The UN "disappears" yet another inconvenient climate claim, and once again, botches the cover up

“Which begs the question: If Africans are the “hardest hit by global warming” according to the UN, how can only 54% of the people in Sub-Saharan Africa be aware of it?”
You should change it to 46%, Anthony. 54% are unaware.
REPLY: Fixed thanks, should have said “unaware” – Anthony

There you go, coming over all logical again!
Mr Watts, it is the Thought Police and Romm 101 for you!

“Please move along. Please disperse. Nothing to see here. Nothing to see here.”

54% of the people in Sub-Saharan Africa (be) {ARE NOT} aware of it
I have a sinking feeling the word will soon get round if they think money may be available.

[snip – bogus email address, valid email required to comment – Anthony]

The IPCC should add a whole new chapter to their 5th report now in production . . . List all the moonbat AGW claims and UN Special reports and which ones have come true and which ones have been disappeared.

Winston Smith should be fired for this. 😉

Yeah! An did you know 100% of newborn babies today have never heard of global warming?
I think you are really on to something here, Anthony. Take lead poisoning, for example. If people have been hit hard by lead poisoning ever since the ancient Greeks, how come they have not been aware of the harm caused by exposure to even small amounts of lead? Surely, lead poisoning must be a myth! Another bogus claim rubbished by reality. Will you write a post about that on this fine science blog?
Isn’t the UNEP press release simply referring to a report by IPCC’s Working Group II? I reckon this means that reports by IPCC’s WGII have been withdrawn?
REPLY: Oh please. More whining from an anonymous detractor. Explain then why on April 17th that press release existed, and a few days later it does not, especially when there are other documents on the website that are older? The UN isn’t stupid enough to remove the WGII report, but apparently they ARE stupid enough to start removing (twice now) other documents that make bold claims that have not been proven true after years.
-Anthony

Anthony –
I think the report referred to is simply the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (TAR), Working Group II volume.
The cached press release referred to a report by “IPCC’s WG II” (not a UNEP report). At http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/004.htm , it’s noted that the TAR WG2 report was accepted at a meeting 13-16 Feb 2001, which fits with the timeline of a report released on or about 22 Feb.
REPLY: No, there’s a specific press release gone missing, which was there April 17th but not today, which I recovered. See the PDF link at the end of my article – Anthony

@Montag says: April 27, 2011 at 10:15 am
“Yeah! An did you know 100% of newborn babies today have never heard of global warming?”
Ho Ho. What a rib-tickler! You are a wag, Montag!
What the hell has this got to do with UNEP deleting “inconvenient” shroud waving projections which crashed and burned when confronted by reality?
Go troll somewhere else.

Jeremy: It wasn’t really someone at the LA times. This is an op ed by Jonas Goldberg a conservative columnist.

I first set foot in sub Saharan Africa more than sixty years ago. There has been a little weather variability in that time, but noticeable to the average person only in El Nino times. Up and down southern Africa the climate this year is indistinguishable from the vast majority of years that have gone before. Despite that, here in South Africa we do not lack for AGW hype. For example, we have CFC lamp globes just like everybody else.

Montag says:
April 27, 2011 at 10:15 am

Surely, lead poisoning must be a myth!

The post is about withdrawn documents. Your comment is about being a skeptic of climate skepticism. Your sarcasm is wasted by being off-point.

Robin Guenier says:
April 27, 2011 at 10:49 am
In any case, people may possibly have noticed heavier rainfall and more mosquitoes (even increased temperatures) without knowing that these phenomena were associated with something called “global warming”
They may possibly have, and then again, they may not. Have you?

Mr. Watts, ” They aren’t aware of it because the “hitting hard” of global warming in Africa simply isn’t happening.”
A bit of a jump to a conclusion. You offer no evidence of your conclusion in this post. I am skeptical of the conclusion you draw without evidence.
REPLY: Define then, “hitting hard” in the context of the UN global warming claim. If you live somewhere, and are “hit hard” by some effect, natural, man-made, you usually know about it. The fabricated ones are the ones you miss. – Anthony

Robin Guenier says:
April 27, 2011 at 10:49 am
“2. In any case, people may possibly have noticed heavier rainfall and more mosquitoes (even increased temperatures) without knowing that these phenomena were associated with something called “global warming” – not everyone understands the interpretation of that phrase as visitors to this blog understand it. If indeed they’ve even heard of it.”
Careful, you might find yourself in a controversy over just what effects can be associated with global warming. The mosquitoes canard has been known since the premiere performance of “An Inconvenient Truth.” In my humble opinion, Warmista do not have a clue what observable phenomena can be associated with global warming. There is not one of them who has spent a life working the land. Being an eco-tour-guide does not count.

