Gail Combs writes in comments:
Oh, BOY ~ I think I may have struck GOLD!
Do not forget Friday Mukamperezida: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/25/they-had-to-burn-the-village-to-save-it-from-global-warming/
At http://foia2011.org I searched for worldbank.org and found 32 e-mails going back as far as 1998. I have only looked at three so far. Looks like the good old World Bank may be something of a puppet master.
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4628
Summary for Policymakers to: Rwatson
Dear Bob, [Robert Watson of World Bank]
Thanks for giving us the opportunity to react to your thinking. It forces us to think more clearly about the main messages. I must admit that I am somewhat confused about the 26 page summary, since this comes very close to (although it is different from) the full-scale document the various teams are currently writing. My view would be that those teams take their own text as the starting point and try to improve/shorten it on the basis of your text. Here, I only respond to your main messages in italics and mainly focus on WG3 issues…..
Question 2:
I would not include a WG3 paragraph, like “The Kyoto Protocol has led to thecreation of new market mechanisms”……
Long but worth reading. Seems Robert Watson of the World Bank was TELLING good old Rajendra Pachauri and the crowd what to put into the Summary for Policymakers
I wonder what the crowd at Occupy Wall Street would think of this e-mail?
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4953
is about drumming up CAGW projects for the “USAID on the Supplemental Grant Program” and R. Watson at the World Bank is copied.
Here is another goodie where Kenneth M. Chomitz of the World Bank is interfering with how a peer reviewed journal is run.
Editorial for Climate Policy, Issue 2.
…. Dear Michael,
I really like the solution of presenting view and counterview articles. I retain some reservations about your proposed editorial. It seems to me that you have the difficult problem of wearing two hats: one as the advocate of particular policies and viewpoints, and the other as an editor of a journal which aspires to be a neutral forum for policy discussion. I appreciate and sympathize with the depth and grounding of your personal views. However, as editor, it seems to me, you have to bend over backwards to be neutral. The editorial uses charged words like ‘demonize’ and could easily spark the war of words you wish to avoid. A strongly worded editorial risks associating the journal with a particular viewpoint, and hence reducing the journal’s value and reputation as a neutral forum….
Kenneth M. Chomitz
Development Research Group
World Bank
…..
from: Hadi Dowlatabadi
subject: Re: [New] Editorial for Climate Policy, Issue 2.
Dear Ken,
I agree with your perspective, but why not set a realistic target? The editorial columns at Science, Nature and New Scientist have rarely hidden their subjective perspectives. I think there are shades to this, and Michael can be a shade grayer, but the passion is also important.
The dialogue approach allows him to be editor, hold strong opinions, but still be viewed as someone who is willing to listen. This is how Steve Schneider has conducted his reign at Climatic Change and I believe despite his well known personal perspectives he has been able to draw on many in the community to contribute to the dialogue that defines the differences in perspectives permeating this subject.
Hadi
So it seems the Professional journals are also getting direction from the World Bank.
Climategate the present that just gives and gives. I can not wait to get back to the other 29 e-mails.
My search is here: http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4&search=worldbank.org&sisea_offset=0
Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
One of the things for which we can be thankful is for FOIA.2011 bring us more of the truth. Maybe we can add another installment on our Christmas wish list…
L-o-v-e-l-y!
Thanks Gail, and all others going through the emails. It is about time this comes to light. That was a THANK YOU of gratitude, to Anthony for providing this forum, and all who contribute, helping to keep the world on the up and up.
Is the Robert Watson at World Bank the same as the Robert Watson who used to work for the Natural Resources Defense Council?
I’m trying to think of a legitimate reason for the World Bank to be involved in any of this.
Thinking … thinking …
I’m as stumped as Phil Jones with an Excel spreadsheet.
Google quits plans to make cheap renewable energy
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/23/us-google-idUSTRE7AM03220111123
“…but still be viewed as someone who is willing to listen.”
Viewed as, but not actually, someone who is willing to listen. By itself mot that bad, but linked with all the other material, a strong indictment.
While Mann and Co. were stone walling FOIA’s from sceptics, it seems the “Team” was very happy to give the World Bank RAW DATA!
You have to read the entire group of e-mails lots of other juicy bits on temp data uncertainty but here is the info on just how fast the rats jump when it is the World Bank who comes calling.
Here are the 32 World Bank e-mails to look through however addition info such as subject headings are found in the search. http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4&search=worldbank.org&sisea_offset=0
I am making sure the e-mail are individually available because the e-mail address is in some cases the only link to the World Bank and those are being Redacted. In some cases it is just a matter of a member of the World Bank being copied.
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=209
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=290
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=597
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=739
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=753
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=854
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=1002
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=1165
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=1365
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=1470
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=1824
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=2911
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=2957
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3088
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3125
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3135
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3137
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3239
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3297
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3854
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3876
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4024
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4067
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4101
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4219
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4287
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4326
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4383
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4447
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4628
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4953
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5112
First mail in that search I had a look at was the world bank asking for a hockey stick for this cover: http://wdronline.worldbank.org//includes/displaybookimage.php?imagename=WDR_2010&bookid=33
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=2911
It is always about following the money, the preservation of power and accumulation of greater wealth which is thought to increase power. All else is irrelevant in the church religion of self serving ideology.
Hate to burst your bubble here, but Bob Watson was the Chariman of the IPCC up through 2001.
WHO is Dr Robert Watson???
He chaired the IPCC before old Patchy and is now handsomely rewarded with a senior position at the World Bank.
He sounds like a Eco Activist imported from the UK and solidly into the United Nations “Sustainability” push. (Agenda 21)
The man behind the curtain
“ChE says:
November 24, 2011 at 8:36 am
I’m trying to think of a legitimate reason for the World Bank to be involved in any of this.”
Try this – to get hold of big money they need something to justify spending it on other than indirectly funding more new palaces for corrupt leaders. If you can create a populist cause (like climate change) that will increase focus on your area of operation; then the money will come from governments because it sounds like a worthy thing to fund, cudos all round.
I noticed the word legitimate, well if AGW is true (believed to be true) then it’s legit.
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=1002
Why were the world bank writing the report
Wow! How can any honest politician stick with the CAGW camp now? Oh! wait….honest politician….
Some are wondering why the World Bank is into the AGW fraud. A quick overview. I am anchored in the San Bles Islands of the Kuna Yala, republic of Panama. On Sept. 27 thru the 29th, the WB met with the leaders of the Kuna Yala. The Kuna’s are the indigenous people with a semi autonomous status in Panama. My knowledge of this came about because boaters were ordered not to anchor near the meeting place of Porvenir. during these dates. I then went to work to find out whats up.
.
The WB offered the Kunas, and the Panamanian govt. a large sum of money (12 million to the P Gov. alone) if the Kunas would abandon their ancestral land. The WB would then use the vacant land to broker carbon credits, and the Panama Gov. would receive proceeds also. They have 2 years after the Cancun climate conference to get the deal done. This is just like the recent Uganda affair where 20,000 people were kicked out. The WB is active in the Caribbean, and I assume in many other places grabbing what land they can. This is very lucrative.
