“FOIA2011″ and Climategate – A Chinese-POTUS connection?

Reader JoeFromBrazil writes

Greetings,

Sorry, but is this just a coincidence ?

Nov, 15-18, 2009 US presidente BO visits China
Nov, 19, 2009 Climategate I
Dec, COP-15

Nov, 19, 2011 US president BO visits China
Nov, 22, 2011 Climategate II
Dec, COP-17

I think that we need know when BO will be in China again…

It may very well be, but I’ve had a theory that I’ve floated with a couple people about this related to a curious comment coming from an IP address in China I found on WUWT months ago, but it reached a dead end due to lack of information. Perhaps it is time to have another look at that.

About these ads

40 thoughts on ““FOIA2011″ and Climategate – A Chinese-POTUS connection?

  1. Well, Climategate isn’t exactly in the Chinese interest, is it? I mean, anything that can be done to hamstring the US industrial economy via CO2 regulations gives more business to China which is exempt from those regulations. Why would China want to kill the goose that has so far laid nothing but golden eggs for them?

    REPLY: There are people doing work in China, close to CRU/UEA/Tyndall that aren’t Chinese. I’ve identified one possible candidate in China in that capacity who might very well be disgruntled with the whole charade. Might be nothing. – Anthony

  2. Keep in mind, WUWT along with CA Blogs are blocked behind the “Great Firewall” while in China. RC is not. You try to figure out what is going on?

  3. I had the Russians in mind; they export a lot of oil and gas, so they’re not interested in CO2 regulations. Their climate scientists like Abibullah Abdasamatov think CAGW is nonsense. Torpedoing the credibility of Western CAGW science by information warfare looks like a Cold War tactic. Maybe China and Russia cooperate.

    BTW, China has no interest in economic harm for the US or the EU; they sell us their goods. They need customers. If anything, they have an interest in stopping us from committing economic suicide.

  4. @BillyV says: Keep in mind, WUWT along with CA Blogs are blocked behind the “Great Firewall” while in China. RC is not.

    — The reason is: the “Great Firewall” blocked all wordpress blogs; CA and WUWT is wordpress based but RC is not.

  5. Solar and wind energy require rare earths, and China has more than half the world’s supplies of these minerals. That gives them a strong interest in the hysteria, whether it is true or not.

  6. Qui Bono?

    The Chinese really don’t like anything that could be counted against them in economic and political negotiations.

    Ergo, I would not be at all surprised to find out that there is a Chinese Hacking connection with Climategate.

    I suspect that it could just be them farking with their ‘foes’ by destroying that artificial and fraudulent construct known as carbon trading (based on the whole AGW ‘Model’).

    Attack the root (their ‘data’), and the whole thing crumbles.

  7. It;s normal when an head of state comes to visit that there is an exchange of gifts. Maybe instead of a naff photo album or cd someone gave the emails.

  8. It was a Chinese Scientist who sent the Oh so polite email about the Urban Heat Island effect and their data being a lot different but the IPCC would not allow the reports into the IPCC chapter.

    Sept 2007

    In the past years, we did some analyses of the urban warming effect on surface air
    temperature trends in China, and we found the effect is pretty big in the areas we
    analyzed. This is a little different from the result you obtained in 1990…..

    We have published a few of papers on this topic in Chinese. Unfortunately, when we sent our comments to the IPCC AR4, they were mostly rejected…..
    Best regards,

    Guoyu
    …..
    To: “Rean Guoyoo”
    Dear Guoyu,

    …….I do think that understanding urban influences are important. I will wait for Dr Li Qingxiang to send some data, but there is no rush, as I am quite busy the next few weeks.

    Best Regards
    Phil
    …..
    Dear Phil,

    ……From attaches please find the data of 42 urban stations and 42 rural stations (by your list) and a reference of homogenization of the data. we have tested and adjusted the abrupt discontinuities of the data duringREDACTEDbut the following yearsREDACTED has only been quality controled and added to the end of the series, but we found the relocation during these 3 years have minor effects on the whole series in most of the stations.

    I partly agree with what Prof. Ren said. and we have done some analysis on the urban heat island effect in China during past years. The results are differnt with Ren’s. But I think different methods, data, and selection of the urban and rural stations would be the most important causes of this. So I think it is high time to give some new studies and graw some conclusion in this topic. I hope we can make some new achives on this both on global scale and in China.

    Best

    Qingxiang
    http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=42

    There is more on the Chinese documentation of UHI here: http://www.c3headlines.com/2011/07/chinese-scientists-document-that-urban-heat-island-impact-can-explain-as-much-as-44-of-recent-warmin.html

    “Yang et al. published an extensive study on the impact of UHI on China’s warming and discovered that over 40% of the increase could be explained by the UHI effect in some urban areas.”

    Received 7 December 2010; accepted 6 May 2011; published 28 July 2011: The data goes up to 2007 and stops the same time period as the above e-mails. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2010JD015452.shtml

  9. AW wrote “a curious comment coming from an IP address in China I found on WUWT months ago”

    One or more people ask “What was that comment”?