Smokey, as with all alarmists, you have changed subjects by offering an unrelated response.
To begin to learn about the evidence for AGW, I would reading the IPCC reports which are available online.

Anthony:
You ask why “nobody seems able to explain is why was that press release there on April 17th, then gone today …” Here’s a suggestion: like you, the UN thought that the Gallup poll finding disproved their “hardest hit by global warming” claim, so immediately “disappeared” the claim.
The only point I’m making is that, for the reasons I set out in my earlier post, the poll probably did no such thing. That doesn’t, for course, mean that the claim was valid. But establishing that would require real data, not a dubious poll.
REPLY: The poll is data, and I’ve never heard of anyone accusing Gallup of running “dubious” polls. They conduct them with integrity and control. I hear what you are saying, but in the previous episode last week where the 50 million climate refugees document was “disappeared” the UNEP did that in response to a blogger asking a question; “where are they” and then the answer “they don’t exist” being picked up by MSM, specifically Fox News. The Gallup poll is getting some similar press coverage. I believe this to be more than coincidence. – Anthony

Can I hope the UN continues to “disappear” content until there’s no UN left? Am I being to optimistic? Gosh, one can only hope.

Something you will never find on a warmist website:
http://ccb.colorado.edu/ijas/ijasno2/georgis.html
It was written some time ago but, I think you will agree, puts paid to any nonsense about man causing climate change in this part of Africa

There are just so many things to comment on so early in the blog!
Montag: lead poisoning? There is lead in all soil. Same for mercury, uranium, thorium and lotsa other things. Granite is radioactive. There are so many ‘dangers’ one can wave hands about. Get a grip. Global warming, now that we know it doesn’t exist in the near term, has fallen below background lead as a danger to anyone. Turns out we evolved on this planet, you see.
Anthony wrote: “The UN isn’t stupid enough to remove the WGII report, but apparently they ARE stupid enough to start removing (twice now) other documents that make bold claims that have not been proven true after years.”
Seems to me it is more like prophecies than claims. These projections or predictions or prognostications were of course based on models grounded in solid climate science and agreed to by something like 97% of the scientists whose income depends on inflation of the scare. (I always wondered about the other 3% who were dependent but honest enough to disagree.)
The whole point of science and engineering (like, climate engineering) is to be able to make accurate predictions. Lacking any ability to make meaningfully correct predictions indicates it is not science as ordinary engineers and physicists and geologists and dare I say, climatologists are concerned. If a random guess consistently outperforms the ‘climate science’ of 2001, then we have something like:
_____1_____ = Truth
Climate science
There are a LOT of contaminated and shrill documents out there which need to be expunged. It’s going to be an interesting year.

[:)] Enjoy.
Traveling back in time here is the full text of the article from 9 Jan 2008 from the link: http://replay.web.archive.org/20080109120412/http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=192&ArticleID=2776&l=en