Much more to this as you will find out if you desire. I searched Kuna Yala World Bank meeting, and found the WB itinerary, and other info. Good luck!
Actually Gail, he joined the World Bank in 1996.See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Watson_%28scientist%29
You really are trying too hard on this conspiracy thing.
HMMMmmm,
Watson seems to be another Maurice Strong.
I for one am not interested in the World Bank and United Nations coming up with the “Plans” that govern every aspect of my life. I am already stuck with the World Trade Organization micromanaging my business.
Robert Watson at the World Bank:
Professor Watson’s career has evolved from research scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory: California Institute of Technology, to a US Federal Government program manager/director at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), to a scientific/policy advisor in the US Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), White House, to a scientific advisor, manager and chief scientist at the World Bank, to a Chair of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, the Director for Strategic Direction for the Tyndall centre, and Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
https://blogs.worldbank.org/climatechange/team/robert-watson
Senior Scientist at the Natural Resource Defence Council
“Contrary to the president’s claims, China has cut its carbon dioxide emissions 17 percent while its economy has been booming,” said Robert Watson, an NRDC senior scientist and co-author of the report. “In fact, the evidence shows that China has done more than the United States to combat global warming over the last decade. The president should stop hiding behind China’s skirts as an excuse for stalling on taking action on global warming.”
http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressReleases/010615.asp
This guy’s also worked on IPCC reports, Over to LaFramboise…
General Comment about Life on Planet Earth-
If people ever saw how things were really made,
how things were really done,
they would probably get very sick,
and very mad.
Making money is hard;
anyone trying to make money must also be hard.
When you look really close at business
there are many things that will make you sick.
Not many people care about Global Warming
but there are many who want to make a profit.
People can be very friendly to many people
and not have a single friend.
So anti AGW groups like WUWT and others are supposed to be funded by BIG OIL interests???
It appears that Pro AGW is funded by a larger source…The World Bank
If they can get people kicked off their land to resell for Carbon Offsets
Rattus Norvegicus says: at 9:40 am
“Actually Gail, he joined the World Bank in 1996.See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Watson_%28scientist%29
You really are trying too hard on this conspiracy thing.”
But Gail had already said at 9:08 about Watson that “Before joining the Bank in 1996”
Does someone have a comprehension problem? or are they just seeing what they want to see so as to enable strawman arguments?
Rattus Norvegicus says:
November 24, 2011 at 9:05 am
Hate to burst your bubble here, but Bob Watson was the Chariman of the IPCC up through 2001.
Rattus Norvegicus says:
November 24, 2011 at 9:05 am
Hate to burst your bubble here, but Bob Watson was the Chariman of the IPCC up through 2001.
____________________________
SO????
He was still AT the World Bank. Remember the guys who supplied the money to burn down African villages??? You do not like Oil Companies, well I hate the World Bank and IMF. When people talk of American Imperialism it is actually WORLD BANK Imperialism.
Bob Watson is also not the only World Bank employee recieving and sending e-mails to the climate scientis at CRU.
Kenneth Chomitz ~ Senior Advisor in the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group. focus: environmental economics.
Christophe de Gouvello ~ Senior Energy Specialist at the World Bank Energy Cluster for Latin America (LCSEG). Worked for several years on energy projects in Sub-Saharan African countries.
Erick Fernandes ~The World Bank, Department of Land Management, USA Wrote: Mainstreaming Sustainable Land Management in Agriculture, Natural Resource Management, and Rural Development Programs http://www.tropentag.de/2004/proceedings/node344.html
Alexander Lotsch
geographer at the World Bank, Chapter Author, World Development Report 2010. …part of blog hosted by the Climate Change Team of the Environment Department of the World Bank. https://blogs.worldbank.org/climatechange/team/alexander-lotsch
And the link to the wiping out of indigenous people:
Advancing REDD Readiness through the Forest CarbonPartnership Facility by Alexander Lotsch, World Bank, Forest Carbon Partnership Facility http://wbi.worldbank.org/wbi/Data/wbi/wbicms/files/drupal-acquia/wbi/2%20-%20REDD%20Readiness%20and%20FCPF%20-%20A.Lotsch.pdf
Before you go defending the World Bank go look up SAPs and what those [self snip] turkeys at the World Bank and IMF have done to third world countries.
breaking news : international bankers directly fund & express personal interest in AGW religion !!!
date of news : 18th Nov 1987 : by George Hunt
http://www.textfiles.com/conspiracy/owgart1.003
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/051007_george_hunt.html
Well done WUWT, only 24 year behind the times.
I’m sure I’ve posted this point here before … to no effect.
Does climategate 2 mean that WUWT will recognise George’s report this time round?
So not only do the warmista turkeys constantly ‘vote for Christmas’ with their cap-n-trade, carbon taxes and windmill subsidies – they also invite the fox into the chicken shed.
Certifiable is just one word of many..
Gail, the two words that best describe my feelings after reading your post are: THANK YOU..
ChE says:
November 24, 2011 at 8:36 am
I’m trying to think of a legitimate reason for the World Bank to be involved in any of this.
Thinking … thinking …
I’m as stumped as Phil Jones with an Excel spreadsheet.
Hey, ChE –
Did the word “conspiracy” pass through your “thinking…thinking…” mind?
The problem is nobody cares and the green machine is now so powerful it cannot be stopped. Read the utter crap coming out of cop17 on twitter and green bloggers. Its a steamroller.
They are quite keen on bankers
4092.txt
date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:00:38 +0100
from: Trevor Davies
subject: goldman-sachs
to: j.palutiko p.jones,m.hulme
Jean,
We (Mike H) have done a modest amount of work on degree-days for G-S. They
now want to extend this. They are involved in dealing in the developing
energy futures market.
G-S is the sort of company that we might be looking for a ‘strategic
alliance’ with. I suggest the four of us meet with ?? (forgotten his name)
for an hour on the afternoon of Friday 12 June (best guess for Phil & Jean
– he needs a date from us). Thanks.
Trevor
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Professor Trevor D. Davies
Climatic Research Unit
University of East Anglia
Norwich NR4 7TJ
United Kingdom
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There’s a lot of people in the AGW bed.
Grepping through the original file, I see 32 emails that reference “worldbank.org” but if I do a different search:
grep -i “world bank” * | cut -d”:” -f1 | sort | uniq
Those would be files that MENTION “word bank” (in either upper or lower case). What is interesting is that MOST of the emails that mention “world bank” do not have a world bank email address in them. For example this one from Phil Jones where he is copying around some information from an publication called “Carbon Trader” 0073.txt
Also there is one to Briffa Re: Carbon trading in the Middle East that ends with “See you in Abu Dhabi.” 0225.txt
So the emails that mention “World Bank” but do NOT contain any worldbank.org addresses (those are for some reason a more interesting set to me but I have only looked at the two mentioned above) are:
0073.txt 0225.txt 0563.txt 0660.txt 0864.txt 1265.txt 1353.txt 1636.txt 1776.txt 1854.txt 2192.txt 2345.txt 2634.txt 2704.txt 3303.txt 3515.txt 3550.txt 4127.txt 4795.txt 4992.txt 5071.txt 5107.txt
5154.txt 5161.txt 5199.txt 5277.txt 5280.txt 5340.txt
This all makes me very curious about any “Green” investments made by members of “the cause” as they would have insight into this particular market and could directly influence these markets with their work.
