One of the favorite put-downs from people who think they have the moral high ground in the climate debate is to accuse skeptics with this phrase: “You are nothing but a shill for Big Oil”
Who amongst us hasn’t seen variants of that pointed finger repeated thousands of times? The paradigm has shifted. Now it appears CRU is the one looking for “big oil” money. See the email:
See the entire email here:
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=171&filename=962818260.txt
There’s more.
But wait that’s not all!
Further down in that email, look at who else they were looking to for money. Oh, this is horrible, it just can’t be, they wouldn’t. They were looking to not only BP but, but EXXON in its Esso incarnation:
See the entire email here:
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=156&filename=947541692.txt
Now who is the shill for Big Oil again? Next time somebody brings up that ridiculous argument about skeptics, show them this.
h/t and thanks to WUWT reader “boballab”
Sponsored IT training links:
Need help for SY0-201 exam? Join the 70-640 training program to successfully pass 70-680 exam.
Mike
BGS are now on board, so please leave them in the text : I have drafted a
letter for David Falvey to sign and sent it. I hope we shall get it back in
time…
The Esso (Exxon-Mobil) situation is still promising, but they’re having to get clearance from HQ in the USA (my best contact retired (with cancer )just a few weeks ago, so we’ve had to work around the new CE, to whom all this is news…). They know the deadline and will do their best for us.
Finally, my short informal CV is attached, as requested.
Hope the drafting is coming together well.
John
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=159&filename=951431850.txt
For WUWT attention:
MET OFFICE TO RE-EXAMINE 160 YEARS OF CLIMATE DATA
From The Times December 5, 2009
Ben Webster, Environment Editor
The Met Office plans to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by leaked e-mails.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/global/article6945445.ece
Indiana Bones (13:56:47) :
Tim S. (14:15:44) :
Ray (14:16:07) :
We are the three….Climanistas!
Arrrriba!
You guys are killing me.
Here is an interesting article referring to a Royal Society communication to ExxonMobil a few years back demanding ‘that the company withdraws support for dozens of groups that have “misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence”.’
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/20/oilandpetrol.business
Another interesting quote in the same article comes from Christopher Rapley (Science Museum Prove It! campaign) in the last paragraph:
‘The Royal Society’s move emerged as Chris Rapley, director of the British Antarctic Survey, warned that the polar ice caps were breaking up at a faster rate than glaciologists thought possible, with profound consequences for global sea levels. Professor Rapley said the change was almost certainly down to global warming. “It’s like opening a window and seeing what’s going on and the message is that it’s worse than we thought,” he said.’
I am lost for words. The utter hypocracy stinks to high heavens. I have just bookmarked the emails just in case I am accused of being supported by oil. In fact where’s my check?
Prof Watson of UEA having bleated about character asasination on BBC Newsnight was heard to remark at the end of the interview with Morita? – ex Senate Climate Cttee – “What an *sshole!”
Nice touch
Not much ClimateGate news in Norwegian media today. They are still silent and are more interested in when and how long Obama stays in Oslo for the so called peace prize. And of course they continue to send the usuall green propaganda.
However one interesting report on the main state TV channel today talked about the close connection between the Norwegian green organizations and big business, including Statoil.
It seams to me that this is more a form of protection money for bad press and blackmail than as a mean of free money contribution.
The greens here, well they are not short of money.
Here is the link !
You can go to Google and have it translated
A professor Watson from UEA had a confrontation with A US sceptic, on BBC Newsnight (4 Dec) – in the dying second as the thing wound up he muttered ‘what an asshole’
Sums up the unwillingness of the AGW brigade to engage. They are blinkered arogant and pompous in their outlook and in the case of UEA probably scared shitless at what an enquiry will find.
Newsnight bbc2 just now
hilarious – an argument between a UEA prof andrew Watson and marc morano ( communications director us senate environmental committee)
the uk prof accuses sceptics of relying on ad hominem attacks, tells the other guy to shut up, and just as they finish says “what an asshole”. He also admits not knowing anything about data deletion
excellent. Should be available on the BBC website soon (sorry I can’t YouTube this)
re: MET OFFICE TO RE-EXAMINE 160 YEARS OF CLIMATE DATA
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6945445.ece
link inoperative.
The Met Office plans to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by leaked e-mails.
The new analysis of the data will take three years, meaning that the Met Office will not be able to state with absolute confidence the extent of the warming trend until the end of 2012.
The Met Office database is one of three main sources of temperature data analysis on which the UN’s main climate change science body relies for its assessment that global warming is a serious danger to the world. This assessment is the basis for next week’s climate change talks in Copenhagen aimed at cutting CO2 emissions.
The Government is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination, arguing that it would be seized upon by climate change sceptics.
The Met Office works closely with the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), which is being investigated after e-mails written by its director, Phil Jones, appeared to show an attempt to manipulate temperature data and block alternative scientific views.
The Met Office’s published data showing a warming trend draws heavily on CRU analysis. CRU supplied all the land temperature data to the Met Office, which added this to its own analysis of sea temperature data.
Since the stolen e-mails were published, the chief executive of the Met Office has written to national meteorological offices in 188 countries asking their permission to release the raw data that they collected from their weather stations.