Global Warming: Africa Hit Hardest
Nairobi, 22 February 2001 – Rising levels of disease, famine and poverty are forecast for Africa by scientists studying the impacts of global warming.
A report, published today (MON) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says heavy, monsoon-like, rains and higher temperatures will favour the breeding of disease-carrying mosquitoes, allowing them to thrive at higher altitudes.
“Higher temperatures, heavier rainfall and changes in climate variability would encourage insect carriers of some infectious diseases to multiply and move further afield,” says the report by the IPCC’s Working
Group II.
The report cites how malaria cases in the highland area of Rwanda have increased by 337 per cent in recent years with 80 per cent of the climb linked with changes in temperature and rainfall which improved breeding conditions for malaria-carrying mosquitoes. A similar link has been reported in Zimbabwe.
The report notes that mosquitoes can also transmit many viruses, over 100 of which are known to infect humans. These include malaria, dengue fever, yellow fever, and severe and sometimes fatal encephalitis and haemorrhagic fever.
Cholera, which is transmitted by water or food, could aggravate health problems in many parts of the world including Africa. The scientists say that during the 1997-1998 El Nino excessive flooding caused cholera epidemics in Djibouti, Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique.
There is evidence that El Nino, a vast natural climatic phenomenon that can bring intense floods and droughts in many parts of the globe, is becoming more frequent as a result of global warming.
Klaus Toepfer, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) which along with the World Meteorological Organization launched the IPCC, said yesterday:” This latest assessment makes bleak reading for many people across the developing world and in particular for us in Africa”. UNEP is headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya.
“We must re-start the stalled climate change negotiations as a first step towards the deep cuts in emissions from factories, power stations, cars and homes, needed to curb damaging climate change. But we also need to help vulnerable people to adapt to the impacts and that action needs to be taken now,” he said.
Mr Toepfer added:” We must prepare across all sectors of society including governments, aid agencies, non governmental organizations and the United Nations family of which UNEP is part. We do not have too much time, but there may be enough to make a real difference to those at risk if we start today,” he said.
While heavy rains will become more frequent, there will also be rising levels of drought and the spread of deserts such as the Sahara, the scientists warn.
“In Africa’s large catchment basins of Niger, Lake Chad and Senegal, total available water has decreased by 40 to 60 per cent,” says the report.
The scientists predict that, in terms of droughts, southern Africa could be one of the hardest hit areas. “Lack of rain, warmer temperatures and increases in evaporation could reduce yields by a third or more in these areas,” it says.
Farmers in the developed world may get access to new varieties of crops which are more heat- and drought-tolerant. But the scientists warn that in the developing world many farmers have little or no access to new species and varieties. “They may struggle to cope when conditions are warmer and drier,” says the report.
In developing countries today, 790 million people are estimated to be undernourished. Undernourishment is a fundamental cause of stunted physical and intellectual development in children, of low productivity in adults, and of susceptibility to infectious disease.
The scientists are reasonably confident that climate change will increase the number of undernourished people in the developing world including Africa.
Food shortages as a result of climate change may add to the numbers of people leaving the land and migrating to urban areas which in turn could lead to more shanty towns around African cities.
“Those most at risk are the squatter and other informal urban settlements, where many people live close together under poor shelter, with little or no access to resources such as safe water and public health services,” says the IPCC study.
These people will also be at greater risk from natural or climate related disasters to such as cyclones as “there is little they can do to avoid disaster, or escape when it strikes”.
The scientists believe that there may be significant extinction of plants and animals in Africa during the new century as a result of global warming. This will increase poverty by impacting on rural livelihoods and
tourism.
“Coastal settlements in, for example, the Gulf of Guinea, Senegal, Gambia, Egypt and along the East-Southern African coast would be adversely affected by sea-level rise through inundation (flooding) and coastal erosion,” says the report.
Some action to protect vulnerable people in Africa has begun, the report notes.
The IPCC’s First Assessment Report in 1990 highlighted the critical need for better early warning systems. Since then, seasonal forecasting for Africa has become vastly more detailed and accurate.
Satellites, for example, can now measure ground moisture, which could let local officials issue flooding warnings in advance to endangered communities, and prepare for health risks such as malaria
outbreaks when there is more water for mosquitoes to breed in.
Early famine warning systems have been set up throughout Africa, giving at least several months’ notice of drought and water shortage. In South Africa and Zimbabwe, maize growers now get warning of drought six months before harvest.
Drought warnings do not in themselves prevent famines, however. Measures that would improve Africa’s food security include transfer of overseas expertise in producing food under excessively hot, dry
conditions.
Transfer of new technologies could reduce the need to cut down trees for use as firewood and charcoal – thus also stopping the onwards march of desertification. Solar, wind and biogas energy are being
used in small-scale projects continent-wide, with promising results. In rural areas of Zimbabwe, for example, biogas units using cattle dung are producing electricity for nearby communities.
UNEP, with funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF), are developing schemes like these in Africa.
Desertification has sparked a range of agricultural and forestry management changes which will also help soften the impacts of climate change. In Niger, farmers with access to credit are setting up low-cost systems which combat wind erosion, including windbreaks, mulching, ridging and rock bunds.
Recently the Sereer in Senegal and the Mossi in Burkino Fasso improved their regional climates by using traditional pruning and fertilizing techniques to double tree densities in certain semi-arid
areas. The trees hold the soils together, reversing desertification. More trees also means more rainfall: the foliage of the extra trees produces more evaporation, which then can fall again as rain.
Initiatives carried out at the community level seem to work best, says the IPPCC report Community-scale projects in Madagascar, Niger and Zimbabwe, for example, show that if an affected community is given the time to discuss options for making their land more productive, they work out efficient solutions and apply them long-term.
Regional-scale cooperation is also important. Many of Africa’s river basins are shared by more than one country, and to avoid potential conflicts, regional agreements on cooperative management of
shared water resources have already been negotiated.
The Zambesi, for example, is to be diverted towards the south, sending surplus water into regions where water is scarce. Other cooperative flood planning envisages using one country’s lakes to store some of a river’s floodwaters, reducing the flood peak and destruction in countries downstream.
For more information, please contact: Nick Nuttall, Media Officer, UNEP, P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya: Tel: 254 2 623381, mobile, 254 (0)733 632755, e-mail: nick.nuttall@unep.org or Tore Brevik, UNEP Spokesman/Director, Communications and Public Information, in Nairobi on Tel: 254 2 623292, fax: 254 2 623927, e-mail: tore.brevik@unep.org
See also http://www.grida.no for a series of useful and downloadable graphs, http://www.unfccc.int for official documents about the climate talks, and http://www.wmo.ch and ww.unep.ch/conventions/info/infoindex.htm
for additional background information.
UNEP News Release 01/27

