Global warming: The Oxburgh Inquiry was an offer he couldn’t refuse.

Guest post by Thomas Fuller, San Francisco Environmental Examiner

Some background.

1. The Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University has published science that was integral to the decision of the EU and the UK to immediately implement programs subsidizing the installation of green energy generation systems.

2. Those subsidies amounted to approximately $50 billion U.S. dollars in 2008 alone.

3. Organised crime has already moved to profit from these subsidies, which appear to lack adequate controls to prevent misuse.

4. When the authorised leak of emails and documents resulted in the Climategate scandal of November 2009, it caused considerable havoc in stock market prices of green energy companies, especially when it was followed by Copenhagen, a cold winter, and scandal in carbon certificate trading.

5. East Anglia University commissioned an investigation into the practices of its research unit and asked Lord Oxburgh to chair the panel.

6. Lord Oxburgh is chairman of Falck Renewables, a manufacturer of windfarms and the UK subsidiary of The Falck Group, a Milan-based manufacturer.

7. A sister company of Oxburgh’s Falck Renewables, Actelios, is publicly traded and had suffered serious falls in its stock price during the period of Climategate, etc.

8. Lord Oxburgh’s company, its parent and more than one of its sister companies have had organised crime activities surrounding their acquisition of property and installation of green energy systems.

9. The green energy industry, organised crime investors, Falck Renewables and its parent and sister companies stood to benefit from an investigation the results of which did not overturn the science findings of CRU.

10. The investigation by Lord Oxburgh was perfunctory. The report was 5 pages. It interviewed no-one who was not employed by the University. It reviewed 11 papers that were not part of the Climategate controversy. Those papers were selected either by the University itself or a committee of the Royal Society on which Phil Jones, director of CRU, was a member.

Do I believe the ‘mob directed the investigation?’ Of course not. Do I believe that Lord Oxburgh had additional reasons to weight the findings of his investigation in favor of the status quo? It’s certainly possible. Do I think that having an underworld connection to renewable energy subsidies prejudices almost every decision made about renewable energy? Definitely. Do I believe East Anglia University chose the wrong person to chair its investigation? Absolutely.

When Lord Oxburgh was asked to chair the inquiry into the scientific practices at CRU, home of the Climategate emails, many sources questioned whether he would be able to be objective. This is because of his leadership of a company that builds windfarms in the UK and Europe. There may have been other reasons to question his ability to be objective. The sister company of Falck Renewables, the publicly traded Actelios, had lost half its value in the preceding months, following the Climategate scandal, the failure of Copenhagen climate talks and perceptions of a cold winter in Europe and America. Lord Oxburgh may have had a lot on the line, and may well have needed the verdict his panel produced.

But there may well be more. Much like the late 19th century produced plenty of sordid stories and crime in the development of the oil industry, there is a lot of organised crime rushing to get involved in renewable energy. We can either praise the mafia’s newfound sense of ecological correctness or note the large amount of government subsidy being thrown around rather carelessly.

Lord Oxburgh is chairman of Falck Renewables, a windfarm manufacturer that is a subsiidiary of the troubled Falck Group in Milan, Italy. The projects that Falck Renewables build seem to follow a pattern:

Their project in La Muela, Spain, was associated with the arrest of 18 people on organised crime issues.

“Powerful wind turbines churned the air above La Muela last week but the stir in this small Aragonese town was caused by the arrest of the mayor and 18 other people on charges that reveal a new phenomenon in Spain: eco-corruption.”

And at Falck’s windfarm at Buddusò – Alà dei Sardi: “Four people arrested, seven wind farms and 12 companies under sequestration, and ‘that’s the outcome of the operation’ Gone With the Wind ‘for which the magistrate court of Avellino has issued arrest warrants for Oreste Vigorito, 62 years Naples lawyer, administrator and president of IVPC Benevento Calcio; Vito Nicastro, 52 years of Alcamo, Ferdinand Renzulli, 42 years of Avellino, and Vincent Dongarra, 46 years of Enna. Another 11 people were investigated in various capacities for accountability in organized fraud for receiving government grants for the construction of wind farms. Nine of the seized companies are based in Avellino, the other 3 in Sicily.”

As for Falck’s windfarm at Minervino Murge, we reported on Friday,”the Anti-Mafia prosecutor in Trapani gave life operation “Aeolus”, with 8 arrest warrants issued at the time of men linked to local clans, public administrators, municipal officials and entrepreneurs “for allowing the association called La Cosa Nostra mafia, and in particular the Mafia family Mazara del Vallo control of economic activities, permits, contracts and public services in the production of electricity through wind turbines and the exchange of vows political mafia. ” identification of persons and companies involved in the investigation Sicilian revealed disturbing links with the construction of wind farms in the territory of Puglia: Minervino Murge, Spinazzola and Poggiorsini municipalities in whose territories some companies have shown interest and in some cases initiated installations without the necessary concessions.”

As for their wind farm near Palermo, Petralia Sottana, what do “Puglia, Sicily, Mazara del Vallo-Minervino Murge have in common? Nothing but interest for wind power. Companies interested in plant wind turbines in Apulia are committed to the same plant in Sicily, the same involved in an investigation initiated by the hot anti-Mafia prosecutor in Trapani and actually called, “Aeolus.”  On 17 February, the Anti-Mafia prosecutor in Trapani gave life operation “Aeolus”, with 8 arrest warrants issued at the time of men linked to local clans, public administrators, municipal officials and entrepreneurs “for allowing the association called La Cosa Nostra mafia, and in particular the Mafia family Mazara del Vallo control of economic activities, permits, contracts and public services in the production of electricity through wind turbines and the exchange of vows political mafia.”

Italian and EU subsidies for the building of wind farms and the world’s highest guaranteed rates, €180 ($240, £160) per kwh, for the electricity they produce have turned southern Italy into a highly attractive market exploited by organised crime.

As a 2009 story by the Financial Times put it, “Multinationals are starting to find out something that is well known to Italian investors: that concealed beneath Europe’s most generous system of incentives – supported by “green credits” that industrial polluters have to purchase – there exists a web of corruption and shady deals.

Rossana Interlandi, recently appointed head of Sicily’s environment department, explains that project developers – she calls them “speculators” – were also lured by the appeal of a law that obliges Italy’s national grid operator to pay wind farm owners even when they are not producing electricity.”

The number of Italian cities with a windfarm nearby has doubled within a year, thanks to EU subsidies. It would be astonishing if the Mafia hadn’t gotten involved.

The situation has deteriorated in Italy to the point that they are moving to residential solar to cut CO2 emissions, in large part to minimize Mafia involvement.

Wind energy has become big business and it’s growing in a hurry. Lots of shady people are getting involved, in no small part because of government subsidies for both construction and feed in tariffs for green electricity.

The parent group of Oxburgh’s Falck Renewables is the Falck Group of Milan. As with so many Italian businesses, it’s a complicated maze of crossholdings and interlocked ownership that makes it almost impossible to decipher. However Falck’s sister company Actelios was the target of an anti-Mafia investigation, as reported last week.

