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.
If journalists were to do their job they could make Obama and other politicians real uncomfortable. For instance someone could ask Obama (or other high ranking politician) what the carbon footprint of:
1) The war in Afghanistan
2) The military in general
3) The federal government
Then if they can’t answer ask why not given what they are trying to do us. If they do give some answer, then ask what the carbon offsets will cost. Of course Obama isn’t going to subject himself to what private businesses are going to have to pay, so he’ll say he wont offset the massive carbon he’s putting out to fight the war in Afghanistan, the military in general or the entire federal government. It could make Obama and a number of others who support Copenhagen very uncomfortable because it will look like they’re applying a huge double standard on one hand while on the other hand it would show how crushing the cost could be (I’d expect the cost to the federal budget would exacerbate the deficit) if the federal government (or just the military) had to buy carbon offsets, like what they want to impose on the public.
Here’s an article talking about the carbon footprint of the Iraq war and the Pentagon in general:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/27/ethicalliving.carbonfootprints
It looks like they have a HUGE footprint (the military consumes more oil than most countries), but you aren’t going to hear Obama taking responsible for his own use and all the heat he’d get on running up the deficit…he’ll just do that to businesses.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6945445.ece
Met Office to re-examine 160 years of climate data
illya (16:31:57) “Anybody know anything about this new hack? True or not: http://www.desmogblog.com/breaking-impersonators-attempt-access-canadian-government-centre-for-climate-modeling-and-analysis “
That is alarmism at its best.
That is a standard practice of thieves operating on university campuses. At a university where I had a contract a few years ago, thieves would pull tricks like that and make off with thousands of dollars worth of goodies. I remember one case where a $10000 projector was taken down in front of a whole lecture theater full of students, as the prof lectured. No one asked for ID. E-mails from angry administrators then went out saying: “Ask for ID.” Thieves usually flee if/when asked for ID.
It’s not uncommon to see these leaps of reasoning from alarmists. Here the logic seems to be: They left when asked for ID; therefore they must be associated with climategate. Perfectly logical (by some standards).
Gail Combs (17:08:16) :
What a brilliant Idea. Maybe we should campaign to get those soft drinks banned INSTEAD of cap and trade. At least it directly addresses the supposed problem and does not hurt people….
CO2 is a byproduct of fermentation…
AGW folk, I double triple dare you!
“snopercod (15:34:56) :
Major integrated oil companies have long been supporters of the ‘environmental movement’.
Chevron, Exxon, Shell, BP, etc. fund these groups which clamor (and sue) for tighter ‘environmental’ restrictions, with the intent of raising the barrier to market entry. This keeps out any possible smaller competitors and protects their monopoly.
I thought people would have caught on to this scam by now.”
Are you implying that Rockefeller support for environmental causes is not entirely altruistic?
Next you’ll be telling me the Easter Bunny is a fertility symbol!
The BBC is testing if their years of publishing alarmist climate stories are effected by ClimateGate and if it will influence Copenhagen:
If you sign in you can leave a message:
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=7310&edition=2&ttl=20091205011807
INGSOC (12:09:55) :
…. I believe the political left in North America has also been corrupted by the same conniving wannabee dictators. I know a poor few friends that are still “left of centre” that are also skeptics, but are more or less without political affiliation due to their adherence to truth; and the sorry lack of a party on the left that places honesty before a corrupt ideology.
Things are looking up though!
AHhh an enlightened one. Yes the Megalomaniacs figured out they could hide behind environmentalism and socialism to use Political Activists to gain money and power. The UN NGOs are the perfect vehicle to seduce bright young things into thinking they are saving the world while advancing the UN s power plays.
Once you see that it is clear the democrats are used for the big steps forward. The Federal Reserve Act in 1913, The World Trade Organization in 1995 and now Copenhagen. All are about handing control of money, then food and trade and now energy over to an elite cabal.
Simple really once you catch on.
RE: PhilW (13:26:29) ,
LOL! Suzanne at the start sounds like Jennifer Lopez from “Taco Flovored Kisses”
On an entertaining note, read this from Ed Milliband’s petition page:
“We, the undersigned, believe climate change is real and man-made, as demonstrated by the science, and we must take action as citizens of Doncaster to tackle climate change. Doing so is necessary for the environment and future generations, and can be good for our economy and society.”
so climate change is man made, and can all be remedied from Doncaster. (Population: 67,977)
“‘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 Times should be pressed for their source on this claim, and if validated, then this should be top news. Unbeliveable.”
From the show “Yes Minister!”:
“If people don’t know what you’re doing, they don’t know what you’re doing wrong.”
“The Official Secrets Act is not to protect secrets it is to protect officials.”
Since when did the FOIA have anything to do with who was receiving it? I noticed this same thing said by Ben Santer when CRU and others were coordinating their FOIA obstruction…it doesn’t matter who are why people are asking for it, the FOIA isn’t just for the government to give the information to only the people it likes!
And finally, news of ClimateGate hits MSM. Our local ABC station carried the story of the Hollywood conservatives wanting to yank Al Gore’s Oscar over the global warming scandal.
Oooohhhh!
Remember folks it is us not the corporations that will end up paying for all of this. A company makes a profit, changes their business so they make a profit or they go out of business. None of the oil/coal companies stand to lose from any of this just the poor and middle class who have another tax added to their backs while the bankers and politicians make more money.
Buddenbrook (17:01:27) :
“This is just chilling. From the Times article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6945445.ece
“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.” ”
This is “cheering news, in a strange way….”