Smokey,
I am no alarmist and you are no skeptic. My post was about unevidenced conclusions. You turn it into an issue about all “alarmists” instead of responding to the issue at hand. Over generalizations does no good. If Mr. Watts wants to offer conclusions about what the poll he referenced shows, his conclusions would be much stronger with evidence backing the conclusion.
How many times was the WWF referenced in the AR4?

There’s a couple of issues with this:
The claim “Africa will be hardest hit by global warming” – this is a 100% fluff claim.
First of all, Africa is the poorest continent. It is safe to say that they will be the hardest hit by almost anything. The poor always suffer more when things go wrong. They’ll probably be hit hardest by a Justin Bieber gig – though that may just be because of having some semblence of taste.
Secondly “will be”. This is the future. Not just any old future, but the future which keeps going into the future. So if in 20 years a given road will be underwater, and 20 years pass and it isn’t, then it was a defective 20 years, and it’s yet to happen. After all, don’t people understand the future tense?
Also Africa is a convenient dumping ground for disaster, because not too many people live there who can pop up on the internet and say “That didn’t happen!” This is similar to the far northern wastes of Canada which apparently were scorching hot while the rest of the world froze. Again, a convenient dumping ground of statistics that no one is going to contradict.
So given all of the above, why did the UN shoot this paper given that it was just full of fluff? I can see why they shot the “20 million refugees” paper, but not why they shot this one.
I can only surmise, there’s something coming, that this paper would have embarrassed. Is there anything due?

I think there may be a different reason for removing this page than that poll: Maybe they removed the page 2 days ago – on World Malaria Day. It must be quite embarrassing that despite all the bad climate change that was supposed to happen in the 10 years since this article was written, substantial progress has been made in the fight against malaria in Africa.
I quote http://www.rollbackmalaria.org/ProgressImpactSeries/report2.html :
“An estimated 908 000 malaria deaths have been averted through ITN coverage between 2000–2010, with three quarters of the deaths averted since 2006”

I was born, and spent my first 46 years, in sub-Saharan Africa. Everything Anthony says is correct. The rest of you (when you disagree) don’t know what you’re talking about. Idiots!
Another bogus climate claim rubbished by reality.

Anthony – thanks again for your tireless work in turning over rocks that certain parties seemingly don’t want turned over. Behaviour like this (of the UN) is exactly why ordinary people are switching their views. We all hate being mushroomed.