Nobody from Falck Renewables or its parent company has been arrested, although Achille Colombo, its former head, has resigned, and news reports of questionable dealings with a Sicilian incinerator project that was cancelled have arisen. The deal, which was cancelled and is still under investigation, was worth an estimated € 4 billion. Falck Group is a Milan based company that has built windfarms in Calabria and Sicily that have been part of an anti-Mafia investigation. Some of the windfarms, including one near Corleone, were completed quite some time ago, but haven’t been connected to the grid. However, generous EU subsidies were forthcoming nonetheless.

Falck’s sister company Platani Energia Ambiente was part of an anti-mafia investigation regarding a controversial land deal that lasted from 2002 to 2007 and involved the removal from office of the contract administrator, Gioacchino Genchi.

Just about the last thing they needed was news that wind energy wasn’t crucial to the planet’s survival. Just about the last thing they needed was news that the research unit that told the world that current warming was unprecedented in the past 1,000 years was probably wrong. The recession had hammered stock prices in green technology. The failure of COP15 in Copenhagen, the collapse of carbon pricing and various scandals about trading permits had not helped.

A quick investigation focussing on internal interviews and a review of papers selected (it seems) by a committee on which one of the targets of the investigation served, and pointedly did not review any of the papers that had been criticized by skeptics, left the CRU smelling like a ‘slightly disorganized but committed’ rose.

The reaction of major media sources and governments to the Oxburgh results show that his findings were more than welcome–they may well have been necessary to continue the momentum for widespread conversion to green energy.

I’ll repeat here that I have no evidence linking Oxburgh or his company to the mafia–even honest companies in Italy can’t get far away from the mafia and can be surprised when they are linked in an investigation. I have interviewed none of the principals in this story, which would be the first course of action for an investigative reporter, which I am not. I am an opinion commentator who happens to read Italian, having lived there for seven years.

But the pressure Lord Oxburgh’s company was under due to general financial conditions and being enmeshed in legal difficulties in Italy make it inevitable that someone would raise the question of whether he could have been impartial.

More importantly, the flood of new government money, new deals and new partnerships for projects in faraway countries makes due diligence difficult, if not impossible. This is a Wild West frenzy of renewable building and carbon trading, and there have been scandals for years–and there will be more. What was the thinking behind choosing someone (even one so respected as Oxburgh) to sit in judgment on issues that affected his company’s health–even survival? I’ll repeat I’m not questioning Oxburgh’s integrity–but could anyone from the renewable sector have escaped some kind of association of this sort? In 2009 alone, 19 were arrested in Spain in connection with corruption surrounding a wind farm, there was a scandal regarding recycled carbon trading permits in Hungary, a regulator in Maine accepted an ownership interest in a company he regulated and which he went on to lead, a Washington biologist is accused of steering wind farm funding to his non-profit, Canada is investigating lobbying violations by green lobbyists, the list literally goes on and on.

And now a company with so many controversial ties to scandals in renewable energy comes up with a verdict that provides needed breathing space for renewable energy companies in general, and his own and his sister companies to boot.

It was a most convenient finding, this exoneration of CRU.

======================================

See the CRUTape Letters, by Thomas Fuller and Steven Mosher, on the right sidebar.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Climategate, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

95 Responses to Global warming: The Oxburgh Inquiry was an offer he couldn’t refuse.

  1. Richard Sharpe says:

    Follow. The. Money.

  2. geo says:

    I agree with Judith Curry that 5 pages is a joke –it’s the executive summary, not the report.

    But here’s the thing, given the approach –carefully looking in the wrong places– then if an effective whitewash for pecuniary reasons was the real goal, he could have done a much better job. When you’re looking in the wrong places –places that the “defendent” asked you to look– you can lovingly go on in incredible minutia for page after page after page. Oxburgh didn’t.

    So I don’t know exactly what the malfunction was here, but I tend to doubt it was meant to be about the money –or it would have been more superfically effective in doing so. Those of us who have had a professional duty to respond to government regulators know that one of the more effective ways you do it is in sheer volume of paper. There are plenty of regulators that will practically “weigh the paper” without even reading it (or at least only barely skimming it) in determining how serious you’ve been in your due diligence in responding.

    That nothing of the kind happened here tells me it is something else.

  3. singularian says:

    4. When the authorised leak of emails and documents resulted in the Climategate scandal – Heh.

    Paragraph starting “As for Falck’s windfarm at Minervino Murge,” is partly repeated in the para below.

  4. Mike McMillan says:

    Maybe some connections over on the western side of the Atlantic need scrutiny, too.

  5. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    Lord Oxburgh is chairman of Falck Renewables, a manufacturer of windfarms…

    Awww, isn’t that just so cute….

  6. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    7. A sister company of Oxburgh’s Falck Renewables, Actelios, is publicly traded and had suffered serious falls in its stock price during the period of Climategate, etc.

    I guess he wasn’t like the big American bankers that shorted when they saw a crash coming.

  7. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    8. Lord Oxburgh’s company, its parent and more than one of its sister companies have had organised crime activities…

    Don’t these revelations get better and better all the time! What a wonderful world of global warming!

  8. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    We can either praise the mafia’s newfound sense of ecological correctness…

    I always did like that scene in Goodfellas where they were changing out the incandescent light bulbs and replacing them with twisty straw bulbs.

    Dang, can’t locate that clip in YouTube to attach it.

  9. CRS, Dr.P.H. says:

    …I’m reading this from Chicago, where our impeached Governor of Illinois is going to trial and making threats to subpoena the Commander-In-Chief-From -Chicago, Pres. Obama!!

    Jeez, I thought WE were corrupt on this side of the pond!!

    Forget the mafia, when the carbon-industrial complex in the USA gets revved up, it will be impossible to stop. You know the players, GE, Exxon, Goldman-Sachs etc.

  10. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    ….the arrest of the mayor and 18 other people on charges that reveal a new phenomenon in Spain: eco-corruption.”

    Oh come on! That’s just ‘standard practice’ in global warming. Are you people trying to make it look like something wrong is happening??

  11. Tenuc says:

    Lord Oxburgh was a former chairman of big oil (Shell), who has gone ‘green’ and is now a CAGW believer.

    I’m sure our government felt he would be the ideal choice to run an enquiry into the Climategate scandal! This attempted cover-up will do more damage to the ’cause’ than was done by the leaked documents!

  12. kwik says:

    GOOD GRIEF!

    Its much, much worse than we thought!

  13. pat says:

    Aw shucks. You mean that shallow, meaningless review of AGW was a complete fraud? Who knew. mean the in depth review of measured data was so impressive./

  14. Richard111 says:

    Ironic to think that organised crime might save us from CAGW.