Would it be too much of a stretch to say the World Bank would be supportive of One World Government?
Only if you have a reading comprehension problem.
A big Thank You, Gail, for your hard work.
The information you dug up is truly scandalous.
As many of us have maintained for some time now, it isn’t just about the abuse and perversion of science, it is about politics.
This new batch of e-mails makes it abundantly clear that they work for a “cause”.
Now you’ve dug out the money providers who implement the politics of the “cause”, with the post of scizzorsbill above illustrating what that looks like in detail.
I hope the Thanksgiving turkey will stick in the throat of all those World bankers.
@ Gail Combs –
The emails you’ve highlighted seem to be only a part of both previous and follow-on conversations, do they not?
Wonder where the “rest of the story” is.
Bob Watson, ex World bank, ex IPCC chair, now UK Defra chief scientific advisor. Corruption in high places. Follow the money.
meemoe_uk says:
November 24, 2011 at 10:21 am
breaking news : international bankers directly fund & express personal interest in AGW religion !!!
date of news : 18th Nov 1987 : by George Hunt
______________________________________
As a farmer I was well aware of Hunt’s Report thanks to Derry Brownfield, a reporter who tangled with Monsanto.
As you said George Hunt’s report was torpedoed That is why these emails are important. It is tougher to kill them. They make a strong link in the chain.
Nicholas Stern of the UK Stern Report fame was Chief Economist at the World Bank – what a small world these people occupy!
Well, I am not going to have time to dig into this as we have some family activities scheduled but something is starting to get a funny smell to it. On one hand, members of “The Cause” are in direct contact with members of the World Bank. On the other hand, they have apparently keen interest in various investment news mentioning the World Bank. Now, I don’t believe they would be so sloppy as to use their work accounts for managing their personal investments (would they?) and while I have seen no smoking gun, there is kind of a whiff of smoke in the air. 2428.txt is interesting. Pay attention to emails with “co2.org” in them. Some of them seem to be about manipulation of things in Russia but there seems to be a money angle with some of them.
Actually, john.ashton with co2.org seems to be in a lot of emails. And why is “Bronnert Deborah [FCO] – Moscow, Russian Federation” (apparently an embassy staffer at the UK embassy in Moscow) in these discussions?
Did I say 2428.txt is interesting? That is where they start talking about using the G8 to advance their agenda. There’s money here someplace, but we probably won’t find it in their work emails.
4631.txt to e.l. jones (probably some UN staffer) is told that “carbontrader.org” is a good site to follow and apparently is also mentioned in 3432.txt where her bona fides were being established “. 3432.txt is kindof hilarious:
World Bank, BP, Shell, hey what’s the problem?
I clicked on the middle reference, giving RWatson’s thoughts. It was very badly formatted, which made it hard to read.
I did not get so much an impression of conspiracy so much as a very intelligent and powerful man who sincerely believes the AGW claptrap and is trying to be as responsible as possible. It seems quite clear that most of the world’s fabulously wealthy or politically powerfull elites actually believe that AGW hysteria will save the world.
His gardeners mow his lawns in Summer, not winter, just as yours do. The hockey stick is a COMPLAINT that the Earth’s biosphere seems to be more vigorous than it used to be. We know that both CO2 and warmer temperatures benefit life. If we ever get these simple realities across to these people, it will be an important step toward REALLY saving the world for living organisms.
Pay attention to emails referencing co2.org, too. You see a lot of message manipulation in those.
Great find!
Or give them an excellent investment opportunity if they are politically connected and know in advance where the money will be flowing and what the message is going to be.
Great detective work Gail.
This does not actually surprise me in the least. Fits the big picture. But so much better when detailed puzzle pieces like this are found.
Lady Life Grows says:
November 24, 2011 at 11:58 am
” It seems quite clear that most of the world’s fabulously wealthy or politically powerfull elites actually believe that AGW hysteria will save the world.”
Don’t think so. They believe that the AGW hysteria will make them more rich and powerful, and create a better system for maintaining or enhancing their position.
They only care about saving THEIR world.
JohnWho says:
November 24, 2011 at 11:35 am
@ Gail Combs –
The emails you’ve highlighted seem to be only a part of both previous and follow-on conversations, do they not?
Wonder where the “rest of the story” is.
_______________________________
There is plenty of digging to do on both sets of emails. Not only on the World Bank but the IMF, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Chase ……
There is also the Farmland grab that Scizzorbill mentioned: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/24/world-bank-global-warming-journals-and-cru/#comment-807254
It gets even better if you follow the strings.
US universities in Africa ‘land grab’
Institutions including Harvard and Vanderbilt reportedly use hedge funds to buy land in deals that may force farmers out http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/08/us-universities-africa-land-grab
And here is the US government involvement again. (This is the tree of choice for carbon credits an aggressive invasive plant)
I can not believe the liberals (or conservatives) would continue to support these people.
Oh and just to make it more fun, a eucalyptus can sprout and grow up to twenty feet in a year from a fresh stump, and I thought sweet gum was bad……
They forgot to add:
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!
Gail Combs:
I think everyone is aware that there is a larger, behind the scenes, hand manipulating the duped AGW scientists and environmental NGOs (in fact most). To speak of it, however, places the speaker automatically in the whacko room with UFO & Sasquatches. I really don’t think anything can be done to alter the final solution. Happy Thanksgiving! GK
/sarc
Note “sarc” is off –
It really is worse than we thought.
World Bank, Big Oil, WWF, BBC, and more.
And the complacent main stream media which should be all over this.
Excellent find Gail!
I truly think that some Rattus Norvegicus might soon be thinking about leaving a sinking ship.
Of course they won’t if they are paid members of the “crew”. (You never know even our resident Brown Rat might even read my comment. How about it Ratty?).
This is getting interesting! Jones, Mann, Briffa & Trenberth e.t.c. (aka “The Team”) could just be the “useful idiots” that these major players are using to get to the “real” pot-of-gold. They started the ball rolling but Big Finance realised the potential to make huge profits on the world markets. Who is pulling the strings? Can Governments be coerced/bought into this scheme? What is the going price for a few votes for or against to keep the “Cause” rolling along. Scary isn’t it?
FOIA must be a very cool operator!
JohnWho says:
@ Gail Combs –
The emails you’ve highlighted seem to be only a part of both previous and follow-on conversations, do they not?
Wonder where the “rest of the story” is.
Probably in the file “all.7z.
At least we can hope so and that the passphrase will be released so everyone can see
Gail, your discovery helps explain the content of the READ ME file and what FIOA wants to expose
I suggest people read “Throw Them All Out” by Peter Schweizer. It is available at Barnes and Noble at 20% off list right off the shelf. I picked up a copy the other day and was steamed before I even got past the introduction. After reading that book, all of this takes on a much different context.