  10. Never make the mistake of viewing nations – especially their various secret services – as monolithic. The enmity between nations is only matched by the internal friction between competing intra-national agencies – especially security related ones.

    I wouldn’t rule out any nation as a source based on apparent national interest.

  11. Hey Hoser, I’m not sure what this would imply but there it is.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us

    “All your base are belong to us” (often shortened to “All Your Base”, “AYBABTU”, or simply “AYB”) is a broken English phrase that became an Internet phenomenon or meme in 2000–2002. The text comes from the opening cutscene of the 1991 European Sega Mega Drive version of the video game Zero Wing[1] by Toaplan, which was poorly translated from Japanese.

  12. Re:DirkH says:
    November 24, 2011 at 10:47 am

    “BTW, China has no interest in economic harm for the US or the EU; they sell us their goods.”

    That’s the conventional wisdom, but they’ve geared up to manufacture and sell us all the solar cells we’ll need to destroy the U.S. economy. Apparently our leaders can’t wait to get on with it. Go figure!

  13. DirkH says:
    November 24, 2011 at 10:47 am

    BTW, China has no interest in economic harm for the US or the EU; they sell us their goods. They need customers. If anything, they have an interest in stopping us from committing economic suicide.

    That’s short-term. The Chinese pretty clearly have domination of the Western Pacific as a near-term goal, and most likely hope to replace the United States as the world’s dominant economic power in the long term, say by the end of the century.

    At the rate we’re going, they’ve got a pretty good shot at it.

    /Mr Lynn

  14. Any sceptic should know immediately that you cannot make this sort of conclusion from such paucity of data, and it reflects poorly on your sceptical credetials that you would dedicate a thread to this coincidence. If you flip a coin twice and it comes up heads both times, does that mean the coin was provided by a group of monarchists?

    The only evidence we have suggests that a European wrote the Climategate emails, as it seems to be only Europeans who can’t get their heads around the fact that in English, a dot is a decimal point.

    Who knows? There could be some conspiracy. The Chinese could have hired a European, or tried to immitate one. But we don’t have a tiny bit of evidence for that; just two sets of three dates two years apart.

    [REPLY: I think you need to re-read the post and not jump to conclusions. -REP]

  15. Considering the apparent collusion between the AGW crowd and the United States Department of Energy, let’s hope we see indictments of DOE staff and Steven Chu.

    As far as the Goracle goes, he is rapidly becoming a laughing stock, something his ego is going to have major league trouble dealing with.
    I predict [SNIP: You may be right but let's not give him any such ideas or even be perceived as wishing such. -REP]

  16. I agree with those who say China has a good reason to stop the CO2 climate change thing. By now, China is producing many products once made by the US and Europe. The US and Europe buy those products. Keeping the US and European economies functioning is good for Chinese sales. Just as important, western economies are hugely in debt to China (at least the US is, not so sure about Europe though). If the US and Europe fail, China will be greatly impacted. Just my opinion.

  17. “I partly agree with what Prof. Ren said. and we have done some analysis on the urban heat island effect in China during past years. The results are differnt with Ren’s”

    I’ve read elsewhere (uh, from comments over at Jo Nova I think) that “Ren” is what you can get when “Mann” is translated into Chinese characters then back to English.

    regarDS

  18. On (presumptuously) behalf of the American readers, thank you to those of you who wished the American contingent a Happy Thanksgiving.

    Ours was very nice. Met family from three states near State College, PA. Coincidentally, we did the same thing in 2009. Go figure.

  19. “I’ve read elsewhere (uh, from comments over at Jo Nova I think) that “Ren” is what you can get when “Mann” is translated into Chinese characters then back to English.”

    I doubt it, Chinese characters are pictorial representations, so if you wanted to say “mann” in chinese you would pick a character that said “mann” to the reader.

  20. geronimo says: November 25, 2011 at 12:39 am

    Sorry, Gerry, but that is NOT how Chinese works. There are two ways the Chinese will ascribe names: the first is by translation, e.g. if your name is “King” the Chinese will call you “Wang” (the Chinese word for “King”, which is also a surname); the second is by transliteration: if your name sounds like a Chinese word they may use that if it is suffuciently respectful enough – but there are exceptions. My name, Phelan, pronounced “Fey-lin” when transliterated came out to mean something like “Waste money like a forest” – I never decided if I’d been “had” or not so continue to use the characters…. There is no “Mann” in Chinese, but there is a similar sounding word meaning “slow”, which the Chinese will NOT use as a surname. It is much more likely they would take “Mann” to be the same as “Man” and use the translation and not the transliteration…. and believe this: someone named “Longstaff” in English would represent too great an opportunity for a Chinese to resist – the translation would not be suitable for a family blog like this.

  21. Given that the Chinese have many students in British universities (especially 2nd rate ones like UEA) and given the Chinese propensity for spying on every aspect of British life I find it implausible that the Chinese have hacked into these emails simply because the Chinese would have far more information than this to give away.