  15. P.G. Sharrow says:

    “Free Government Money” draws bad actors like sweets draw ants. They can’t help them selves. Cleptos have to steal. The renewable push of 30 years ago yielded the same results and after a dozen years the programs were ended. Lots of money spent and little benefit realized. What I found hard to believe was that they could have made good money by doing things right, but they had to scam it.
    Bureaucrats mainly funded the scamers as they made the the most wonderful promises of results. After the bureaucrats discover they have been had, they bury it and cover up. Bureaucrats and politicans must be dumber then fenceposts as they never learn, and keep on doing the same things, expecting different results.

  16. max says:

    “We can either praise the mafia’s newfound sense of ecological correctness”

    There is nothing newfound about this, the Mafia has long been a proud steward of the environment, a position which has repaid them handsomely. They have been involved with the waste management business for decades and, as visitors to Sicily can attest, the completely Mafia run waste management systems are unparalleled in the developed world (the 3rd world a different matter). Any place where money can be made regardless of whether product or service actually works, you are sure to find the Mafia (because they realize that if whether it works or not doesn’t matter then there is no need to waste money on trying to make it work in the first place).

  17. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    And now a company with so many controversial ties to scandals in renewable energy comes up with a verdict that provides needed breathing space for renewable energy companies in general, and his own and his sister companies to boot.

    It was a most convenient finding, this exoneration of CRU.

    How will they patch this one over? Damage control will be forthcoming and will be spread by trolls waiting under the bridge for their marching orders. Will they be bringing out Ed Begley for this one? How about that guy with the fish eye glases? Will Al Gore be able to answer about this as he walks down the hall chewing?

    I’m interested to hear Monckton’s thoughts on this one! I got some popcorn!

  18. JohnD says:

    Post-normal extortion.

  19. NZ Willy says:

    “Falck Renewables” indeed. Why not cut through the East-Anglia BS and just call it “Flick Renewables” in the spirit that JFK called his ladies “flickers”, or even cut further and just call it F…

  20. Andrew30 says:

    Tenuc (23:11:50) :

    Lord Oxburgh was a former chairman of big oil (Shell), who has gone ‘green’ and is now a CAGW believer.

    Shell has been funding the CRU from the very beginning.

    That’s right, Shell and BP have been funding the CRU the whole time.

  21. baahumbug says:

    Deeee dede deeeee de deeeeeeee

    I can see another series of parody videos coming, like the “Downfall” ones.

    Scenes from the Godfather…

    Godfather: “Globul Warmin, wind farms, it’s all hot air. Not solid like gamblin.”

    Sonny: But pops, we gotta keep up wid da times. And I aint givin up any of ma territoris to them scum from UEA. Ayl give em som warmin from da end o my tommy gun.

  22. UK Sceptic says:

    Welcome to the EUSSR, the gangsters paradise…

  23. stan stendera says:

    Save two there were no birds on my birdfeeder today. Even Fat Albert, the gluttonous dove was absent. The only two birds present were the wrens [my wren has found a mate!] on picket duty. I had to get my binoculars to read the tiny signs they were carrying. One said: “On Strike”, the other said “Close Altamont”. I mIss them but I don’t blame them.

    In the last twenty years over 8,000 Golden Eagles, a federally protected species, have been sliced apart by the wind turbines at Altamont. Frequently they spiral to earth with a broken wing only to be killed by the scavengers who have learned to hang around wind “farms”. To call such an industrial project a farm is an abomination.

    Because of scavenger activity no one knoes how many birds are killed by wind projects. The American Bird Conservany estimates up to 275,000 a year. 10,000 a year at Altamont is another estimate. Both are probably conservative. It is worth noting that, in spite of the National Audubon Society’s support of the global warming myth, a number of local Audubon societys around Altamont have banded together to sue to stop the bird slaughter. They have won in court but little has been done.

    This is in stark contrast to what happened to the greenies favorite whipping boy, Exxon-Mobile. They had an incident at one of their facilities that killed 85 birds. They were fined $600,000. No action has ever been taken against any wind project for bird slaughter.

    Then there are the bats. Now I know bats are creepy, but when we used to sit on our deck at twilight watching the birds we got chewed up by mosquitos. Then we put up a bat box. Now we get to watch not only the birds but also the bats, knowing each quick swoop they make kills a mosquito. The bite quota is way down. Ain’t Nature wonderful.

    At Backbone Mountain in western North Carolina 4,000 bats a year are killed at a wind project.

    All of this might be worth it if wind projects actually generated any useful electricity. They don’t. All they generate is government handouts to promoters. Is it any wonder crime has moved in? Let’s call them the ecomafia.

  24. Jimmy Haigh says:

    It’s all really starting to look like a duck now.

  25. DirkH says:

    Now you see why that Club is called the Club Of Rome…

  26. Kate says:

    This is no surprise. Oxburgh announced the result of the CRU investigation before it had even begun, as I pointed out at the time. I also posted the findings of an investigation by HMRC that over 80% of carbon trades and VAT-related carbon credits were fraudulent (the “Carousel” system). But then again, if politicians, bureaucrats, green fascists, bankers, and the mass media want to create a financial system based upon the biggest scientific fraud in history, what they will produce is the financial equivalent of a massive cash sewer in the middle of a legal and political swamp.

  27. Tom says:

    €180 per kwh? Really? That’s… about one thousand times the retail price of electricity. Did you mean per MWh, perhaps?

  28. Erik says:

    —————————————————————-
    world’s highest guaranteed rates, €180 ($240, £160) per kwh, for the electricity they produce
    —————————————————————-

    €180/kwh ? – I doubt it, but then again I am a skeptic

  29. The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says:

    I’m 50 years old – so nothing surprises me anymore. We all knew that nothing would come of the CRU debacle. However, I hope one of the British newspapers gets this and runs with it. There’s one thing you can say about British newspapers, and that’s when they get their teeth into something, they just won’t let go – as has been seen many, many times.

  30. mikael pihlström says:

    So, the mafia sat around idle for centuries?, no incomes?, waiting
    for renewable projects to start. No one should take lightly infiltration
    by organized crime, but please get some sense of proportion.

  31. Dave Wendt says:

    The seemingly ubiquitous involvement of OC figures in the EU green energy market adds an interesting spin to the post from earlier in the month about potential scams involving pumping high priced energy from supposedly green sources into the grid to reap big profits on the spread.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/13/the-insanity-of-greenery/#more-18452

  32. toby says:

    Oxburgh’s report was short and sweet because the accusations were groundless.

    I notice the more substantial House of Commons report has been forgotten. Since Oxburgh’s report was short and therefore wrong, the HoC report was longer but therefore right.

    Conspiracy theories, now! The MAFIA are behind AGW? The wingnut index of this site is growing.

  33. Robert of Ottawa says:

    The rot goes deeper. There are large swathes of government and academic bureaucracy now dependant on government green money. In the US itself, 18,000 people work for the EPA and that organization is salivating at the opportunities of further money.

