The always sharp Jo Nova tips us to this:
Here’s a Spectacular Poster of ClimateGate covering 3 decades
You have to see this to believe it. Look up close and admire the detail while you despair at how long science has been going off the rails. To better appreciate the past and what was exposed by the CRU emails, the time-line chart consolidates and chronologically organizes the information uncovered and published about the CRU emails by many researchers along with some related contextual events. That the chart exists at all is yet another example of how skilled experts are flocking in to the skeptics position and dedicating hours of time pro bono because they are passionately motivated to fight against those who try to deceive us.
Click on the image to see it enlarged, but download the full PDF to see the detail.
Download The PDF (788k)
Mohib Ebrahim has created this amazing document. I’ve created a permanent Home page for this beautiful poster that will host the latest updates of this enormous Timeline as a PDF. There are also printable versions in A4, A3, A2, US letter and US tabloid for those of you (like me) who need printed versions to scribble on, and scrawl exclamation marks.
I’ve got the page one printed.
Big, great, beautiful. Thanks Mohib!
BBC
Snow and ice ‘worst in 20 years’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/8427849.stm
I think people like Mohib Ebrahim deserve some monetary award for their selfless work. Everybody should send Mohib some money, even if it’s a few dollars. That should encourage him and others to continue the work. Does he have a PayPal account?
Happy holidays.
OK so I have gone over the chart fairly thoroughly. I should be preparing for next term but darn it all this is so interesting. My only question remains. How will this overwhelming evidence get translated into investigations, charges and some honesty on the part of MSM. I have seen nor herd nothing significant. Has the average person in the media simply left reason behind entirely. We are still getting much criticism of the government here in Canada for not taking the lead in cutting CO2. Governments are still talking like its still a deal to be done. I just don’t get it. How can this much chicanery go unnoticed, ignored, let alone unpunished. When will the bomb go off! When will the damn dam break!
The role of the IPCC is defined in item 2 of its document “Principles Governing IPCC Work”, (online at http://www.ipcc.ch/about/princ.pdf)
Super! Lotta work. Was hoping to see something stating that the IPCC was created to promote the AGW agenda. Most assume it is impartial..
The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. [my emphasis added]
This extract makes it clear that the name “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” is something of a misnomer because the organisation is specifically directed to investigate any human influence on climate. In this context the term “climate change” is analogous to the definition used by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that is “climate change caused by human activity”.
Us letter corrected link:
http://joannenova.com.au/globalwarming/climategate/history/2009.12.23_climategate_timeline-us_letter_2p.pdf
Yay!
Best chrismas present ever!
Thank you so very much ! Exellent work.
“Ron de Haan (18:24:23) :
NASA comes up with another cause for arctic ice melt and it isn’t CO2:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=41638&src=eorss-manews
”
Interesting. They say they simulated ocean temps from the mid Pliocene, that should be 3.5 Myears ago.
“Global average surface temperatures during the mid-Pliocene were about 3°C (5.5°F)
greater than today and within the range projected for the 21st century by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”
Here i found something about the climate back then:
http://www.palaeos.com/Cenozoic/Pliocene/Pliocene.htm
“Antarctica was not yet completely frozen.”
NASA again about the Pliocene:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/features/199704_pliocene/
Follow the link under
“What Caused the Middle Pliocene Warming?”
(BTW the wikipedia says temperature was, well, like before Hockey stick. Thanks, Connelley.)
That timeline contains one error so far as I can see. He says that, quoting from the American Thinker methinks, that grapes were grown in Greenland at the time of the Vikings. From the Smithsonian site I couldn’t find this claim. Grapes were grown in “Vinland”, most probably New Foundland, and they cannot be grown there today. so maybe that’s what he is referring to. But there are other more solid evidence that Greenland, at least, was warmer than today during the Medieval period, and that’s in the ice cores.
i think (no snide comments) that if someone came up with a database/matrix where all of us could easily send a (peer- reviewed) letter to our local representatives, voicing our concern about the AGW b.s. it might help? [U.S. ONLY]
email, snail-mail to all the open senate and house seats, flood them with mail?? once a month till the election.
or is it stupid??
Thank You, Thank You,
This needs to be printed out and posted in every school and every politicians office!
In Australia, what turned the tide for the ETS debate in the Senate was that each of the Liberal Senators was receiving enormous amounts of emails, letters and phone calls from concerned constituents, each using their own words and their own experience, that they would lose their livelihood if the ETS scheme went through. It was unprecedented, absolutely nothing like a Greenpeace-style mass campaign, where every letter received is almost identical.
Thank you Mr. Ebrahim. Very well done.
If you were to make a wall chart of this I’d be interested in buying a copy.
India parliament Copenhagen fallout.
“We have opened windows for the possible jettisoning of the entire UN framework”
Oppositions slams Ramesh for ‘cop’-out
“Here’s an idea that might just work for socialist liberals in Europe: how about diverting some of the international funds to help developing countries adapt to global warming and using them instead to help Eurostar better “adapt” to cold climate conditions? Even Sarkozy might see the logic in that!”
Divert Global Warming Funds to Global Cooling Funds?
http://www.texasgopvote.com/blog/divert-global-warming-funds-global-cooling-funds-12232
1. Non-Junk Science, formerly, “Science,” in Latin: “Scientia,” (=knowledge), starts with a hypothesis, and/or hypotheses, and within at least, some theoretical basis, if the actual field is new at the time, like, Nuclear Fission, Nuclear Power, Nuclear Fusion, Radioactivity, Atomic Bomb, Hydrogen Bomb, and Neutron Bomb, within Nuclear Physics and beyond, and later becomes “accepted theory,” and established ways of making nuclear weapons, reliable ways to make nuclear power reactors, and accepted ways to measure radioactivity, but never as, “settled science” or “settled theory,” as within AGW propagandists.