Very nice work, Gail! Quite a can of worms you’ve dug up.
RockyRoad says: (November 24, 2011 at 11:22 am):
Rocky, not just the World Bank. Someone at UEA (according to 0195.txt, it seems likely to be Phil Jones) received (at least) four rather lengthy circulars (2233.txt, 0703.txt, 4659.txt and 3550.txt, in date order, all in 2008) from the “Spiritual Leader of the Global Community”, who can be found at http://globalcommunitywebnet.com/.
Their site ‘modestly’ describes them as “the 21st century framework for Earth governance, and the only legitimate body with the power to make the laws of the land and to make the rules for the territory of the Earth”. It would be interesting to know from where they obtain this “legitimacy”. Both the email circulars and their site make … interesting … reading, green one-world new-ageism taken to a whole planet level.
Yep, there’s a lot of weird one-world politicking here, but I don’t recall the GC having consulted any of us about their “framework for Earth governance”.
There are wealth creators, who take resources and turn it into something more valuable, and wealth manipulators, who manipulate the movement of wealth. Wealth manipulators need to have control of most of the wealth in order to manipulate it. Wealth creators are a problem because the wealth they create is not under control.
Is it a wonder that huge banks ( they are different the small banks, it is a granularity issue) need to control manufacturing and commerce? What better way then by limiting access to natural resources and energy?
Gail Combs
November 24, 2011 at 12:24 pm
###
Whats with greenies and their love of Gum Trees. In the part of Kalifornia where I lived, eco-nuts where suing people who dared to cut down Gum Trees on their own property. The local papers would run stories critical of the evil tree killers. A few years ago, there were stories of some disease killing gum trees and the lefties were all in a panic.
Having a background in ecology, a single mom neighbor of mine asked if I could help her son with a Science Project. We did two. One was simple, setting up an aquarium with 9 guppies ( 6F and 3M, the proper ration for success). Then record the number of guppies split up in size groups, thus demonstrating exponential population growth.
The other was even simpler. We recorder the species we saw associated with two gum tree thickets, two live oak thickets, and two redwood thickets. The results were staggering. The only species that did well (as in thrived) under the gum trees was Toxicodendron diversilobum!
the teacher like the first one but did not like the second.
A strong ‘confirmation bias’ she has … beware, all, going ‘a bridge too far’ (as SMc puts it) in establishing perceived ‘connections’.
.
Mr Watson apparently has form – he was a big mover behind the Montreal Protocol on CFCs. A comment by David Wojik at Judy Curry’s place includes:
“And Jim D is quite right that the IPCC was modeled on the massive report that pushed the Montreal Protocol over the top politically. That was Robert Watson’s coup and he tried to replicate it, with lots of help of course. My view is that it has failed simply because it was too extreme.”
http://judithcurry.com/2011/11/24/emails/#more-5962
Slightly O/T, but interesting discussion about 2.0 in that thread. The Team were making insulting personal comments about JC in their emails as far back as 2005 – apparently she wasn’t co-operating enough with the party line even then.
Dr Robert Watson, whom Al Gore has described as his “Hero of the Planet” is currently Strategic Director of Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and Chief Scientific Adviser to Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, (DEFRA).
He was IPCC Chairman at Kyoto:
http://sovereignty.net/p/clim/kyotorpt.htm
“When asked in 1997 at Kyoto, as the new IPCC Chairman, about the growing number of climate scientists who challenged the conclusions of the UN that man-induced global warming was real and promised cataclysmic consequences, Watson responded by denigrating all dissenting scientists as pawns of the fossil fuel industry. “The science is settled” he said, and “we’re not going to reopen it here.”
The UK got him in 2007
5 July 2007 – International climate change expert is Defra’s new Chief Scientific Adviser
Prior to joining the World Bank, Dr. Watson was Associate Director for Environment in the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the President in the White House. Prior to joining the Clinton White House, Dr. Watson was Director of the Science Division and Chief Scientist for the Office of Mission to Planet Earth at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).”
He is one of Al Gore’s favourite scientists. He was appointed to his current jobs after the sudden announcement that founding Tyndall Director, Mike Hulme, was leaving for ” a year’s sabbatical”.
Co-incidentally Al Gore had been in the UK not long before Watson’s appointment, pushing An Inconvenient Truth. At that time he was advising then PM Gordon Brown.
26 March, 2007 – “Al Gore in Cambridge this weekend”
http://www.cambridgenetwork.co.uk/news/article/?objid=33269
Within a year of taking the job, Watson was in full scare mode:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/06/climatechange.scienceofclimatechange The UK should take active steps to prepare for dangerous climate change of perhaps 4C according to one of the government’s chief scientific advisers. In policy areas such as flood protection, agriculture and coastal erosion Professor Bob Watson said the country should plan for the effects of a 4C global average rise on pre-industrial levels. The EU is committed to limiting emissions globally so that temperatures do not rise more than 2C.
Watson-Gore Mutual Admiration Society
He was already in his new job when he praised Al Gore, as reported here:
http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2007/10/13/news/local/news02.txt (dead link)
“We need an advocate such as Al Gore to help present the work of scientists across the world,” said Bob Watson, former chairman of the IPCC and a top federal climate science adviser to the Clinton-Gore Administration.”
Watson’s World Bank leaving party:
http://info.worldbank.org/etools/BSPAN/PresentationView.asp?PID=2129&EID=963
Jack Gibbons, Watson’s former boss at the White House, read aloud a letter written to Watson by Al Gore. In this letter, Gore calls Watson his “hero of the planet,” commends him on his incredible career and contributions, and congratulates him on his new jobs. Gibbons also spoke about the challenges facing scientists whose scientific evidence is often viewed not as strict science but as efforts to steer policy.
He is advising UK politicians on policy, any wonder we are in the mess we are on energy?
385 of the emails mention Tyndall
Interesting, email 0001.txt, the first of the batch, has several references to Tyndall. That might be a thread I can grab and begin to pull on. I’ll work on a little project after our Thanksgiving festivities are over.
0040.txt
Apparently this is a discussion about who to select as Tyndall Centre Research Director (RD). Interesting set of desired characteristics:
I think this is the string that unravels things a bit, there are likely others, but this is a good place to start. I’ll see what I can unravel out of all of this after the weekend.
Rattus Norvegicus says:
“You really are trying too hard on this conspiracy thing.”
Is the Norway rat really so naive??
Ottmar Edenhofer WG-3 Co-Chair:
“One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”
That is an ongoing conspiracy to steal money based on a false scare.
Adam Smith understood conspiracies:
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.
The antidote:
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
– George Washington
Otherwise…
“In the end more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free.”
– Edward Gibbon (Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire)
And thanks to Gail Combs and the others who are turning over the rocks. We see lots of slugs and earwigs scurrying around.
Who was it that said creating a religion is the best business?
The AGW saga seems to be confirming it.
Nik
November 24, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Who was it that said creating a religion is the best business?