I’m surprised that there haven’t been more comments about the accuracy or inaccuracy of the contents: “The report cites how malaria cases in the highland area of Rwanda have increased by 337 per cent in recent years with 80 per cent of the climb linked with changes in temperature and rainfall which improved breeding conditions for malaria-carrying mosquitoes. A similar link has been reported in Zimbabwe.”
Does anybody have a copy of the full report? It is always interesting to see whether predictions of calamity withstand the test of time.

Typo:
Sahe[l] has been greening

Why did they ask Developed Asia twice, and get a different answer the 2nd time?

“Robin Guenier says:
April 27, 2011 at 10:49 am
REPLY: The one thing that nobody seems able to explain is why was that press release there on April 17th, then gone today, while older documents remain on the web page which contained a link to it. If anyone can explain that, especially in light of UNEP was caught removing another document with a bold claim last week (50 million climate refugees that never mateialized) I’m listening – Anthony”
Anthony, is it a coincidence that you mention April 17 above and you had the following on April 16? My guess is that these people are avid readers of WUWT and when they saw the article below, they got really scared and tried to keep ahead of your people who may want to search for failed predictions of any kind.
“New permanent feature: the “Climate FAIL Files” – help needed
Posted on April 16, 2011 by Anthony Watts
Many times, these climate failures get a mention, and then fade into obscurity. When we try to find them later, search engines aren’t as useful or cooperative as we’d like. I want to change that by providing a central repository for such failed claims. I’ll make it a special page, part of our menu bar, with an icon link on the sidebar, suitable for placement on other websites. The Climate FAIL files page exists here.”

Al Gored said, “This digital disappearing act is the future, and we are so eagerly digitizing everything.”
Begging to differ on this one, Al; I predict sites or apps which will routinely check for any odd digital disappearances or changes in online publications, will register such events and classify them. At a click of a command button we’ll be able to reconstruct entire sites and their histories on demand, with all interesting changes highlighted, even with suggestions for possible causes for their deletion or alteration. Digital …as flaky as our data storage systems may be… is ultimately better than paper, parchment, papyrus, clay or even stone. Keep in mind that we have lost most of the world’s “hard” literature produced throughout history due to fires, floods, destruction, decomposition, theft, rats, whatever.
For the time being, though, we have to rely on Mr Watts and his dogged determination and excellent sleuth work.

It happens more and more often. There are companies solely dedicated to erasing traces and such.
What I do now is make a copy of all relevant documents I find just in case.
That made me wonder if there were any such organized initiatives (document conservation of sorts) but I couldn’t find anything.
It is also true of tv interviews which have a much shorter life span than before on the net, unless it is stored by someone on youtube or elsewhere.

Mike Jonas, it is not worth my time to go through the entire list of 17 references you made (which is a small percentage of the citations in the AR4 so hardly dominating let alone nothing but WWF propaganda), but looking at the first on the list by Allianz and the WWF perhaps it was appropriate. The IPCC referenced the report by saying, “However, in 2006, insurers also began to communicate directly with their policyholders regarding the rising costs of claims attributed to climate change”, which the report by a large insurer (Allianz) and the WWF documented. Hardly inappropriate.

The second reference (Austin et al 2003) was done by a private company, AGAMA Energy. The IPCC said in reference to this study, “In South Africa, the development of renewable energy technologies could lead to the creation of over 36,000 direct jobs by 2020”
Neither of the first 2 references you made have anything to do with the science of AGW and both would seem appropriate for the way they were used by the IPCC. Hardly WWF propaganda dominating the AR4.

The IPCC AR4 makes thousands of references from BP to Greenpeace. It would seem to be a misrepresentation to label it nothing but WWF propaganda.

I live in “sub-saharan africa”, so perhaps i could give an opinion on being hit hard?
It’s autumn, and very chilly this morning, we had above usual rainfall and lower than usual temperatures this summer, being cloudy, we got less than half our usual sunny hot days.
What we’re really being hit hard with, is carbon tax. High fuel prices, high electricity prices, green tax on ALL new cars, and soon to be introduced, toll roads for getting to work and back, a veritable war on personal transport.
So yes, they have to remove these embarrassing war cries before people figure out what a scam it is, and who caused it. Cos there’s a lot of very unhappy people here because of the global warming nonsense.