    Same applies here in Canada. Here’s a typical story of self-serving warmists http://winnipeg.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100401/climate_funding_100403/20100403/?hub=WinnipegHome

  34. bobby222 says:

    Readers may like to know that Lord Oxborough used to be Sir Ronald Oxburgh, the President of Queens’ College, one of the many ancient colleges which constitute the University of Cambridge in England. He is an eminent scientist in the field of geology. Here are some interesting connections you might not know…

    As a member of the house of Lords, and active for many years in government work, he will have come into contact with Lord Falconer. Falconer used to be Charlie Falconer. Not only was Falconer a member of Tony Blair’s government (its chief law officer I think), he was a close friend of Blair’s and later elevate to the house of Lords. Falconer was also a fellow Queensman, having studied there as an undergraduate. As for Blair, I notice that there have been many connections, or at leat sympathies, between some of Blair’s inner circle and Al Gore.

    I do not suggest anything untoward. I just raise my eyebrow!

  35. Alexander says:

    Politicians throwing subsidies at any problem attracts dodgy ‘entrepreneurs’ like meat attracts flies at an Aussie barbecue.
    Politicians thinking they can repeat the same failed tactics and expect successful outcomes proves nothing more than the essential stupidity of politicians.
    And this is OT, but I appreciate how civilised the posters on WUWT are,
    while contrary views from the majority posted in the Guardian attracts inredibly vicious comment. Nice contrast!
    Anthony’s standards of civil behaviour on WUWT are to be commended.

  36. Capn Jack says:

    Toby,

    Go back to moonbot land. You know that top secret place in your head.

    We heard you folk were organising, we just never thought we would see a moonbot land here.

    Lo and behold a moonbotian and Hawkings said space aliens would not be friendly, he is right.

    Nanoo Nanoo Toby.

    Say hello to Loopa Loopa George for us.

  37. Richard Sharpe says:

    toby (01:12:50) said:

    Oxburgh’s report was short and sweet because the accusations were groundless.

    I notice the more substantial House of Commons report has been forgotten. Since Oxburgh’s report was short and therefore wrong, the HoC report was longer but therefore right.

    Conspiracy theories, now! The MAFIA are behind AGW? The wingnut index of this site is growing.

    Keep spouting your bullshit. I am sure you will find some moron to believe it.

  38. mikael pihlström says:

    Thomas Fuller

    “The green energy industry, organised crime investors, Falck Renewables
    and its parent and sister companies stood to benefit from an investigation
    the results of which did not overturn the science findings of CRU.”

    How many investigations do you need before you get it: nothing will
    overturn the main science findings of CRU. There will be new details, complementing views perhaps, but the science findings about theses
    past events will stand, corroborated by a load of independent evidence.

    If you are true sceptics, why not concentrate on the core matter of
    modelling RF, the IPCC models and scenarios etc.

  39. Mooloo says:

    Conspiracy theories, now! The MAFIA are behind AGW? The wingnut index of this site is growing.

    No. You are the one reading things in that are not there. No-one has claimed any crime link to the belief in AGW, just a possiblity that they are taking advantage of it.

    History tells us that many of greatest of humankind’s failures are when we try to hard to be good. Revolutions start with the best intentions and end with the Gulag. People give money to desperate children in Africa, only to find 90% is spent on “administration” because their chosen “charity” was actually not.

    Whether AGW is real or not, there is a desperate need to stop the idiotic throwing of money by politicians trying to look like they care. Why are people paying other people to not chop down forests that they had no intention to chop down, for example?

  40. jlc says:

    Thomas,
    the proce is either 180/MWh (most likely) or 180/kW of available capacity,

  41. jlc says:

    That might be “price”

  42. Mike Haseler says:

    toby (01:12:50): Oxburgh’s report was short and sweet because the accusations were groundless.

    I notice the more substantial House of Commons report has been forgotten.

    No way! We are still chuckling! If you bothered to read it, the Commons have printed one of the best dismissals of climate science I have ever had the fortune to read. The only way the climategate gang got out of this at all was by effectively redefining their discipline as not being subject to the rule of science.

    OK, they went away with their integrity in tact because they decided that the standard they wanted their “scientific” discipline to be judged by was that: “they weren’t proven to have lied”. So, they have joined the throng over other distrusted professions like politicians and effectively admitted that climate forecasting was not a science based on the rigorous “proof by test”, statistics, physics, chemistry, etc. … basically it can now be classified along with the arts

    or to put it another way one bunch of scoundrels have said that another bunch of scoundrels can’t be proven to have (intentionally) lied (on the specific issues being considered – by the specific witness they chose as being least likely to have the evidence to prove a lie, etc.).

  43. A C Osborn says:

    toby (01:12:50) :

    Oxburgh’s report was short and sweet because the accusations were groundless.

    Tell that to all those Scientists that passed compliants to both Committees which did not actually interview them or investigate their claims.
    You obviously either didn’t bother reading the emails or read them through Rose (AGW) coloured glasses.

  44. Kailer says:

    That must be MWh right? They’re not really giving windfarmers 180,000 euros/MWh of electricity are they?

  45. Rick Bradford says:

    Ey, give da guy a break, willya? Anythin’s better’n being strapped to one a dose windmills, am I right or am I right?

  46. Mike Haseler says:

    toby (01:12:50): Oxburgh’s report was short and sweet because the accusations were groundless.

    Toby, the fact is that most people and certainly most scientists were able to read for themselves what was happening in climate “science”. They didn’t need an inquiry to know that e.g. the process of peer review had been distorted or that they were saying one thing about sulphates in private which they were not telling the public.

    The damage was done by the emails themselves and the only way to limit that damage was to have shown that such behaviour was totally unacceptable in climate science and to have shown this academic discipline set the highest scientific standards for itself.

    Paradoxically the best outcome for the climate “scientists” – What the credibility of climate “science” needed was a very strong rebuttal of the kind of activity seen in the emails. The more heads that rolled, the more people who think: “wow they do set high standards in that subject”.

    In contrast climate “science” has all but admitted that what we saw in the emails was perfectly acceptable for their subject.

    This hasn’t raised the credibility of those in the climategate emails, far from it! It has in fact lowered the public perception of this subject so that e.g. most people will now view anyone working in this field as endorsing the kinds of behaviour seen in the climategate emails. All work from climate “science” will be viewed with much the same credibility as we all view Party Political Manifestos – unlikely to be blatantly untrue – but certain in some way to hide the real truth.

  47. Henry chance says:

    This is what peer review looks like in an investigation.
    Peer reviewed endorsement. I suspect the CRU wrote the report before the inquiry commenced.

  48. 3x2 says:

    toby (01:12:50) :

    Oxburgh’s report was short and sweet because the accusations were groundless.

    I notice the more substantial House of Commons report has been forgotten. Since Oxburgh’s report was short and therefore wrong, the HoC report was longer but therefore right.

    Conspiracy theories, now! The MAFIA are behind AGW? The wingnut index of this site is growing.

    I don’t really think you need a conspiracy, just hundreds of billions in free money moved around in an endless shell game with no accountable end product.

