This headline in the Sunday Daily Mail is quite something:

People often note strange ad placement from the Google adwords at WUWT. Seems it’s a global problem.
WUWT readers may recall another prominent climate scientist who mentions “no statistically significant warming since 1995”. See this previous WUWT story:
A note from Richard Lindzen on statistically significant warming
It is quite interesting that Jones says the same thing.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
johnnythelowery, that bit about scaring the school kids enrages me. I also was taught things in school that worried me: new ice age, by the time I was old enough to have a car there would be no oil left, it was all moot, we probably would have a nuclear war first, etc.
As I’ve always said about these things: LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE. Teach facts, let them join their own churches. If they want to be Scientologists or AGW’ers, so be it.
This may have been floated…not read the posts here.
Jones may or may not have a job at CRU anymore. If he does it would be difficult at best.
Why does he not simply “turn coat” and come on over and start some REAL whistle blowing. I bet within a few days more would come over. Sure “grant and tenure” will get in the way, but golly gee if there is SO much interest in CC and GW why can’t grants be given to support the counter arguments. At some point with “science” getting a bad wrap won’t corporations stand up and say, “You know the science is NOT settled, let’s get it right before was waste trillions. We support further investigations!”
I’d admire that. Would others? (Well besides all of you at WUWT!) There are enough doubters now that corps my not have to endure backlash. Could happen. Maybe this has not matured to that stage yet. Maybe I am naive.
But my bags are packed and I am going to Kauai for two weeks. ☺
Mind the the shop while I am away.
Clive
I just cannot get over how little girly-men like these could conceive the biggest scientific frauds in history. Real men will eventually show them a thing or two when the going gets really tough. Better find a way to warm this planet back up girls, or effectively deal with a cold and damp one, and quickly.
Considering the amazing implications of Jone’s statements, you may be surprised that there is not a single mention of any of this in the Guardian, the Independent or the BBC. No headlines. No by-lines. No comment.
Even more sinister is the complete silence from every politician, government minister, and senior civil servant in Britain. I can assure all of them, (cowards that they are), if you ignore us we are not going away.
Meanwhile, in the U.S….
Utah’s House of Representatives has adopted a resolution condemning “climate alarmists”, and disputing any scientific basis for global warming. The measure, which passed by 56-17, has no legal force, states that carbon dioxide is “essentially harmless” to human beings and good for plants.
The original version of the bill dismissed climate science as a “well organised and ongoing effort to manipulate and incorporate “tricks” related to global temperature data in order to produce a global warming outcome”. It accused those seeking action on climate change of riding a “gravy train” and their efforts would “ultimately lock billions of human beings into long-term poverty”.
In the heat of the debate, the representative Mike Noel said environmentalists were part of a vast conspiracy to destroy the American way of life and control world population through forced sterilization and abortion. By the time the final version of the bill came to a vote, the bill dropped the word “conspiracy”, and described climate science as “questionable” rather than “flawed”.
However, it insisted that the hockey stick graph of changing temperatures was discredited. It also called on the federal government’s Environmental Protection Agency to order an immediate halt in its moves to regulate greenhouse gas emissions “until a full and independent investigation of climate data and global warming science can be substantiated”. As Noel explained: “Sometimes … we need to have the courage to do nothing.”
Kate (00:32:33) : Just wanted to say that I enjoy your posts. Thank you.
Maybe dementia has set in–Jones is now 57 and pushing 58. I know of a number of people that have gotten Alzheimer’s in their 50’s, indeed, even in their 40’s. This sounds like someone that cannot remember their prior positions so stating something very contrary (yet true) is likely but damning; duplicity is easy to demonstrate.
I hope this “outing” will make him reconsider his threat of suicide. Phil will become a martyr for AGW if he does that.
TerrySkinner (01:47:58) :
I should really like to see the e-mail back and forth amongst the CRU/NASA crowd that this piece has no doubt provoked.
I am sure that they are using human couriers. Only a fool would be using either e-mail or a cell phone. Putting anything in writing (snail-mail) would likewise be insane. Even if encrypted, the code can eventually be broken. See for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venona_project
Of course, one can hope. I mean, how smart can these people be?
Mike Ramsey
Codetech: CodeTech (21:44:10) : …..johnnythelowery, that bit about scaring the school kids enrages me. I also was taught things in school that worried me: new ice age, by the time I was old enough to have a car there would be no oil left, it was all moot, we probably would have a nuclear war first, etc.
As I’ve always said about these things: LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE. Teach facts, let them join their own churches. If they want to be Scientologists or AGW’ers, so be it……
Regarding kids & the CO2 scare:
I recall doing (in the UK) a green paper @ur momisugly 1969, instigated by my teacher, on the high operational ceiling of Concorde and how it was going to destroy Ozone. I was 8 and still remember it to this day!!
It’s going to be tough to unprogram all these kids so we can expect waves
of ‘AGW driven by CO2’ thinking to keep coming around, perhaps, for the rest of our lives.
What I find interesting and disturbing is that when they get informed questions and criticism, then suddenly all the confidence and significance shrinks. And I am a bit worried about this, because it shows that science has a problem with critical questions nowadays. One can only hope that this kind of behaviour is unique in politically important sciences and doesn’t persist in less policy relevant ones…
Perhaps it is also more significant in science of complex models and systems, like Earth sciences or econometrics/statistics.
We need a gallery of the lying “scientists”, clearly Jones lied.
These clowns are in it for a few TRILLION to date.
The entire group needs to be in prison, for life.
Madoff was not as evil as this group, and he is in for life.
Once the trials are over, the EPA will have a very hard time enforcing any more of its idiotic behavior.
Yes, this will take some time – if we do not make an example of this group – real science will never be respected.
I can see the head line in the Sun “Emperor at center of ClimateGate strips down to his FLIP-FLOPS!!!”
marc (08:37:02) :
It’s in the BBC transcript:
B – Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming
Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive,
It’s good job Phil Jones didn’t go into the medical profession.
Patient:- Doctor am I pregnant?
Dr Phil:- Yes, but only just.
Good for Phil Jones.
Actually read the full quotation of what Phil Jones said about the MWP in his BBC interview and compare it the IPCC Summary – shockingly (or not if you don’t lap the Daily Mail) they are both the same. Yet more pronouncements of AGW’s death and so forth. If you say something enough times it becomes true right?
His statement about the tempature trend being flat over the last 15 years:
“Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.”
None of this is groundbreaking stuff. Basic principles of Statistics, not a revelatory admission of “surrender” as some here are so desperate to portray it as.
Um… did any of you do stats 101? You know the difference between statistical significance and significance, right?
Here’s the economist –
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/02/climategate_distortions/
– if you need a little extra info on quite how badly the Mail reported that.