Scientist’s Story From 1995 Corroborates With Hacked CRU Emails

Noted global warming skeptic, Dr. Timothy Ball must feel somewhat vindicated by the exposure of these hacked CRU emails. After years of being ridiculed and called a “denier” by this “peer group” of climate scientists driving the global warming hysteria, his worst suspicions have been discovered.

Global Warming is often called a hoax. I disagree because a hoax has a humorous intent to puncture pomposity. In science, such as with the Piltdown Man hoax, it was done to expose those with fervent but blind belief. The argument that global warming is due to humans, known as the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW) is a deliberate fraud. I can now make that statement without fear of contradiction because of a remarkable hacking of files that provided not just a smoking gun, but an entire battery of machine guns.

***

Climate science hijacked and corrupted by this small group of scientists

Dominant names involved are ones I have followed throughout my career including, Phil Jones, Benjamin Santer, Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, Jonathan Overpeck, Ken Briffa and Tom Wigley. I have watched climate science hijacked and corrupted by this small group of scientists. This small, elite, community was named by Professor Wegman in his report to the National Academy of Science (NAS).

***

Jones claims the files were obtained illegally as if that absolves the content. It doesn’t and it is enough to destroy all their careers. Jones gave a foretaste of his behavior in 2005. Warwick Hughes asked for the data and method he used for his claim of a 0.6°C temperature rise since the end of the nineteenth century. Jones responded, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” He has stonewalled ever since. The main reason was because it was used as a key argument in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Reports to convince the world humans caused rapid warming in the 20th century. The emails obtained are a frightening record of arrogance, and deception far beyond his 2005 effort.

I had heard that story. But this is new to me:

Another glimpse into what the files and emails reveal was the report by Professor Deming. He wrote, “ With publication of an article in Science (in 1995) I gained sufficient credibility in the community of scientists working on climate change. They thought I was one of them someone who would pervert science in the service of social and political causes. So one of them let his guard down. A major person working in the area of climate change and global warming sent me an astonishing email that said. “We must get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” The person in question was Jonathan Overpeck and his even more revealing emails are part of those exposed by the hacker. It is now very clear that Deming’s charge was precise. They have perverted science in the service of social and political causes.

Read the whole thing.

Here are some of Dr. Ball’s quotable quotes, via Wikipedia:

• “Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.”^[7]
• “The entire Kyoto issue is based on the theory of carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas…There are 2 major problems. First, [it] is not the most important greenhouse gas. Second, evidence now shows that temperatures rise before carbon dioxide increases – not the other way round.” ^[8]
• “Water vapor is effectively ignored in the computer models. Yes, that’s right. The climate models used as the basis for the entire global warming argument do not include the effect of clouds.”^[8]
• “Since 1940 and from 1940 until 1980, even the surface record shows cooling. The argument is that there has been warming since then but, in fact, almost all of that is due to what is called the “urban heat island” effect – that is, that the weather stations are around the edge of cities and the cities expanded out and distorted the record.”^[9]
• “The plain fact is there was never any evidence of CFCs affecting the ozone layer.”^[10]
• ” Scientists put CFCs in a chamber in a lab with ozone and assumed because the chlorine part of the CFC was destroying ozone this would happen in the ozone layer. Of course what they didn’t tell you was that the ozone was varying to different degrees at different levels in the ozone layer which extends over several kilometers. There is a self correcting mechanism because as the ultraviolet penetrates further into the atmosphere it contacts more O2 and therefore more O is produced and more O3.”^[10]
• “…The majority of the scientists who are on the Kyoto and global warming bandwagon know nothing about the science…The other problem is that so many of the scientists who are quoted as being on side with global warming are actually doing studies on the impact of global warming and climate changes and their studies then are listed as evidence for support of it. They are not, they are just starting with the assumption that global warming is going to occur, and what effect that would have. That is not support or proof at all.”^[9]
• “I can tolerate being called a sceptic because all scientists should be sceptics, but then they started calling us deniers, with all the connotations of the Holocaust. That is an obscenity. It has got really nasty and personal.”^[11]

MORE:

The latest at Watt’s Up With That?:

CRU Emails “may” be open to interpretation, but commented code by the programmer tells the real story

Laura Ingraham had Patrick Michaels, (who was a  target of derision in the emails) on her show to talk about the “conspiracy among climate scientists to conceal inconvenient scientific truths about global warming”. Audio here.

Michaels recently said this about the emails:

“This is not a smoking gun; this is a mushroom cloud,” said Patrick Michaels, a climatologist who has long faulted evidence pointing to human-driven warming and is criticized in the documents.