    If my BBC pension depends on “the green markets” or my windfarm company is about to tank, I don’t have to be in league with the “mafia” to know where my interests lie regarding climategate or anything “climate” related.

    CRS, Dr.P.H. (23:10:17) :

    Forget the mafia, when the carbon-industrial complex in the USA gets revved up, it will be impossible to stop. You know the players, GE, Exxon, Goldman-Sachs etc.

    I would argue that it already is revved up and impossible to stop.
    Goldman-Sachs (Lehman, Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank … big oil, big everyone …) all taking their 10%. The current and future pensions of millions. This list could go on for pages. Already impossible to dismantle even if temperatures plunged back into a Little Ice Age by next week. Got to love the “green” economy.

  49. Atomic Hairdryer says:

    Organised crime has been active in Italian green projects for a while, including their own take on recycling-

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/09/090916-italy-toxic-video-ap.html

    “September 16, 2009—Authorities are using a robotic submarine to investigate whether the Mafia dumped “hundreds” of radioactive-waste barrels into the sea off Italy.”

    Shouldn’t be any great suprise finding fraud in any bubble.

  50. Steve (Paris) says:

    I am intriuged by the use of ‘authorised’ here:

    ‘When the authorised leak of emails and documents resulted in the Climategate scandal of November 2009′

    The implication being that Climatgate was an exercise in damage control. Which means what we have seen is the tip of the iceberg, doesn’t it? Anyone out there following up on this? FOI? Lawson?

  51. Mike says:

    Isn’t all business organised crime?

  52. Jimbo says:

    From my little understanding of jury selection lawyers can challenge jurors both in the UK and the USA. Why do you think this is allowed? Conflict of interest? Suspected bias? In the above case we have the defendant selecting the judge and juror!!!!! This is why many on WUWT predicted, quite rightly, a whitewash.

    “As each juror number is called out either the prosecution or the defence may call out “challenge”. This is what is known as challenging for cause…”
    http://www.courtsni.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/06BE4B16-E561-41F1-B967-7E16173127DA/0/JurySelection.htm

  53. RichieP says:

    A meaning for “heater” previously undiscovered then?

  54. Jimbo says:

    Andrew30 (23:57:31) :

    Tenuc (23:11:50) :

    Shell has been funding the CRU from the very beginning.
    ——-

    See Shell funding CRU as well as other big oil, coal and nuclear generation companies here (scroll down to bottom of page):
    Source: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/

    Selected sources of funding for CRU
    British Petroleum (Oil, LNG)
    Central Electricity Generating Board
    Eastern Electricity
    KFA Germany (Nuclear)
    Irish Electricity Supply Board (LNG, Nuclear)
    National Power
    Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (Nuclear)
    Shell (Oil, LNG)
    Sultanate of Oman (LNG)
    UK Nirex Ltd. (Nuclear)

  55. Pascvaks says:

    Murphy’s Law states – “Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong.”

    I have learned in my lifetime to shorten this to “If it can, it will.”

    When you find that something has gone ‘wrong’, and you want to find the most currupt individual or group responsible, ask yourself who had the most to gain and then check to see who actually did gain the most by the outcome? One is not necessarily the other.

    Did Oxburgh appoint himself? Who ‘really’ appointed the members of this glorious inquiry? But, the real question is: ‘Who gained the most by the outcome?’

    PS: Corruption is a condition of life. It comes in too many forms to count. If it can, it will — be corrupted! C’est la vie!

    PPS: The Mafia exists in many forms and gets too much credit for this type of thing. I doubt they, or any other notorious group, were the BIG winners is this fiasco.

  56. Smokey says:

    Mike (05:47:38) :

    “Isn’t all business organised crime?”

    No. Who do you work for? Criminals?

    I think you have business conflated with government.

    And who needs separation of church and state? The Administration has now entered the church business: click

  57. AnonyMoose says:

    Perhaps there should be a permalink to the original article, for people who want to confirm the original text. It looks like there presently is only a link to the author’s work, and this article will scroll away as he writes more.

  58. Robert Morris says:

    That wiley old Roman was right, “Cui bono?”

  59. kate. r. says:

    I’m not sure whether to anticipate another ‘Black Friars Bridge’ or not.
    But really, in Italy and Spain they call it Mafioso, in the UK, US and elsewhere it’s just called b.a.u.
    ‘a most convenient finding’ – great title for a movie, or is that a sequel.
    start with MGW;s ’08 cartoon of the ‘chart showing how since the release of Gore’s AIT global temperatures declined’.

  60. Smokey says:

    Robert Morris (07:10:21),

    “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” also comes to mind.

  61. Liam says:

    Organised crime has long been involved in the recycling and waste business, not surprising it is spreading into other areas of the “Green Economy”, which is full of cranks, crooks and snake-oil salesmen.

  62. Stirling English says:

    @mike

    ‘Isn’t all business organised crime?’

    No.

  63. Jessie says:

    The Department of Defence Should Assess the Security Risks of Climate Change Policies

    Neglected Security Risks of Climate Policy
    1. Gas Pains
    2. A Strong Defense requires a Strong Economy
    3. Climate policy: The real Threat Multiplier
    4. Trade War: US-China Conflict
    5. Proliferation Risk
    6. Europe’s Dependence on Russian GAs
    7. Biofueling Disaster

    http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/

  64. John Galt says:

    Mike (05:47:38) :
    Isn’t all business organised crime?

    I think you meant to say “all government?”

  65. Sam_I_Am_Not_KDK says:

    toby… Ignorance won’t help you. Throwing around the term ‘conspiracy’ hoping that will save you, like the idiot box promotes, just won’t cut it. If you had ANY clue regarding world history and modern history, you would absolutely KNOW CONSPIRACIES take place daily (all the time, in fact) especially with big gov and big biz… always working to suppress the counter argument, regardless if it has more facts on its side.

    The idiot box, state-run schools and the like seem to still have a grip on the many, but awakening is occurring. Bet you think Columbus actually deserves a day on our calendar… after all, he was just a nice, kind guy out to discover the world and make friends… lol.

    Stop looking like a brain-dead tool using common terms that the masses respond to; here you are against people that actually do some research.

  66. Henry chance says:

    I do not see a way in which Lord Oxburgh could have found not in favor of the CRU without hurting his own investments. Their stock plummeted during the initial period of November December opening of Climate gate events and reports.

    Too many greedy cheaters are in the carbon credit pipeline. The odds of a farmer recieving more than couple of pennies from the carbon credits in the pipeline are very slim. There will be far too many money handlers and pimps taking a cut andthe farmer will find near nothing.

    The RIGGA or whatever energy inniative in the New England state is now being directed into state general funds coffers. They will never go to “green” jobs.

  67. Steven mosher says:

    mikael pihlström (03:37:52) :

    “How many investigations do you need before you get it: nothing will
    overturn the main science findings of CRU. There will be new details, complementing views perhaps, but the science findings about theses
    past events will stand, corroborated by a load of independent evidence.

