"You wouldn't accept that at a grade 9 science fair…" – CBC finds a moment of clarity on Climategate

@Deadman And after that it was downhill from there I would imagine.

IS it possible to take Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize and give it to the individual(s) who leaked the emails and code?

Lest anyone thinks this is over, think again. With some $145 TRILLION in wealth transfer in the balance, they will not slip quietly into the night.
I heard one on TV this AM say well it’s just a few bad scientists, but the science behind the AGW(FRAUD) is sound. Sure, it’s sound if you look at the ‘peer reviewed’ stacked deck.
What is now needed is an open science approach to this FRAUD. Where all scientists with something to say, have their say.

ONE international is sending emails all over the web. once you click the link in the invitation, you sign their petition. you can sign as many times as you want by just clicking, which i find to be in bad taste.
for more info visit http://one.org/international/actnow/copenhagen/index.html?rc=copenhagenconfemail
and pls write about this ongoing unfair effort. thanks

(Nepotism is the insiders sharing booty with family members, is there a term for insiders killing off family members? A heck of a lot of “Emperor Wanabees” died at the hands of family and “friends”…)

I think the term fratricide would fit in this case.
There is about to be a stampede to see who can throw the most people under the bus and be the last man standing. When things turn ugly in a political organization actions become very self serving, and aimed at personal political survival above all else.
Now is when folks will start to trot out memo’s they wrote 2 years ago that indicated obliquely that they were uncomfortable with some aspect of the science, or that they took on faith that they were getting good info from someone else and there for it is their fault, the key words will be something something “I trusted them” etc. etc.
Larry

I’ve typed out the entire transcript of Rex Murphy’s editorial. Also included are Jon Stewart’s video clip and an earlier Rex Murphy editorial ripping environmentalists.
http://pathstoknowledge.net/2009/12/04/climate-science-needs-a-reset-button

Absolutely great piece of journalism. That is how a journalist is supposed to act. Thank you Rex.
illya (01:23:09) :said
“…If you really believe, that the the evidence is incriminating, somebody should file a criminal charge, before the whole thing is whitewashed…”
The lawsuits are coming but first the extent of the fraud needs to be found. That is what the first lawsuit by Chris Horner (Freedom of Information) is about. Also it is best not to appear as money grubbing and greedy. I and many of those here would like to see prison time for these people who have knowingly defrauded us.
I found this on one site:
” Al Gore, Barack Obama, and the Climate Change Gang are attempting to defraud the United States government and the American people out of potentially trillions of dollars through the use of a now proven scam called “Climate Change”.
This is a violation of US law.
Those found liable for attempting to defraud the United States government through the use of FALSE CLAIMS can be forced to pay TRIPLE DAMAGES in compensation for all monies lost through use of those FALSE CLAIMS.
Can you say “Class Action Lawsuit”?
US CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
TITLE 31 > SUBTITLE III > CHAPTER 37 > SUBCHAPTER III > § 3729
§ 3729. False claims
(a) Liability for Certain Acts.— Any person who—
(1) knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, to an officer or employee of the United States Government or a member of the Armed Forces of the United States a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval;
(2) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement to get a false or fraudulent claim paid or approved by the Government;…
(7) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement to conceal, avoid, or decrease an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government,
is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the amount of damages which the Government sustains because of the act of that person, except that if the court finds that—
“
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message929901/pg1
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/usc_sec_31_00003729—-000-.html
Unfortunately we are individuals and not UN organized NGOs so it will take a while to get our acts together. Besides the US government has to bring charges and what democrat is going to bring charges against Al Gore, the Clintons, Obama and the democratic party as a whole?
Any lawyers out there? Could a state bring suit?

pwl … OOoohh. Rex always publishes the text of his editorials. Bummer you typed it out. Will look for it.