2. The AGW theory, and its various names, Global Warming Hoax, Climategate, MMGW, Global Warming, and Climate Change, states as a “scientific fact,” that humans warms and destroy the earth, due to its Carbon Footprint, making it, e.g. the AGW theory, DOA, e.g. “Dead On Arrival,” due to the fact its basis, is both non-scientific, anti-human, and anti-capitalism in its inscription, and should therefore be rejected.
3. Phil Jones (CRU/UEA), Michael Mann (PSU), James Hansen (NASA/GISS), Ben Santer (LLNL), in conjunction with the former, “1975 ´Endangered Atmosphere´Conference, Where the Global Warming Hoax Was Born,” by Majorie Mazel Hecht, Special Report, Fall 2007, 21st CENTURY Science &Technology, at http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles%202007/GWHoaxBorn.pdf, and their respective names, Margaret Mead, Paul Ehrlich, Stephen Schneider, John Holdren (Obama´s Science Czar), George Woodwell, James Lovelock, and their #1 Propagandist, Mr. Al Gore, are all hysterical propagandists, with an anti-science ideology, with a foreseeable formula for a “no future” world.
4. Say No To Global Warming Hoax!!!
Say No To Climategate!!!
Say No To Global Governance!!!
Say No To Cap And Trade!!!
Say No To Junk Scientists!!!
Say No To Fold AGW Into National Security!!!
Say No To Copenhagen!!!
Say No To All!!!
Sorry, wrong video link last post.
India parliament Copenhagen fallout.
“We have opened windows for the possible jettisoning of the entire UN framework”
Oppositions slams Ramesh for ‘cop’-out
Michael (13:43:38) :
This is the script for the movie, “CLIMATEGATE”.
Hmmmm would I get some royalties?
Chez Nation (16:54:29) :
We are all in agreement that a lot of data from different sources is needed in order to engage in climate science, and that this work needs to be audited and evaluated in a variety of directions.
Related to this is economic and social data. This includes global estimates of economic activity from the World Bank and IMF, forest cover estimates from the UN FAO, and population estimates from the UN Population Division.
The UN is the source for global population estimates, which is produced by taking piecemeal national censuses of varying quality and applying assumptions to coordinate it to single year estimates.
If global population in 2010 was really 6 billion or 7.6 billion instead of the current estimate of about 6.8, this would have a significant effect on our perception of human impact.
Not only should climate science and data be audited, but also the other data sets that comprise the total understanding of the world’s environmental status which create the perceptions that influence public policy initiatives .
You are absolutely correct. Considering how much is at stake on the population numbers on an individual country basis those numbers should surely be audited.
At stake: territorial claims, representation to parliaments claims, food/aid requested etc are all per capita, and governments are not lazy in claiming more for less, “lying for their country”.
Amazing work on this document Mohib – you can bet this will end up on my cube wall at work as soon as I get back from the holidays. I may have to dig out my other eco-friendly bumper sticker and hang that up too 🙂
EARTH FIRST!
we´ll mine the other planets later…
To Robert Bissett
Regarding the definition of CC, the SPM (2207) as a footnote on page 2 says that the definition of CC is now, Natural + AGW.
In declaring this, they also acknowledge that the definition given them by the UNFCC was just AGW.
This means to me that if we spend trillions supposedly trying to reduce the temperature how would we know when the job was done, if Natural just keeps adding to it–as ist likely
Alternatively if natural is dropping–as is also likely– why spend the trillions in the first place.
It seems to me that the propellor heads have some explaining to do
I think there is a typo on the timeline at 1976:
1976
CLIMATOLOGIST SURVEY REVEALS NO CLEAR OUTLOOK
HANSEN et al publish “Greenhouse effects due to man-made
perturbations of trace gases” in the journal Science and stated
“Anthropogenic gases may alter our climate by plugging an
atmospheric window for escaping tradition.” [11]
I assume tradition should be radiation.
There is a consistent process that happens when a widely held delusion has been found to have foundations in deception. It starts slowly. One or a few catch on, or have strong suspicions. Some muttering happens in the crowd (behind the cheers, oohs and aaws..) Slowly, the muttering turns to a murmur. Then a few catcalls.
Finally, someone stands up and tips over all three cups to show there is no pea under any of them… (Climategate).
Shortly after that, an ever larger part of the crowd starts tossing tomatoes at the perpetrators. (all those Google hits on Climategate).
In the final stages, the entire ‘work history’ of the perpetrators and all their associates gets laid bare. (I think this article shows we are at the early part of that stage… though perhaps with a bit of overlap still with the prior stage.)
It’s about this time the “cops and lawyers” start to show up “taking names and statements”. (Didn’t I see a ‘hold documents for lawsuit’ notice to some government agencies 😉 The stages do not always have clean lines between them and can have significant overlap, especially if there is a very large and complex ‘event’ involved…)
I think we’re about to see the most interesting parts of this whole process…
In a way, this chart is the program for the final act:
“Program! Program! Can’t tell the Actors without a Program! Get your Program HERE! ” …
(Any guesses on how soon we start hearing: “What did you know and when did you know it?” )
some warmists complained that emails were taken out of context – well, here it is.
Re: Dr A Burns (18:30:24)
A GISTEMP/ HADCRUT3 comparison 1880-2009 can be seen more clearly here:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/mean:13/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1880/mean:13
Of course, temperature shifts 1880-1940 have very little or nothing to do with human GHGs.