    If you are true sceptics, why not concentrate on the core matter of
    modelling RF, the IPCC models and scenarios etc.”

    mikael,

    you really SHOULD read more about Tom and what he believes before you write. I’ll speak for Tom because he is a friend and we wrote a book together. As we argued in that book. NOTHING in the mails changes the science. Nothing COULD. first because they are just mails and not scientific facts themselves and so could not logically CHANGE the science. only science can change the change. That is, only new facts and new theories can replace old facts and old theories. So we maintain ( although few people on the other side pick up on this ) that mails change NOTHING ABOUT THE SCIENCE. Both Tom and I are Lukewarmers. This means we believe in radiative physics. We believe the world is warming. and believe that the concentration of gases in the atmosphere contribute to this. Same as jeffId, same as steve mcintyre, same a Lucia, same as a whole host of skeptics.
    Where we differ is this:

    1. we are unsure about the level of warming
    2. uncertain about feedbacks
    3. uncertain that warming will be damaging
    4. uncertain about the best course of action.

    So, what did the mails show and what does Tom show in the piece above?
    Well the mails show that the process has become corrupted. Recently here in San Francisco a lab technician was busted stealing evidence. (alledgedly) what happens?

    The people who were convicted of drug charges are let go.

    The fact that the lab tech stole drugs doesnt change the factual guilt of these people. But to preserve trust in the system they are set free. In the case of climategate mails, we know the process is corrupt. That fact doesnt make it COOLER TODAY, what it does is simple: it erodes trust. And trust can only be restored through right action: get rid of the lab techs and do a full audit of the papers they wrote. Take the papers out of publication and have them resubmitted if possible. Instead these clowns put Oxburgh in charge. generating more lack of trust

  68. Richard Sharpe says:

    It was a Gore-wash.

  69. Gail Combs says:

    Amino Acids in Meteorites (22:47:31) :

    7. A sister company of Oxburgh’s Falck Renewables, Actelios, is publicly traded and had suffered serious falls in its stock price during the period of Climategate, etc.

    I guess he wasn’t like the big American bankers that shorted when they saw a crash coming.
    ______________________________________________________________________________
    The big American bankers orchestrate the crashes! The US dollar is fiat currency with no real value. If someone is foreclosed the bank gets the land, house, products, company or what ever other assets secured the loan. By manipulating the financial cycles The big American bankers wipe out their smaller competitors AND trade worthless paper for REAL assets.

    “…American history in the twentieth century has recorded the amazing achievements of the Federal Reserve bankers. First, the outbreak of World War I, which was made possible by the funds available from the new central bank of the United States. Second, the Agricultural Depression of 1920. Third, the Black Friday Crash on Wall Street of October, 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression. Fourth, World War II. Fifth, the conversion of the assets of the United States and its citizens from real property to paper assets from 1945 to the present, transforming a victorious America and foremost world power in 1945 to the world’s largest debtor nation in 1990. Today, this nation lies in economic ruins, devastated and destitute, in much the same dire straits in which Germany and Japan found themselves in 1945.” – Eustace Mullins who was on the staff of the Library of Congress
    http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm

    For a very good explanation of how banking is run in the USA and elsewhere see:
    A PRIMER ON MONEY: by US House Committee on Banking and Currency
    http://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/Money/patman-primer-on-money.pdf

  70. Gail Combs says:

    P.G. Sharrow (23:23:01) :

    “…..Bureaucrats mainly funded the scamers as they made the the most wonderful promises of results. After the bureaucrats discover they have been had, they bury it and cover up. Bureaucrats and politicans must be dumber then fenceposts as they never learn, and keep on doing the same things, expecting different results….”

    No Bureaucrats and politicians are bought and paid for.
    Here is an example:

    1. Canadian Maurice Strong headed Molten Metal.

    “He is a huge political donor, not just here in Canada, but to both the Republican and Democratic parties in the U.S. as well…” http://the-classic-liberal.com/maurice-strong/

    “Republicans plan to ask Mr. Knight whether he improperly used his 20-year friendship with Vice President Al Gore to help Molten Metal win Government contracts and organize Mr. Gore’s enthusiastic visit to the firm’s plant in Fall River, Mass., in April 1995 (Earth Day)…..Molten Metal was rewarded by the Federal Government for its generosity to Mr. Knight and the Clinton-Gore campaign….” http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/04/us/panel-to-quiz-clinton-s-96-campaign-chief-on-stock-gift.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

    After funding was cut Strong bailed leaving investors holding the bag. They sued http://securities.stanford.edu/1008/AxlervMoltenMeta/001.html

    There was also a House Committee investigation
    http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20040830154236-07181.pdf

    And it is not only the Democrats.
    “…Strong blurted out that he’d almost been shut out of the Earth Summit by people at the State Department. They had been overruled by the White House because George Bush knew him. He said that he’d donated some $100,000 to the Democrats and a slightly lesser amount to the Republicans in 1988….” http://www.afn.org/~govern/strong.html

  71. Gail Combs says:

    stan stendera (00:22:34) :

    Then there are the bats. Now I know bats are creepy,…

    At Backbone Mountain in western North Carolina 4,000 bats a year are killed at a wind project.
    __________________________________________________________________________________

    Oh no they are killing my bats! Call Emily Davis Mobley! Bats are not creepy they are really neat critters when you get to know them. Then again I like snakes too.

    (Actually I am in central N.C. and I do know Emily.)

  72. frederik wisse says:

    First of all thank you for clarifying the relations . What is wrong with asking the most heavy hurt person or organisation , by the CRU-schandal , to investigate the scandal ? At least he will do his utmost to paint a favourable picture of the innocuous persons put in the twilight by their own statements ! The saying is here it takes a crook to catch a crook , but the sing-song here is more likely it takes a crook to liberate a crook . Our world nowadays is changing so fast that even the temperature readings cannot catch up with the fraud , apparently truth is slower than fiction .

  73. Gail Combs says:

    toby (01:12:50) :

    ” Conspiracy theories, now! The MAFIA are behind AGW? The wingnut index of this site is growing.”
    ______________________________________________________________________________

    Typical CAGW spin. Can you not READ. The MAFIA are taking advantage of an opportunity provided by the politicians to make lots of money. By making drugs in the USA illegal the bureaucrats made another opportunity for the MAFIA and the police to make lots of money.

    “Civil asset forfeiture has allowed police to view all of America as some giant national K-Mart, where prices are not just lower, but non-existent — a sort of law enforcement ‘pick-and-don’t-pay.’”
    —U.S. Representative Henry Hyde

    “…”Efficiency is measured by the amount of money seized rather than impact on drug trafficking.”