Crispin in Waterloo said:
The whole point of science and engineering (like, climate engineering) is to be able to make accurate predictions. Lacking any ability to make meaningfully correct predictions indicates it is not science as ordinary engineers and physicists and geologists and dare I say, climatologists are concerned.
——————————————————————–
The ‘whole point of science’ has nothing to do with making accurate predictions. While some scientific findings make help to predict what will happen in certain, very specific circumstances, that is a long way from being ‘the whole point of science’.
I have great respect for engineers, and would be very surprised if they claimed that what they do has anything to do with ‘making accurate predictions’.

One more thing: they’re using two of the most dysfunctional countries in the world as examples – I sincerely doubt that malaria increase in Zimbabwe has much to do with climate at all.

I don’t think my lead poisoning analogy is false. People may notice the effects of lead poisoning without being aware of and able to understand the underlying physical causes, just like Africans may notice climate disruptions withouth knowing terms like “global warming” or “human-induced climate change”. Isn’t this obvious? The question “If Africans are the “hardest hit by global warming” according to the UN, how can only 54% of the people in Sub-Saharan Africa be unaware of it (and only 49% of Middle East and North Africans)?” is withouth meaning. Seriously, any 12 year-old will be able to dismiss this is as nonsense (that is, unless he is a climate “sceptic” and sees Anthony Watts as his Leader). For sure, UNEP authors on climate change impacts will not feel threathened by this – in this respect -irrelevant poll. Robin Guenier asserts in a previous comment that the poll is dubious, and in any case, polls should always be taken with a pinch of salt.
I don’t know why this old press release appears to have been withdrawn. It could be a result of maintenance on web serves, or it could be that UNEP became aware of inaccuracies or misquotations. So what? And what is so special about this press release, anyway? UNEP/IPCC reports, web pages and official press statements are loaded with statements on climate change impacts – why is this particular press release so special? My bet is that the people working in UNEP couldn’t care less about this outdated press relase. UNEP frequently publishes comprehensive reports, and authors are quoted in the media all the time. If you think the UNEP deliberately withdrew the press release because of a gallup poll, you need to substantiate the claim (you know, this is how most people make arguments).
Robin Guenier says:
April 27, 2011 at 10:49 am
“… it seems, Anthony, that you may be reading too much into this.”
[snip – I’m not interested in the insults from an anonymous coward, if you wish to insult me with such labels, have the courage to put your name to it, otherwise refrain – Anthony]

I’m not knocking the article. It is interesting from many aspects.
But why does the USA seem to out of kilter with the rest of the world in that 47% believe that rising temperatures are as a result of natural causes – by far the highest figure with Canada next at 24% ? I am sure that some missiles on this are heading your way.

johanna says:
April 28, 2011 at 12:17 am
“…I have great respect for engineers, and would be very surprised if they claimed that what they do has anything to do with ‘making accurate predictions.”
————————————————————————————————
Dear Liberal Arts Major:
Prepare to be very surprised!
When an engineer designs a railroad trestle (or anything else for that matter) he/she is making a prediction that a column or beam of a specified dimension and material will be sufficient to support the weight of the freight train which will travel across it. Should that prediction prove false, a lot of expensive rolling stock, freight, passengers and crew will find their trip and their lives abruptly interrupted.
If it ain’t about making accurate predictions, then it ain’t engineering and it ain’t science!

“Define then, “hitting hard” in the context of the UN global warming claim. If you live somewhere, and are “hit hard” by some effect, natural, man-made, you usually know about it. The fabricated ones are the ones you miss.” – Anthony
Perhaps, since you are the one making the claim, you should define “hitting hard”. Yes, of course, the use of the term “hit hard” means that all climatic effects of global warming on Africa are fabricated. Your reply was the type of evidence needed to strengthen your conclusion. Thank you.

“Define then, “hitting hard” in the context of the UN global warming claim. If you live somewhere, and are “hit hard” by some effect, natural, man-made, you usually know about it. The fabricated ones are the ones you miss.” – Anthony
Anthony, pwl earlier in this thread offered up the missing piece. Perhaps you could let us know which of the effects talked about in the piece, you feel have been fabricated.

The WWF has supplied about .0001% of the information in the IPCC report.

Interesting. Maybe they have Charles Johnson from the now nearly defunct Little Green Footballs helping them with their website. heh.