###
L Ron Hubbard …
1. When he wrote that email, Bob Watson chaired the IPCC. Perfectly legit, so.
2. Chomitz is on the editorial board of Climate Policy, and should speak out when he disagrees with Grubb.
DesertYote says:
November 24, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Gail Combs
November 24, 2011 at 12:24 pm
…..Having a background in ecology, a single mom neighbor of mine asked if I could help her son with a Science Project. We did two……
The other was even simpler. We recorder the species we saw associated with two gum tree thickets, two live oak thickets, and two redwood thickets. The results were staggering. The only species that did well (as in thrived) under the gum trees was Toxicodendron diversilobum!
the teacher like the first one but did not like the second.
___________________________________________
Oh thank YOU!
I had hints about how bad eucalyptus (gum) trees were but aside for comments in some gardening blogs had no real studies I could link to. It seems the information is verboten. No doubt because a big corporation and Al Gore want to introduce the darn tree all over the world.
Our North Carolina Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) is not nearly as bad (Goats love it)
Toxicodendron diversilobum, western poison oak, I can certainly do without. Poison Ivy will just about put me in the hospital and I have heard poison oak is worse.
Another interesting string is “Climate Change Centre” or CCC
Lots of names here. Early documents in the series are about the formation of it.
from 0014.txt
Holy crap! Here we have the people that have created the whole AGW thing to begin with leveraging it to completely re-engineer and “manage” the global economy. This is absolutely scary. You basically have UEA in the UK pulling the strings to completely change the world economy based on fear of a climate impact that their scientists can’t even privately agree is actually happening!
The “science” is only a small portion of the entire picture but it is the important enabling lever. NO WONDER it is so important for them to “adhere to the process”.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a conspiracy on a massive scale representing potentially trillions of dollars globally and what amounts to global economic decisions being made by a small group of insiders wielding coordinated “integrated” influence in various international and national policy making circles. This is HUGE.
Smokey says:
November 24, 2011 at 2:59 pm
“We see lots of slugs and earwigs scurrying around.”.
Why do they always start in Europe?
EU demands right to dictate national budgets
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/eu-launches-bid-rewrite-eurozone-budgets-032511566.html
These guys spend more time plotting schemes than plotting data.
This is maybe worse than Lysenkoism.
Eucalypts are superb trees…in their own environments. Here in Western Australia they have a wide range of uses, from food and medicine, to tools and building.
I would also argue that they are a weed anywhere outside of their normal range. It never ceases to amaze me of the stupidity of planting species way out of their normal habitat to become the next generation’s weed problem.
Richard S.J. Tol says:
November 24, 2011 at 3:15 pm
1. When he wrote that email, Bob Watson chaired the IPCC. Perfectly legit, so.
2. Chomitz is on the editorial board of Climate Policy, and should speak out when he disagrees with Grubb.
_______________________________________
It is not that Watson was IPCC chair it is that the return address on the e-mail is the World Bank and the entire history that goes along with it.
Maurice Strong was Advisor to the World Bank President from 1996 to 2002. You remember good old Maurice??? He started out working for Rockefeller/Saudi Oil in the 1950’s, was a Rockefeller foundation trustee from 1971 to 1978 and ended up as Chair of the First Earth Summit in 1972. That was the start of the Ozone scare (Back to Watson, co-chair of UNEP’s Ozone Panel) and Global Warming Scam.
Strong was also a member of the Commission on Global Governance from 1992 to 1996 while Watson chaired the Global Biodiversity Assessment.
The World Bank, The World Trade Organization and the United Nations ALL want “Global Governance” and they are using a whole bag of tricks to drive us into their trap of an unelected bureaucracy that rules our lives.
Direct from the World Bank Website
Makes it pretty darn clear the World Bank thinks of them self as part of a “Global Governance System”
If you want your children reduced to serfdom and living in poverty then fine keep the blinders on.
Tom Harley says:
November 24, 2011 at 4:50 pm
Eucalypts are superb trees…in their own environments. Here in Western Australia they have a wide range of uses, from food and medicine, to tools and building.
I would also argue that they are a weed anywhere outside of their normal range. It never ceases to amaze me of the stupidity of planting species way out of their normal habitat to become the next generation’s weed problem.
______________________________________
AMEN!
We are battling Kudzu (This is a house) http://www.theresilientearth.com/files/images/kudzu-covered-house.jpg
and fire ants http://www.extension.org/sites/default/files/w/3/32/FireAntMoundsInPasture.jpg
Both imports.
Boxwood, from England is another “escapee” that is a real nuisance. That is why I have goats. (another import)
I should add to Gail Combs’ post that if these UN/EU conspirators succeed in instituting a world government, we individual citizens will have no vote in that government – just like the EU today. Regulations will be arbitrarily decreed, and all we’ll be able to do is say BOHICA. [handy acronym finder]
Our savings and our assets will be taxed away from us without our consent. But like Orwell’s Animal Farm, there will be a relatively small ruling class of unelected bureaucrats, and a large class of serfs to provide the resources and pay the bills. That’s us, you and me.
But there will be voting. Each individual country will have a vote. How do you think Mali or Tuvalu or Kazakhstan or most of the UN’s 193 countries will vote on a motion to redistribute the West’s wealth “equally”?
Unaccountable UN kleptocrats, and their cronies at the WB and the IMF, and truly evil despots like George Soros, have plans for us and for our assets, my friends. And it is a conspiracy, because they plan in secret – while pretending they’re concerned about “carbon”. It’s only their cover story to get control.
You go girl! Follow the money and look for “world bank”, now why didn’t I think of that? Well done and thanks Gail. While obvious for decades that the World Bank and IMF always had their grubby mitts into everyone else’s pies I never thought of this angle. So easy in hindsight.
TRM says:
November 24, 2011 at 6:37 pm
“…World Bank and IMF always had their grubby mitts into everyone else’s pies…”
Yep! It’s all tied together.
IMF ‘credit line’ will funnel British taxpayers’ cash into stricken Italian economy .
“Working together: Mrs Merkel (left) and French President Nicolas Sarkozy are trying to hatch plans to introduce changes to EU treaties which will create central controls over fiscal policy in countries in the single currency”
http://ghanapolitics.net/World-News/imf-credit-line-will-funnel-british-taxpayers-cash-into-stricken-italian-economy.html
TRM: It’s bigger than just the World Bank. They are only a part of this. It’s much larger. It is the UN, it is manipulating policy in sovereign countries (note: I personally feel that the person responsible for this is Russian).
This is coordinated, it is integrated. It is investment, it is policy, it is indoctrination of children, it is huge. This is a matter of a group of people with a global governance agenda using “climate” as their lever to enact their political and economic policies. The evidence of this is right here in these emails. These people need to be purged from their positions of power. They have abused the public trust. They are “wolves in sheep’s clothing”. They would want for you to allow them to control you “for your own good”. The CRU needs not only be sacked, they need to be imprisoned, in my personal opinion, along with the IPCC, the CCC, and Tyndall. It reminds me of a bad Pink Floyd album We need a new sort of Fletcher Memorial Home to which we can send these people.