Bravo Rex! Makes me proud to be Canadian.
Too bad that the CBC (along with nearly all media) has actively been pushing the AGW line. Along with yet another presentation of AIT on CBC TV this weekend, the CBC radio airwaves have had repeated promos for the Saturday science show Quirks and Quarks (noon; can be heard live in four successive time zones via http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ or later as a webcast). The program will feature melting ice, rising oceans, and other climatic horrors that we just know threaten our way of life.
I almost feel sorry for the people who so steadfastly promote this AGW story without ever checking the underlying facts. I predict a future epidemic of sunken foreheads resulting from one person after another repeatedly slapping that part of the anatomy as they realize how thay have been “took”.
IanM

Here’s the MSM coverage on this in the local rag
http://www.kansascity.com/340/v-print/story/1607208.html
—————————————
Friday, Dec 4, 2009
Posted on Wed, Dec. 02, 2009
‘Climategate’ e-mails heat up debate but don’t prove that Earth isn’t warming
Sorry to burst the balloons of global warming skeptics out there: Cli- mategate is a dud.
Sure, it’s a catchy title, implying that a huge conspiracy surrounds the hundreds upon hundreds of e-mails that were reportedly hacked and recently released from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in England.
And in a handful of those e-mails, scientists friendly to the notion that global warming is occurring appeared ready to delete or otherwise obfuscate evidence that might have contradicted their theories. In short, they were haughty scientists behaving badly.
But in reacting to this development, some people have leaped to absurd conclusions.
The first is that this incident “proves” climate change is not occurring.
The second is that it shows there’s no need for the world’s political leaders to take bold action at the upcoming Climate Conference in Copenhagen, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Wrong. And wrong.
The furor over the e-mails hasn’t changed the central reality:
The overwhelming preponderance of evidence from scientific research from around the world indicates global warming is a reality, and manmade emissions have played a role in climate changes.
It would be irresponsible for President Barack Obama and other world leaders — especially those from China, India and other rapidly developing countries — to use a manufactured scandal as an excuse for inaction on global warming.
The evidence
Skeptics poring over the released e-mails are looking for evidence that scientists contributing to the Climatic Research Unit over the past two decades have somehow conspired to twist data so it shows only one thing — global warming is happening.
But in reality, many of the e-mails include attempts by scientists to challenge others’ work and to more rigorously examine the data. Plus, reputable groups outside the Climatic Research Unit have been involved in similar research for years. They include the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Japan Meteorological Agency.
For example, NASA lists several factoids on its website (climate.nasa.gov) regarding climate change. They include:
•Levels of carbon dioxide are higher than at any time in the past 650,000 years.
•Global sea levels and global surface air temperatures have been on an upward trend (yes, with a few yearly declines mixed in there as well).
The Antarctic report
This week, the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research released what it called “the first comprehensive review” of Antarctica’s climate, based on the work of 100 scientists from eight nations.
Responsibly, the group wanted to make sure leaders in Copenhagen would have more complete information before making decisions that could result in spending billions of dollars to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Not all the report’s findings were doom and gloom. In fact, the study is a prime example of how scientists must approach the topic of climate change.
For instance, the authors concluded that the manmade ozone hole over Antarctica had actually shielded much of the continent from the effects of global warming. And that sea ice was increasing in parts of the continent.
But the report also said carbon dioxide levels were rising at an “unprecedented” rate and the continent is predicted to warm by slightly more than 5 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.
Copenhagen and the future
The effects of the leaked e-mails could be felt many ways.
In the long term, scientists doing climate research should be more open about how they get their data and how they draw their conclusions. That could make the complicated issue more understandable to the public.
It is the short-term impact of the incident that hangs in the balance, though.
As we noted, it’s clear that the United States and other countries should continue pursuing the best ways to set goals for reducing harmful greenhouse gases.
It would be disastrous if a few e-mails traded among some imperious scientists could derail essential efforts to deal with global warming.
© 2009 Kansas City Star and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.kansascity.com

I agree.
Rex is honest and courageous, but the CBC is heavily invested in David Suzuki through his “Nature of Things” science show and are in a serious conficted of interest when reporting on climate change.
Not sure that Rex can outlast a seriously biased news agency like the CBC.

I’m shocked that the CBC didn’t announce they were giving Suzuki an entire hour to rebut what Rex said.
But the CBC is broadcasting the sci-fi film “An Inconvenient Fantasy” on Sunday at 10pm and in case you miss it, again at 1 am.