itself with trusting politicians and the climate “experts”, it has woken to find all is not as it seemed.

Armageddon is not nigh. The planet has been cooling for almost a decade and the fabled climate computer models never predicted that.

And now damning emails leaked from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia have implicated some famous climate scientists in a conspiracy to manipulate data and suppress evidence to exaggerate the case man-made ”runaway” global warming is threatening the planet. We see clearly the rotten heart of the propaganda machine that has driven the world to the brink of insanity on the eve of the Copenhagen climate summit.

More than 1000 emails and 3000 documents, covering correspondence between climate scientists for more than a decade, was posted on a Russian website with a link to the climate sceptic blog Air Vent on November 17, by someone using the name FOIA (presumably after the Freedom of Information Act). FOIA wrote: ”We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps. We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.”

We knew but never before had seen such proof of bad faith, overwhelming in its small detail, its shameless dishonesty, its meanness, its totalitarian tactics, pouncing on every deviation from The Word, as handed down by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The head of the agenda-setting Climate Research Unit, Phil Jones, in an email to Ray Bradley, Michael Mann, and Malcolm Hughes, the American scientists who created the now discredited ”hockey stick” graphs, which claim to show rapidly escalating temperatures is quoted thus: ”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.”

Mann, in another email dated Oct 27, 2009, writes: ”As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, it’s about plausibly deniable accusations.”

Phil Jones writes in another email about his alarm over new freedom of information laws, as he has been trying to block FOI requests for monthly global surface temperature data from retired Canadian statistician Steve McIntyre, the editor of the sceptic blog Climate Audit. ”The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone . . .”

The fact it was a retired statistician and not a news organisation pounding the FOI requests that precipitated this flood of information is a sad reflection on the state of journalism.

There is also a revolting email from Jones to Mann, describing the premature death from a heart attack of Tasmanian author and climate sceptic John L. Daly as ”cheering news!”

Mann, in another email, maps out a plan to ruin a journal, Climate Research, which has published sceptic papers. ”So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal.”

Another email to Mann, from Kevin Trenberth, an IPCC lead author on October 12, titled ”BBC U-turn on climate”, states: ”The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t . . . Our observing system is inadequate.”

The good thing is people can now see the tactics of the alarmists and their army of bovver boys. You can read the emails online and then you can read the sly attempts to explain away the misdeeds. Despite their feigned reasonableness and world-weary calm over the email scandal, climate alarmists are in a mad fumbling panic. They are exposed as dangerous megalomaniacs, foolish, but with enormous power.

Their power came from the complicity of the media and because it suited a certain type of politician to build a new bureaucracy and pose as an environmental saviour, never having to face up to the consequences of being wrong.