Instead of South American meat packing glitterati, we have European green energy glitterati. It’s sick and they are completely corrupt yet they probably believe they are the “good guys”.
What I wonder is how much of this international skullduggery can take place without the active participation of the US Congress? After all, they did reject Kyoto back in the Clinton administration, and they did reject Cap-and-Trade, if just barely, in 2009.
True, we are still supporting the UN, the IPCC, various development banks, and the World Bank. But conceivably a more conservative Senate can put the brakes on those, too. Do we really need to panic yet?
/Mr Lynn
Careful not to get hit with the “club of rome”, …..
Is this the same Robert Watson that told Spencer, around the time frame of the Montreal Protocol (before any of the GW “science” had been done), that the next step is regulation of CO2 emission?
crosspatch is right as usual.
According to http://adaptalready.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/140/
the following appears:
“In an interview with The Times Robert Watson said that all the errors exposed so far in the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) resulted in overstatements of the severity of the problem.
Professor Watson, currently chief scientific adviser to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said that if the errors had just been innocent mistakes, as has been claimed by the current chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, some would probably have understated the impact of climate change.”
There are NO bad Pink Floyd albums… only bad listeners!
As Pink Floyd would say “Welcome… Welcome to the Machine! GK
Well, some would say “The Final Cut” was a bad album. But if you were tuned in to the Falklands issue and the whole cold war thing at the time, it had a different meaning. But these people have become today exactly what THOSE people that were hated then were.
World Bank announced lst of June 2011. The carbon trading market would crash if it didn’t get more investors (like the BBC Pension fund?) And the result was the globe would experience 3 – 4 C increases by 2015. The South Sea Bubble of the 18th Century burst, leaving people bankrupt.
Now are we going to see a Carbon bubble about to burst? I believe carbon permits/credits are now minus value. What a smart move Australia, at putting $23 per tonne on a useless product no one will want to buy.
Gale and all others great work so far – Might I suggest that everybody keep pulling on this thread here are several points I want to make that might shread more on this problem we now face.
It seems a group of powerful people, governments, Soros’s, Russia, IMF, World Bank etc. have started to implment many different actions at once and it is speeding up fast.
1) It started with a plan AGW to Control Energy via Carbon Tax/Trades etc. as stated by a commentor (before any of the GW “science” had been done), that the next step is regulation of CO2 emission)
2) Now they are buying land and planting trees (hmm) how much land have they accumalated so far through these shell companies and were?
As a commentor notes – There is plenty of digging to do on both sets of emails. Not only on the World Bank but the IMF, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Chase ……There is also the Farmland grab that Scizzorbill mentioned: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/24/world-bank-global-warming-journals-and-cru/#comment-807254 It gets even better if you follow the strings.US universities in Africa ‘land grab’ Institutions including Harvard and Vanderbilt reportedly use hedge funds to buy land in deals that may force farmers out and did. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/08/us-universities-africa-land-grab. Again who is buying this land? Is it really a bunch of easlily consolidated holding companies?
3) US agencies are allowing more and more experimental planting of toxic trees (someone said large weeds) in fertial farm land areas commentor (Eucalypts are superb trees…in their own environments. Here in Western Australia they have a wide range of uses, from food and medicine, to tools and building. I would also argue that they are a weed anywhere outside of their normal range. It never ceases to amaze me of the stupidity of planting species way out of their normal habitat to become the next generation’s weed problem.)
4) And here at home in the US our own EPA, USDA, FDA, are implimenting crippling and controling regulating more and more effecting the means of production of everything? commentor And here is the US government involvement again. (This is the tree of choice for carbon credits an aggressive invasive plant) Genetically Modified Eucalyptus Trees Ignite Controversy Eucalyptus trees are good for making paper. They are terrible for just about everything else – soil, insects, plants, and water. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has just approved ArborGen’s request to plant various test forests across seven southern states. Nicknamed “America’s Largest Weed,” it comes as no surprise that communities are worried about introducing the eucalyptus into new environments, which include 300 acres of test sites in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas. …… Worse, they create toxic conditions in the soil and their canopies block out sunlight for underlying plants. They hog water and yet easily catch fire, relying on fire to spread their seeds (are they again trying to detroy us from within in this case our farm lands. remember we cut off water to the CA central Valley farm land and killed everything their – liberals) …..And we have not even talked about the agency like NLRB, Forced Unions, EPA cross state clean air regs.
My point is when you piece it all together the are setting up more than just financial global controls the are trying to control the means to live where you want, grow what you want, be an employee how you want, and the list is endless.
This is much much more in my opinion. And Obama at this point in time is their only hope of gettng this country on board. If it does not happen (by the 2012 election) then they will have a long wait for the next opening.
FOI.org thank you and Gale and all here thanks for digging just keep going follow the money and find out who is buying what where and why. They are nibbling at stuff everywhere and Clmategate 2.0 is going to force them to move quicker (I just read German and France want control over other EU countries budget and decisions) Not a single vote on that.
Late sorry for the typos.
I am not running this through word before I post I think the main points can be seen through my many typos…..
I always found these emails interesting.
http://www.au.agwscam.com/cru/emails.php?eid=152&filename=941483736.txt
From: Tom Wigley
To: Mike Hulme
Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL: CRU scenarios
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:15:36 -0700 (MST)
Cc: rwatson@worldbank.org
Dear Mike,
Thanks for your detailed response about your use of the SRES scenarios.
I’m sure it will be useful to Bob Watson. I wish I could explain better
what Bob’s problem entails — it is intensely political. My judgement is
that, if I tell you more, then this will indirectly help Bob in answering
the questions posed of him by Sensenbrenner; particularly should Bob need
to get back to you. Please note that this is confidential information.
Please note, too, that I am making my own judgement on this in the
interest of clarifying a complex issue. I have not been authorized by
Bob, or anyone associated with IPCC, to divulge this information.
The stated concern of Sensenbrenner is that the use of the SRES scenarios
prior to their ratification might, in some way, jeopardize IPCC’s
“independence and objectivity”. Sensenbrenner apparently uses as
guidelines in making his judgement “IPCC’s ‘Principles’ (as) approved in
Vienna, Austria in October 1998” together with “June 11 and 28, 1999
letters” giving “Appendix A to the Principles, which is entitled
‘Procedures for the Preparation, Review, Acceptance, Approval and
Publication of IPCC Reports’ (which was) approved … in April 1999”.
Sensenbrenner implies that these documents “raise concerns about the use
of preliminary IPCC material by Dr. Wigley and the Pew Center on Global
Climate Change for non-IPCC purposes, apparently without IPCC sanction”.
He considers that “these issues (are) significant because they relate
directly to the integrity of the IPCC process”.
In my case, I bypassed the “IPCC process” by obtaining permission, in
writing, from the 4 groups who produced the marker scenarios. I did not
acknowledge the CIESIN web site. In your case, apparently, you did. The
problem here is that this site stated very clearly that the data were “not
for citation or quotation”. Did you take notice of this?
