Climategate – proof global warming is made-up

By Linda Bentley | December 2, 2009

| More

hockey stick chart
The famous “hockey stick” chart produced by Michael Mann, meteorology professor at Pennsylvania State University, to prove his warming theory, was debunked by Steve McIntyre, a Canadian statistician, who found a Y2K computer glitch altered data. Later, assisted by an economics professor, he proved any number entered in the algorithm utilized by Mann produced the same results.

Global warming used to sell global government?
Thousands of e-mails hacked from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which have since been posted online at, reveal scientists associated with the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have purposefully and fraudulently produced outcome based “science” to further their global agenda.

E-mails between prominent climatologists, such as Professor Phillip Jones, head of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at UEA, made significant contributions to the IPCC Third Assessment Report of 2001 and the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 (AR4).

When raw data was requested for review by skeptics, Jones failed to provide that data. Instead, when the requesters indicated they would utilize the UK’s Freedom of Information laws to obtain that information, Jones sent an e-mail to one of his collaborators, Michael Mann, a professor of meteorology at Pennsylvania State University, who created the famous “hockey stick” graph to show what a catastrophe the pending uptick in warming would bring to the planet.

Steve McIntyre, a Canadian statistician, while analyzing NASA temperature graphs, discovered something odd occurring in January 2000 across a broad area that seemed to raise temperatures by 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit. McIntyre found a Y2K computer glitch caused the problem and, once corrected, the recent years, as Mann’s hockey stick corroborated as being the “warmest on record” all ended up taking a back seat to 1934, with at least half of the top 10 warmest years occurring before World War II.

Jones wrote, “Mike, can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise … Can you also e-mail Gene and get him to do the same? … Will be getting Caspar to do likewise.”

In another e-mail, regarding peer research that contradicted their global warming claims, Jones told Mann, “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what peer-review literature is!”
Probably one of the most damning e-mails to Mann came from Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the University of Colorado’s Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

Trenberth wrote, “The fact is we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”

Mann remained undeterred in pursuing his global warming agenda and continued using his hockey stick chart, despite the fact that it had been debunked.

Later, McIntyre, with the help of Ross McKitrick, a professor of economics at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, specializing in environmental economics and policy analysis, determined the algorithm utilized by Mann to produce his chart would produce the same hockey stick result regardless of the numbers input.

Mann also narrowed his “evidence” to that which proved his warming theory and excluded that which disproved it.

While climatologist Patrick Michaels said of the recent unearthing of the Climategate fraud, “This is not a smoking gun, this is a mushroom cloud,” those involved in perpetuating the fraud are in denial.

On Saturday, UEA’s website proclaimed, “CRU climate data already ‘over 95%’ available.”
It also posted a statement by Jones, who said, “In the frenzy of the past few days, the most vital issue is being overshadowed: we face enormous challenges ahead if we are to continue to live on this planet.

“One has to wonder if it is a coincidence that this email correspondence has been stolen and published at this time. This may be a concerted attempt to put a question mark over the science of climate change in the run-up to the Copenhagen talks.

“That the world is warming is based on a range of sources: not only temperature records but other indicators such as sea level rise, glacier retreat and less Arctic sea ice.”

Jones’ statement concluded with, “My colleagues and I accept that some of the published emails do not read well. I regret any upset or confusion caused as a result.

“We are, and have always been, scrupulous in ensuring that our science publications are robust and honest.”

Eduardo Zorita, a climate scientist at the GKSS Research Center near Hamburg, Germany, also posted a statement on Saturday that explained, “Why I think Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be banned from the IPCC process.”

Zorita wrote, “Short answer: because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.”

On Nov. 24, a report was released by the University of New South Wales Climate Change Research Center in Sydney, Australia, titled, “The Copenhagen Diagnosis, 2009: Updating the World on the Latest Climate Science.”

The preface states, “The purpose of this report is to synthesize the most policy-relevant climate science published since the close-off of material for the last IPCC report. The rationale is two-fold. Firstly, this report serves as an interim evaluation of the evolving science midway through an IPCC cycle – IPCC AR5 is not due for completion until 2013.”
Mann and Rahmstorf were listed as contributing authors.

The report begins with “The most significant recent climate change findings,” detailing surging greenhouse gas emissions, recent global temperatures demonstrate human-induced warming, acceleration of melting ice-sheets, glaciers and ice-caps, rapid arctic sea-ice decline, etc.

The report goes on to say sea-level predictions have been revised, stating, “By 2100, global sea-level is likely to rise at least twice as much as projected by Working Group I of the IPCC AR4; for unmitigated emissions it may well exceed 1 meter. The upper limit has been estimated as – 2 meters sea level rise by 2100. Sea level will continue to rise after global temperatures have been stabilized ...”

Meanwhile, Al Gore’s book-signing event at a Borders Books in Chicago to promote his new book, “Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis,” was met by a group of protestors declaring the former vice president’s science as “bunk.”

What used to be the United States Climate Change Science Program is now the United States Global Change Research Program, and the Copenhagen Treaty, as presently worded, indicates right off the bat the purpose is to form global government. Global warming was the avenue used to sell it.