The Met Office is confident that its analysis will eventually be shown to be correct. However, it says it wants to create a new and fully open method of analysing temperature data.
The development will add to fears that influential sceptics in other countries, including the US and Australia, are using the controversy to put pressure on leaders to resist making ambitious deals for cutting CO2.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change admitted yesterday that it needed to consider the full implications of the e-mails and whether they cast doubt on any of the evidence for man-made global warming.
Did anyone catch the end of Newsnight (BBC2 10:35pm ish)?
I’m sure a professor at East Anglia called Marc Morano an a**hole live on air. Did I catch that right?
Just found this thread on the BBC. Around 80% + of comments are sceptical of AGW!!! Is the tide turning?
“Will the climate change e-mail claims affect Copenhagen?”
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=7310&edition=2&ttl=20091204223149
OT but breaking news – just seen Morano verses Watson on Newsnight (BBC2m UK). After bizarrely accusing the sceptics of charactor assasinations rather than science – Watson was clearly heard stating “what an asshole” at the end of the discussion! Good to finally see the BBC finally covering clomategate (and Channel 4 earlier this evening) but both interviewers were clearly uninformed/biased – in that they only mentioned the emails, when the real meat is in the programmers’ code and notes.
Oil Companies are like anybody else. They are run by people. They have been duped just as much as anyone. Even their own science experts jumped on the “end-of-the-world” bandwagon – it makes for puffing out your chest, it sure beats another petrochemical patent for cracking hydrocarbons and being able to sound real important at global conferences and executive tables and those who shout loud enough are often so good they can be promoted to “distinguished lecturer” at the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Big Oil is run by people – just like you or me – they are just as gullible – and please don’t forget – they are doing a service to mankind – they are often far more environmentally conscious than all other market sectors because of the risks involved and the sensitivity of the public to oil spills. Their people are extremely hard working and passionate about the good work they do. Remember that energy produces the food we eat and transports it to market, not to mention heating our homes. The days of Rockefeller and secret behavior & collusion of Big Oil is long long long over…
Oil Companies are like anybody else. They are run by people. They have been duped just as much as anyone. Even their own science experts jumped on the “end-of-the-world” bandwagon – it makes for puffing out your chest, it sure beats another obscure petrochemical patent for cracking hydrocarbons. The science experts at big oil jumped on the AGW chance to be able to sound real important at global conferences and executive tables and those who shout loud enough are often so good they can be promoted to “distinguished lecturer” at the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Big Oil is run by people – just like you or me – they are just as gullible – and please don’t forget – they are doing a service to mankind – they are often far more environmentally conscious than all other market sectors because of the risks involved and the sensitivity of the public to oil spills. Their people are extremely hard working and passionate about the good work they do as well as being more often Green than not. Remember that energy produces the food we eat and transports it to market, not to mention heating our homes. The days of Rockefeller and secret behavior & collusion of Big Oil is long long long over…
There has GOT to be another batch of “editor’s choice” emails and files coming. Maybe they will incriminate Choo-Choo Pachauri and the UN Cabel?
Oil, shcmoil.
I’ve just discovered the evil force behind this whole thing!
It’s dry ice manufacturers! They’re plotting to force the world to capture CO2, thereby flooding the market with their cheap raw material. Then, they have colluded with government officials to popularize cheap parlor tricks thatconsume dry ice, thereby increasing the market for their product.
Cheap raw material, bigger market. They’ll make a fortune!
Don’t believe me?
(Zoom to ~4:30)
OT but
Am I the only one who had to watch the video 30 or so times before I noticed the bunny slippers?
Tree right away, deer eventually, but did not notice the slippers until I got to wondering why two bunny rabbits.
Jh
Just watched that….brilliant. I thought the CRU Prof was debating Morano though. The presenter, Martha Kearney just had to apologize for the bad language.
Soon to be seen on youtube (and here I guess) the Prof makes a real fool of himself.
As I understand it, here in the UK the oil companies are busy making millions selling carbon credits e.g. to our National Health Service (it doesn’t have to make sense, it’s to save the planet…). I’ve also heard that whilst oil does suffer somewhat in usage under proposed AGW restrictions, they do also have the key effects of boosting demand for gas, reducing demand for coal and raising the price of both oil and gas – all of which are good for the oil companies.
So why wouldn’t the oil companies now want to push the AGW agenda?
@UKIP Yes, I nearly fell off my sofa laughing. I’ve watched it several times. What is particularly delicious is that his whole beef with Mark Morano (who completely wiped the floor with Watson) was that the skeptic’s only device was character assassination! What with him and Bob Ward being annihilated by the chap from the Spectator, it’s been a good day! 🙂
That’s interesting, but I get a 404 Error when I try that link….
This one works
Met Office to re-examine 160 years of climate data
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6945445.ece
Petition time:
http://allpainnogain.cfact.org/?utm_source=Climate%2BDepot&utm_medium=Banner&utm_term=All%2BPain%20No%20Gain&utm_content=3%2Bout%20of%204&utm_campaign=All%2BPain%20No%20Gain
Andew P. (14:57:38) :
Do you have a link?