I was waiting for an disinterested but affected party to realize their jeopardy and the Met has. If this is to be a transparent re-assesment, as they claim, it is what skeptic and alarmist alike should relish!
Big oil thinks the release of the e-mails was baaad.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/blimey.html
Hopefully they will invite people from “both sides of the fence” as well as posting their progress in every detail as it develops so everything is wide open.
Transparency will be a must otherwise this will go on for ever.
Does the story from the TimesOnline say the UK Met Office just threw the Hadcrut temperature series under the bus? Because they can’t trust it?
It is going to take them three years to re-do it?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6945445.ece
To that I say, it is about time. The ClimateGate emails really seem to be waking people up (even those in the catastrophic global warming Met Office).
Whats up with climateGate on Twitter. No posts?
Paul Vaughan (16:08:36) :
“Staggering to see how many lefties whole-heartedly & naively bought into what has been a right-wing ploy all along.
i.e. watch the spin change the narrative now…”
Intriguing. I would point out however, that getting one’s enemies to “carry water for the cause” is an Alinskyite tactic, played masterfully by those behind neo-environmentalism. I would argue that it is the right that has been naive in falling for such a ploy. I do marvel at the fiendish genius behind the neo-enviro movement. It took a long time to pull the curtains open and reveal the lies and skulduggery that make up the agw confidence trick. And as you say, it may well be too late to stop it now! Now the right is going to have to weasel out of something they didn’t really believe in anyway. Truly brilliant tactics. The supposed admissions and pronouncements that have been occurring today are, I believe, just the start of a major PR offensive by the warmists. They aren’t finished yet! After all, it is clear from the fine article above that the eco-deist’s have Shell Oil among others to finance their deceit: As well as the force of government in many nations. It has become “too big to fail” in their eyes.
I still remain guardedly optimistic.
For what it is worth, I believe I recall that Cool Climate, the releaser of the files also said or implied that there is more information and possibly some further files to be released sometime in the future.
It is known that there are still a lot of e-mails from CRU that are not in the currently released file.
One of those still missing e-mails was Jones somewhat infamous e-mail to Warwick Hughes of the “Errors in IPCC climate science” blog where Jones simply dismisses Hughes request for data with the contemptuous ” Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it. … Cheers Phil”
Could get even more interesting if Cool Climate decides to go for the kill regardless of the personal consequences and releases another file or files and further lot of coding.
manfredkintop (14:24:53) :Said
“I am in blood stepped in so far that should I wade no more,…
Speaking of blood this quote is more appropriate for Copenhagen since I am sure members past or present of the IMF will be there.
“”Today I resigned from the staff of the International Monetary Fund after over 12 years, and after 1000 days of official fund work in the field, hawking your medicine and your bag of tricks to governments and to peoples in Latin America and the Caribbean and Africa. To me, resignation is a priceless liberation, for with it I have taken the first big step to that place where I may hope to wash my hands of what in my mind’s eye is the blood of millions of poor and starving peoples. Mr. Camdessus, the blood is so much, you know, it runs in rivers. It dries up too; it cakes all over me; sometimes I feel that there is not enough soap in the whole world to cleanse me from the things that I did do in your name and in the name of your predecessors, and under your official seal. ”
With those words, Davison Budhoo, a senior economist with the International Monetary Fund (IMF)… “
I love the way Gavin Schmidt is fighting a running battle on RC now that they finally decided not to moderate non-consensus views. He thinks the CRU emails aren’t a big deal, and it will all blow away. That and the fact that he is ever so unbiased in his position, of course. Laughable …
MattN (12:09:29) :
“I believe I read one where they also met with Siemens.”
That is one that actually makes sense, as Siemens is huge in nuclear power. Shell is getting into solar power, and has an interest in seeing coal shut down. Virtually all the corporations supporting CRU and other AGW alarmist advocate “researchers” stand to benefit from the elimination of coal as a legal energy source. Coal is such a huge part of most country’s energy infrastructure that its elimination means the other sources of power will see huge rate increases due to scarcity.
China and India won’t play ball, because their energy systems are generally monopolized so there are no competitors in those nations that stand to benefit from ditching coal.
I predict that Copenhagen fails, the US ditches cap and trade, China, Brazil, India all tell the IPCC to take a hike. However if/when EMC2 Inc releases to the Navy a positive report on the current round of polywell fusion experiments, you will see movement to ban coal and install polywell reactors in those power plants. Should be late 2010 when we hear something on that.
Several of the oil companies are among those pushing for the carbon reduction initiatives. Both Shell and BP are fully behind cap and trade for example. Shell is even lobbying the U.S. govt. to remove of any restrictions on carbon credit trading and asking for the allowal of trade in financial derivatives/toxic paper.
Shells wants very badly to trade in some of those sweet sweet derivaties. Exxon Mobil on the other hand, apparently favours a carbon tax.
http://www.theage.com.au/business/cfd/shell-calls-for-derivatives-on-carbon-trading-20091117-ij67.html
Google has ensured that if you are skeptical about global warming alarmism then you DONT have a vote. On the tails of being accused of censoring online searches through restricting autosuggest on Climategate Google’s new actions now show that they are really only interested in one side of the debate – and its not your side!
more here; http://www.twawki.com
LOL, this just in.
US President Barack Obama has changed his plans to attend the UN summit on climate change, and will be in Copenhagen at the end of the conference rather than the beginning.
The White House says Mr Obama has moved his appearance from 9 December to 18 December after talks with other leaders and after seeing progress that has already been made to give momentum to negotiations, the BBC reports.
The White House says he believes “continued US leadership can be most productive through his participation at the end of the Copenhagen conference”.