    A reverse sting operation, where the officer becomes the seller who encourages the suspect to commit a crime, “was the preferred strategy of every agency and department with which the researcher was associated because it allowed agents to gauge potential profit prior to investing a great deal of time and effort.” More importantly, the narcotics units studied preferred seizing cash intended for purchase of drugs supplied by the police, rather than confiscating drugs already on the street. When asked why a search warrant would not be served on a suspect known to have resale quantities of contraband, one officer responded:

    “Because that would just give us a bunch of dope and the hassle of having to book him (the suspect). We’ve got all the dope we need in the property room, just stick to rounding up cases with big money and stay away from warrants.” http://www.fear.org/

    Drugs are a real big money maker for the police, politicians and the MAFIA. That is why only lip service is paid to actually finding a solution to the problem. Carbon trading will be just the same. The little guy will be raped by the bullies, the politicians and the MAFIA, once again. And the real problem will only get lip service just like the drug problem.

    I don’t care if you think CAGW is real or not the POLITICS are the same, make money off the little guy.

  74. Dan in California says:

    Robert of Ottawa (02:37:49) :

    “The rot goes deeper. There are large swathes of government and academic bureaucracy now dependant on government green money. In the US itself, 18,000 people work for the EPA and that organization is salivating at the opportunities of further money.”

    I don’t know about other states, but the US EPA does not operate in California. We have our own state taxpayer funded Cal EPA because the federal regulations are not coming fast enough or strict enough. Plus CARB, the California Air Resources Board, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, all of which have the authority to pass regulations that have the force of law. It is these organizations that have set standards that create the “49 state” and California version of cars, lawn mowers, etc.

  75. rbateman says:

    Steven mosher (08:30:28) :

    I will add that we are unsure of the number of cycles within the climate meanderings that are yet to be identified.
    The timing of the appearance of ‘unidentified’ cycles is also a factor unaccounted for.
    I am quite sure that at some point the current “120 yr” trend will pivot and turn, and most likely just at the same time the tail of the climate snake is grapsed in false confidence.
    Why?
    Because climate science is too far removed from observation, that’s why.
    Looks to me that 2 levels of derivatives rule the thinking.
    Corruption is not limited to the money side, though it is fully expected.
    Nothing good is coming out of these derivatives, and nothing is to be expected to come out of them.

  76. Ziiex Zeburz says:

    Thomas Fuller.

    The Milano ‘La Stampa’ reported in March that ENL (the Italian Electricity provider) had suspended payments to solar panel electric Companies as there was exceptionally high use of online electricity being diverted into the solar panel grid. ( diverting 1 kw and passing it into the solar system meter gives the thief plus minus 0.35 cents a kw profit )

  77. John McCutcheon says:

    Oxburgh had a clear conflict of interest. Why was he appointed? Given the comments above, I believe that corruption is the answer. How do we reply? Well, the majority are apathetic and will move as they are told to do. We have to target opinion makers – Newspapers and TV. Then we have to bring these scammers to trial and this is going to take a lot of cash. But the choice is clear. Fight for your democracy or lose it. I suspect we have already lost it. We have unelected civil servants running Europe and a US president who will look away at the green corruption of his own machine – a man who even appeals for votes on the basis of race. OK, we may lose but if you don’t fight, defeat is certain.

  78. Jeff Id says:

    Nice article Tom.

  79. mikael pihlström says:

    Steven mosher (08:30:28) :

    “you really SHOULD read more about Tom and what he believes before you write. I’ll speak for Tom because he is a friend and we wrote a book together. As we argued in that book. NOTHING in the mails changes the science.”

    I stand corrected. Maybe I should have read more or maybe
    Tom Fuller should have stated this as clearly as you did now.
    Small matter in the end.

    I find your ´’lukewarm’ stance interesting, because it is reasonable:

    1. we are unsure about the level of warming
    2. uncertain about feedbacks
    3. uncertain that warming will be damaging
    4. uncertain about the best course of action.

    1. so am I , but ‘prepare for the worst’ see point 4
    2. so am I, but being an ecologist the possible biosphere
    feedbacks (e.g. methane bursts) are nightmarish. That
    said, it is perfectly possible we will might never be able to
    predict the whole earth system.
    3. there are so many possible effects – the most likely,
    unfortunately will hit where it hurts most; arid, densely
    populated areas with little resilience
    4. I see it mostly in terms of risk management: inaction
    is not a good option when confronted with uncertain,
    but potentially catastrophic far into the future. A climate
    policy is costly, but spread out over time doable (maybe
    3% of global GP). And would have positive side-effects,
    lower dependence on fossil fuels – think of the political
    benefits: less dependence on MIddle East, Russia, etc

  80. Al Gored says:

    No surprise. The whole AGW project is basically extortion. Give us power, money or you will die of ‘planetary fever.’

    So they are making us an offer we can’t refuse.

    The level of fear-mongering, shout-downs of sceptics, and fraudulent ‘science’ employed in this extortion effort has made it all too obvious.

    And there is soooo much money at stake.

    Only problem is that look who is involved in this. Goes right to the very top.

    But great article from a courageous journalist – in San Francisco no less. Expect to see some Pelosi goons.

  81. Al Gored says:

    Gail Combs (09:27:56) : OT. But, Afghanistan. Shocking about those record opium crops.

  82. Al Gore's Holy Hologram says:

    La CO2a Nostra

  83. Al Gore's Holy Hologram says:

    Ask any Italian and they’ll tell you the mafia has also taken hold of the country’s waste recycling business too and turned Naples into a dumping ground.

  84. Crispin in Waterloo says:

    NZ Willy (23:56:49) :

    ‘ “Falck Renewables” indeed. Why not cut through the East-Anglia BS and just call it “Flick Renewables” in the spirit that JFK called his ladies “flickers”, or even cut further and just call it F…’

    I think there is a misunderstanding about the spelling.

    ‘Falck Renewables’ has a capital ‘i’ in the middle: ‘faick’. It’s a tongue-in-cheek joke on the rest of us.

  85. Tom Fuller says:

    Al Gore’s Holy Hologram, I am stealing that (but I’ll give you credit…) La CO2a Nostra… thanks in advance.

  86. Eduardo Ferreyra says:

    My impression is that the next thing we’re going to see is bloody dead horse’s heads appearing in the beds of Lord Monckton, Fred Singer, Richard Lindzen, Chris Horner, Marc Morano and many more…

    Mafias are tough guys. You don’t want to mess up with them.

  87. George E. Smith says:

    “”” Mike (05:47:38) :

    Isn’t all business organised crime? “””

    Only if it is used to provide jobs for people who otherwisw would be unemployable.

  88. kate. r. says:

    From Jan 25, 2009.

    “The United Nations’ crime and drug watchdog has indications that money made in illicit drug trade has been used to keep banks afloat in the global financial crisis …

    Vienna-based UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa said in an interview released by Austrian weekly Profil that drug money often became the only available capital when the crisis spiralled out of control last year.

    “In many instances, drug money is currently the only liquid investment capital,” Costa was quoted as saying by Profil. “In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system’s main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor.”

    The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime had found evidence that “interbank loans were funded by money that originated from drug trade and other illegal activities,” Costa was quoted as saying. There were “signs that some banks were rescued in that way.”