My view is, and has always been, that contributors to such data sets or
distribution sites do not give up the intellectual property rights to
their own data. They could do so, of course, by signing appropriate
legal/copyright documents; but I have never done this, nor, as far as I
know, has anyone who contributed to the CIESIN site. This is why I went
to the individual authors in order to obtain permission to use their data
in my Pew report. I hope you can see that there is an important
difference between what you did and what I did. At face value, it would
appear that you have ignored the clearly-stated message that the CIESIN
site data were “not for citation or quotation”. (More on this point
below.)
You refer back to the July 1998 Bureau meeting agreeing that the
preliminary SRES scenarios (in your words) “could, and should, be used by
scientists”. From my reading of the background material, this is subtly
wrong — the Bureau only agreed that the data could be used by “the GCM
modeling community”. As it happens, I am part of that community, and I
acted as the interface between the scenarios and the rest of the NCAR GCM
team, providing SRES data to them in a form that could be used for our GCM
runs. I do not think you can claim to have filled this particular and
quite specific role in your work.
However, there are some interesting subtleties here that, I think,
vindicate your position. The issue is what is meant by the “GCM modeling
community”. In my view, anyone who uses GCM data either to provide data
sets to the impacts community or to carry out diagnostic studies directly
to improve GCMs is part of this community. (Note that this does *not*
allow one to include the impacts modelers as part of the GCM community.)
The two stated aspects are precisely what you do. Furthermore, SCENGEN
(which I presume you have used in your work) makes direct use of GCMs in
order to produce spatially-specific climate results based on any given
emissions scenarios (including the SRES scenarios). The SCENGEN method is
simply an alternative way of translating emissions scenarios into
GCM-based and GCM-type output. In my view, anyone using the SRES
scenarios in the development of SCENGEN, or applying SCENGEN to produce
spatially-specific climate results for dissemination to others, must be
included as part of the “GCM modeling community” referred to in the
Bureau’s agreement regarding use of the SRES scenarios. You may have
interpreted the Bureau’s statements even more broadly than this — but
this is of no consequence, since what you have done also falls squarely
within the more restricted interpretation that I have given above.
Nevertheless, I think it would have been wiser for you to have done things
the way I did, rather than to have acknowledged the CIESIN site as your
source.
The next issue, raised in your email, concerns the DDC. I have not looked
at this site, but I presume it duplicates what was on the CIESIN site. If
so, then its use (and the use of the preliminary SRES data) must be
controlled by the rules under which the DDC was set up and operates. The
key questions, therefore, are:
(1) Do these rules allow the use of these data by anyone?
(2) Do the SRES data, as it appears on this site, include the statement
“not for citation or quotation”?
(3) Does this make moot the whole issue of the use of the SRES scenarios?
In other words, if these data are available to all and sundry, with no
restrictions, through DDC, then no one can complain about their use.
(Although, in your case, since you acknowledged CIESIN rather than DDC,
you may still be subject to criticism.)
What this could amount to is a loophole in the IPCC rules of procedure.
Sensenbrenner might then argue that this loophole should be closed by
clarifying and tightening the rules for the DDC.
The bottom line is that I think you have done things in a perfectly
legitimate way. Even acknowledging the CIESIN site is legitimate, since
your primary application was in the production of climate change scenarios
as a member of the “GCM modeling community” as I believe this community
should be defined. You have then distributed these results to the global
climate impacts community who, in turn, will be feeding their results back
into the IPCC process through WGII. Your chosen method of distribution
(especially the WWF pathway) might be judged as less than ideal; but I
cannot see anything that you have done that goes explicitly or implicitly
against IPCC regulations.
Below the bottom line is the concern expressed by Sensenbrenner that these
actions (yours and mine) might, in some way, have undermined the
“integrity of the IPCC process”. It would be interesting to hear from
Sensenbrenner just how he thinks that might have happened. All we have
done is distribute credible and defensible scientific information. If
this information were to be in conflict with the currently best-available
science, this might be an issue of concern — but it is not. The more
such credible scientific information is distributed to the community,
particularly when it is presented in an easily-read, non-technical yet
authoritative way, the better. I can see no way that this can distort the
IPCC process. Some people, however, appear to think that it might. (A
less kind interpretation might be that they are just trying to slow down
the process by tying it up in legal and procedural knots — but I have no
evidence that this is what they are trying to do.)
I hope you can see from the above quotes and somewhat convoluted arguments
what a legal and political minefield this is. These sorts of issues do
not seem to arise outside of the USA; but here they take on an enormous
importance. One must tread very cautiously.
Cheers,
Tom
…………………………..
More at the link
The UN and World Bank have nothing on the EU and ECB.
Merkel said the proposals for more intrusive powers to enforce EU budget rules, including the right to take delinquent governments to the European Court of Justice, were a first step towards deeper fiscal union.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065800/Germany-France-plans-greater-fiscal-union-meeting-new-Italian-leader-time.html#ixzz1ehhefYq7
You do what we say or we take all your money away.
My above post is referenced to this
> > From: Tom Wigley
> > To: Mike Hulme
> > Cc: Robert Watson
> > Subject: CONFIDENTIAL: CRU scenarios
> > Date: 27 October 1999 19:02
> >
> > ****In strictest confidence****
> >
> > Dear Mike,
> >
> > Bob Watson contacted me last week asking about some climate results that
> > he apparently saw on the CRU and/or WWF web pages. The CRU web site
> > states that you have produced (and already distributed) a set of regional
> > scenario leaflets based on “new ghg emissions scenarios”, which I think
> is
> > what Bob may be concerned about.
> >
> > I hope that “new” does not refer to the SRES scenarios. You may recall
> > that, when I was in CRU, I showed you, in confidence, a letter from F.
> > James Sensenbrenner, chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives
> > Committee on Science, criticizing IPCC for “allowing” me to use these
> > scenarios in my Pew Report.
> >
> > Unfortunately, this issue is not going away, and any further perceived
> > “misuse” of the SRES scenarios prior to their IPCC ratification would
> > exacerbate the problem considerably.
> >
> > I do hope, therefore, that you have *not* used the SRES scenarios. I
> > expect not, since I explained the potential problems to you in July.
> > Please reassure me — and Bob.
> >
> > If, by chance, you *have* used the SRES scenarios, but not yet
> distributed
> > the WWF leaflets, I urge you to hold fire until you have contacted Bob.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> >
> > Tom
> >
… The green bay tree.
Gail,
re arborgen, they did their trials in NZ and some gm trees were worked on in aus,(they say…they canned them? hmm?
the guy managing, the arborgen show is?
an ex Monsanto man, and with the monsanto revolving door seen so easily in usa already I suspect somewhere they have a large slice of pie still in this.
as to bluegums, well they grow fast but never seen the 20feet a year from stumps here, maybe usa has better water supply. I can say theyve ruined already poor land and decimated communities in aus, and now all the tax havens have fallen over we have heaps of acres of em that no one wants.(they arent gm,,maybe, just a bloody nusiance and fire hazard.)
Getting this information disseminated to the public including what it means in lay terms will be vigorously opposed by the ‘elite’ and their accomplices, the media.