    I think it is a disgruntled research post-grad unhappy with the kind of things going on in Team AGW. Lets face it, the UEA can hardly ensure that everybody in UEA is “on-message” and given that 50% of the population aren’t, there’s a very good chance that an insider would take offence on the shenanigans in Phil Jones department and spill the beans. My guess someone that got his doctorate in 2010 from the UEA then decided to do the dirty on his old department once he was well clear.

  22. The Chinese pay lip service to any agreement then carry on as before knowing that nobody can do a thing about it.

  23. Luther Bl’t says:
    November 24, 2011 at 10:35 am
    Yoy mean Maurice Strong could be the Climategate leaker FOIA?

    Not in a million! He’s a Socialist & started this whole song ‘n dance routine off for the UN in 1992! He’s also the worst example of a Socialist, he’s a millionaire several times over making his primary fortune in the oil industry (maloderous icthyoid that he is) & making a secondary fortune selling Papal Indulgencies sorry Carbon Credits to the Chinese! What is it with these people, they make their millions, then for some reason go on a guilt trip, & everyone else has to pay to make them feel good about themselves. Why not just give it all away in that case, but of course they then couldn’t control others without the money, could they?

  24. Lady Life Grows says:
    November 24, 2011 at 10:56 am
    Solar and wind energy require rare earths, and China has more than half the world’s supplies of these minerals. That gives them a strong interest in the hysteria, whether it is true or not.

    But it was China that blocked the deal at Copenhagen. When it came down to brass tacks, they showed their hand. As Jud says:

    Jud says:
    November 24, 2011 at 11:46 am
    Never make the mistake of viewing nations – especially their various secret services – as monolithic. The enmity between nations is only matched by the internal friction between competing intra-national agencies – especially security related ones.

    I wouldn’t rule out any nation as a source based on apparent national interest.

    I’ve always thought (and posted here) of China as a leading candidate for being behind the hacking/leaking of Climategate, Reasons include their well-known habit of cyber attacks against other countries–and their expertise at it; the fact that (as documented on one past thread here that backtracking the trail of of URLs from the Russian server led to one associated with and nearby China; the reluctance of the UK police to point a finger at a suspect (which they’d be reluctant to do if it were China, for fear of creating an international incident); and the concurrent trial balloon by a UK bigshot with intelligence community connections, Sir David, that foreign intelligence services were behind the attack (he suggested Russia in conjunction with Big oil, but that’s so absurd it must have been a smokescreen).

  25. “I doubt it, Chinese characters are pictorial representations, so if you wanted to say “mann” in chinese you would pick a character that said “mann” to the reader.”

    My mistake and apologies, it wasn’t at Jo Nova I read about the “Ren” / “Mann” thing, it was here. As per:

    “Gail Combs says:
    November 22, 2011 at 4:03 pm
    My hubby, who knows a bit about the Chinese language, noted that in the top Climategate 2 e-mail quoted here on WUWT, from someone named Qingxiang, there is a reference to “Prof. Ren.” He says it is possible that “Prof. Ren” is a mistranslation of Prof. Mann’s name into Chinese (where the character 人 means man and is pronounced ren) and then back into English.

    It’s not easy to understand things out of context, but it is possible.”

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/22/climategate-2-0/#more-51549

    regarDS

  26. Gail Combs says:
    November 24, 2011 at 11:33 am (Where the years were redacted) The years in question are:
    according to email #0044–

    From attaches please find the data of 42 urban stations and 42 rural stations (by your
    list) and a reference of homogenization of the data. we have tested and adjusted the abrupt
    discontinuities of the data during 1951-2001, but the following years (2002-2004) has only
    been quality controled and added to the end of the series, but we found the relocation
    during these 3 years have minor effects on the whole series in most of the stations.

  27. Some of the MSM is mentioning Climategate 2.0 now;

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2066240/Second-leak-climate-emails-Political-giants-weigh-bias-scientists-bowing-financial-pressure-sponsors.html

    I cannot understand why top management in US Government would help with the leaks.

    To me the US Government is on the warmista side. They are the cause of all this.
    How otherwise can all these scientists either work for government institutions or government grants?
    Which is under political control ?

    And the reason?
    They are afraid of the chaos they firmly believe will come from a “peak oil” situation.
    So they rather increase taxes on fossil fuels. To force people paying more from alternative sources.

    They have been doing this in Norway for many,many,many years already. They also believe they are doing a good thing for us all.
    But remember the lesson learned from DDR ; The road to hell is paved with good intensions.

  28. Anyone who believes that China does not have an interest in promoting the global warming agenda has bee listening to the chinaphiles in cia and state for too long. china is playing the long game and the short term economic loss resulting from not being able to sell us things is of far less concern than the long term gain of allowing us to economically dismantle our nation by allowing the liberal half-wits block development of manufacturing, mining, energy production an the like. you cannot maintain a military if you do not have the means to manufacture the required equipment and supplies.

Comments are closed.