    Profil said Costa declined to identify countries or banks which may have received drug money and gave no indication how much cash might be involved. He only said Austria was not on top of his list…”

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLP65079620090125

    HA ! Some conspiracy.

  89. Henry Phipps says:

    mikael pihlström (12:08:18) :

    Steven mosher (08:30:28) :

    “you really SHOULD read more about Tom and what he believes before you write. I’ll speak for Tom because he is a friend and we wrote a book together. As we argued in that book. NOTHING in the mails changes the science.”

    I stand corrected. Maybe I should have read more or maybe
    Tom Fuller should have stated this as clearly as you did now.
    Small matter in the end.

    “I find your ´’lukewarm’ stance interesting, because it is reasonable:

    1. we are unsure about the level of warming
    2. uncertain about feedbacks
    3. uncertain that warming will be damaging
    4. uncertain about the best course of action.

    1. so am I , but ‘prepare for the worst’ see point 4
    2. so am I, but being an ecologist the possible biosphere
    feedbacks (e.g. methane bursts) are nightmarish. That
    said, it is perfectly possible we will might never be able to
    predict the whole earth system.
    3. there are so many possible effects – the most likely,
    unfortunately will hit where it hurts most; arid, densely
    populated areas with little resilience
    4. I see it mostly in terms of risk management: inaction
    is not a good option when confronted with uncertain,
    but potentially catastrophic far into the future. A climate
    policy is costly, but spread out over time doable (maybe
    3% of global GP). And would have positive side-effects,
    lower dependence on fossil fuels – think of the political
    benefits: less dependence on MIddle East, Russia, etc”

    OKAY, THAT’S IT! I’VE HAD IT!

    Mikael:

    I have tried to avoid commenting on even the most ridiculous statements posted here by advocates of one stripe or another, but (moderators, forgive me), sonny, you have just crossed the threshold of my resistance.

    1. Mikael, “preparing for the worst” is a weak, cowardly, and poorly-defensive posture which prevents you from embracing change, investing whole-heartedly in the future, and capitalizing on new opportunities. If history is any guide, and I have no doubts, warmer times, if ahead, are to be welcomed.
    2. I have yet to meet an “ecologist” who can make an honest living for himself and his family without a very generous, politically-approvable, government grant, which obviously strains the meaning of “honest living”.
    3. What alien planet’s history have you been taught? Over the past eons, ecologically stressed areas have the prime source of countless human migrations, which have led to the wonder of diversity which we see in humankind today. The cultural sharing, although often involuntary, has created tough, vibrant, outward-looking human cultures, which are just the kind that I believe are needed to take us to the stars, and thus end the cycle of extinction of the dominant species by external events, which has characterized the past. Shouldn’t you and your cohorts be working to encourage the resettlement of endangered humans (if that’s what you think they are) to safer areas? You can do it. YES YOU CAN! Just remember, they might not want to move on the basis of climate modeling which seems to be, ah, quite problematic.

    4 a. Risk management has not created any new real world solutions, has never accurately predicted problems which will arise, and has never gotten past the basic reason for the existence of risk management: providing some kind of excuse when some vulnerable entity is being sued by American-style personal injury shysters.
    Inaction is not merely a good option, it is the only option which is scientifically justifiable. “No definitive answers” should equate to no drastic, permanent, unrecoverable, highly-experimental attempts to influence the results.

    b. Why should the world give your masters 3% of the world’s GDP, based on the 2030 PROJECTED valuations? Three trillion American Goddamn Greenback dollars? (Isn’t that what Mr. Patchy demanded in Copenhagen? Well, whatever. It’s a noticeably amount of money.) Even allowing for ObamaFlation, that’s more than even another of his donor-pal bank bailouts. And that didn’t turn out so well either. And give it to whom? Mr. Patchy?

    c. What’s so wrong with the Western World utilizing the oil that Russia and the Middle East wants to sell? News Flash! Have you noticed that people who invest their money in you, and who are financially dependent on your continuing patronage rarely, if ever, attack and seek to destroy you and your means of paying them back for their goods and services? The price of your gasoline is merely reflective of the taxes your elected representatives have chosen to inflict upon you, for your own good, of course. Do you really care if the oil consumers of the world, who all use the same pooled oil resources, exhaust the supplies of the erstwhile commies and the desert dwelling humans before they uncap the thousands of already-located, already-drilled, and already-capped wells in the western part of the American Midwest? No, I didn’t think so. Actually, I do. I met a lot of very personable desert-dweller types in Texas, and I liked them. Very like Texans, really. Their lives sway back and forth with the price of Light Crude at the New York Mercantile. Haven’t met that many erstwhile commies, except in taxicabs in Boston. Scary to have your fortune in the hands of erstwhile commies, but scarier to have your fortune in the hands of the New York Mercantile.

  90. Roger Knights says:

    Dr. Roy Spencer will be interviewed tonight (Mon.) on Coast-to-Coast from 10pm to 2am Pacific time.

  91. max says:

    Mike:
    “‘Isn’t all business organised crime?”

    There are more than a few businesses I have worked with/for that only warrant the descriptor “organized” if “dis-” comes before it. I leave the criticism of the crime part to others.

  92. mikael pihlström says:

    Henry Phipps (17:53:10) :

    2. I have yet to meet an “ecologist” who can make an honest living for himself and his family without a very generous, politically-approvable, government grant, which obviously strains the meaning of “honest living”.

    I have competed and won some grants, but predominantly earned
    money elsewhere. But, your attitude is destructive to intelligence:
    Why is the US the leading economic power in the world? Because,
    it has developed excellence in science and RTD; part of it is ‘good
    scientific tradition’, originally imported from Europe, but developed
    to its full in the US; part of it is correlative to the money allocated.

    Now, you and your likes want to cut the tree down, because some
    branches produce fruit that you instinctively find disturbing?

  93. mikael pihlström says:

    Henry Phipps (17:53:10)

    1. Mikael, “preparing for the worst” is a weak, cowardly, and poorly-defensive posture which prevents you from embracing change, investing whole-heartedly in the future, and capitalizing on new opportunities. If history is any guide, and I have no doubts, warmer times, if ahead, are to be welcomed.

    On the contrary denying even the possibility of damaging
    warming scenarios is weak,, cowardly etc. I am all for change
    climate policy and so on.

  94. mikael pihlström says:

    Henry Phipps (17:53:10)

    3. What alien planet’s history have you been taught? Over the past eons, ecologically stressed areas have the prime source of countless
    human migrations …

    Please update your worldview. I always get this response
    from your fraction: as if it was about moving a small population
    of nomads. We talk about e.g. 100 M’s chinese, densely populated
    deltas in Bangladesh or Egypt. Resettlement is always painful and a last
    resort, but I think the Togans have it in their backhead as salt water
    penetrates their wells.

  95. Warren Bonesteel says:

    Well done!

    Always. Follow. The. Money.

    It’s not just a cliche. It’s good advice.

Comments are closed.