Why Eucalyptus? Surely not because of 20′ annual growth. Hell, our own cottonwoods come close enough to that. They work for paper – don’t they? There must be some overriding advantage to selecting an alien invasive species and the significant environmental risk to their introduction. GK
” Shevva says: November 25, 2011 at 12:32 am
You do what we say or we take all your money away. ”
Actually it is the opposite. Apparently (rumor) the Germans have said “do it our way or we go back to the Deutschemark and you can have the Euro”. They are the only country that could leave the Euro and have their native currency go up in value. Everyone else would instantly be 10% of previous value.
John says:
November 24, 2011 at 11:58 pm
….My point is when you piece it all together they are setting up more than just financial global controls they are trying to control the means to live where you want, grow what you want, be an employee how you want, and the list is endless.
…. just keep going follow the money and find out who is buying what where and why. They are nibbling at stuff everywhere and Clmategate 2.0 is going to force them to move quicker (I just read German and France want control over other EU countries budget and decisions) Not a single vote on that.
_____________________________________
The takeover is very much by stealth and we do not even know it or would recognize it.
A good example is the “Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010” The Act actually turns control of our food supply over to the World TRADE Organization.
Since it was created in 1995 the WTO, in conjunction with the OIE and FAO branches of the United Nations, have been writing regulations covering every aspect of farming. The USDA and FDA have been partners in writing these soon to be regulations ever since.
FAO:http://www.fao.org/prods/gap/
OIE: http://www.oie.int/doc/en_ListDocument.php?line_0%5Bvalue%5D=3573905&line_0%5Bfield%5D=descripteur&typerec=Index
Using the new 1996 HACCP regs and orchestrated food contamination scares, the public was hoodwinked into asking for new laws thus opening the door to international regulation of the US food supply and the death by Red Tape of family farms in America.
SEE:
Serious Flaw in USDA’s HACCP Food-safety System: http://mfu.org/node/276
Shielding the Giants: http://www.whistleblower.org/storage/documents/Shielding_the_Giant_Final_PDF.p
Section in the Actual Law:
The USA bureaucrats are in on the treason, and it IS TREASON to undermine our Constitution.
Straight from the FDA a few years (2008?) ago:
Here are some of FDA’s viewpoints on your right to procure food expressed in its response on ‘freedom of food choice’ during the FTCLDF lawsuit
As several others have said this is HUGE and very deeply embedded in our governments, universities, corporations and financial institutions. I am very much afraid if we do not fight this NOW we will wake up to find all our freedoms gone having been taken by stealth under various pretexts such as “Save the Children” and “Save the Environment”
ozspeaksup says:
November 25, 2011 at 4:15 am
Gail,
re arborgen, they did their trials in NZ and some gm trees were worked on in aus,(they say…they canned them? hmm?
the guy managing, the arborgen show is?
an ex Monsanto man, and with the monsanto revolving door seen so easily in usa already I suspect somewhere they have a large slice of pie still in this.
as to bluegums, well they grow fast but never seen the 20 feet a year from stumps here, maybe usa has better water supply…..
________________________________________
The 20 ft was from a commenter at a garden blog. And yes we do have a good water supply in some places in the USA.
The person could be commenting from his own experience (I think he did) or it could be a misquote from the document below. Either way that type of growth is going to be a royal pain for subsistence farmers and the oil/fire hazard makes slash and burn a problem.
That was California. A bit more search and we find far wetter Florida.
This is NOT a nice tree to dump on African and South American third world farmers.
Many congratulations to Gail Combs for bringing these important connections to the minds of so many critical thinkers who read this blog. It is great to see her get credit for her insights and extensive knowledge of the FACTS.
I don’t think there is “confirmation bias” on her part – not at all. What is that – a polite way of calling someone a “conspiracy theorist” without actually using that pejorative and offensive term?
When you are more fully aquainted with the facts (as Gail undoubtedly is) and they fit together like a jigsaw then you know you’re looking at the real picture because the bits wouldn’t fit together so perfectly otherwise.
The climate “science” part of the jigsaw is only one part of the picture revealed when the whole jigsaw is put together.
G. Karst says:
November 25, 2011 at 6:53 am
Why Eucalyptus? Surely not because of 20′ annual growth. Hell, our own cottonwoods come close enough to that. They work for paper – don’t they? There must be some overriding advantage to selecting an alien invasive species and the significant environmental risk to their introduction. GK
_______________________________
Eucalyptus produces an oil that “mists” the ground and keeps other seeds from sprouting. The oil also makes it so nasty tasting even a goat will not eat it. Therefore I think it is equivalent to “salting the earth” If people can OWN land and grow food that they can trade for what they need, barter if need be and they are free. Destruction/control of the food supply has been used in war for centuries. It was what Stalin did in 1932 – 33 to break the Ukrainians. It was what the USA did to break the American Indians ~ Literally wiped out the buffalo that was their food supply.
Heck the original 2009 food safety bill in the USA had a clause that would allow the FDA regulatory power over home gardens. It will only take ONE sentence added to another bill to slip that provision back into the law. http://www.examiner.com/scotus-in-washington-dc/trojan-horse-law-the-food-safety-modernization-act-of-2009
What many do not know is that it is also what was done to the USA during after WWII to bring us to heel by destroying our farming and towns and our culture. SEE: http://www.opednews.com/articles/History-HACCP-and-the-Foo-by-Nicole-Johnson-090906-229.html
This is whole mess is not something that sprung up all of a sudden. The fight for freedom has been ongoing because there has always been a group who want power and control. Often they are the same families over decades and even centuries. These people have found it is far far safer and more lucrative to sit back and FUND the princes and presidents and wars (often both sides) that to be the leaders on the firing line.
“…the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War.” ~
Benjamin Franklin in his Autobiography
Fiat Money History in the US: http://kwaves.com/fiat.htm
UK & USA Central Banks: http://www.eidolonspeak.com/?p=246
An interesting side note: International Economic Club of China (Note Al Gore, Maurice Strong etc as speakers) http://www.chinaecoclub.org/home.asp
More on what Franklin had to say about bankers:
The bankers have been taking back control ever since.
Kitefreak says:
November 25, 2011 at 11:37 am
Many congratulations to Gail Combs for bringing these important connections to the minds of so many critical thinkers who read this blog. It is great to see her get credit for her insights and extensive knowledge of the FACTS.
I don’t think there is “confirmation bias” on her part…..
__________________________________
Thank you.
It just seems that every time I looked into a problem, CAGW, Animal ID, Food crisis, Foreclosure crisis, US loss of Manufacturing/economic crisis… there is a banker/financier on the other end of the string manipulating the circumstances to his advantage or more often CREATING the problem.
What struck me is how long term the plans were. These guys do not think in terms of quarters or five year plans but in terms of DECADES long plans or more and that frightens the heck out of me.
Looky here. The nice people at the World Bank are trying to help the little people “visualize” what they need to be saved from. And that nice man at the BBC is helping too!
16:39 UK time, Wednesday, 23 November 2011
@BBCRBlack via Twitter
Visualising climate change with the World Bank’s new online tool http://t.co/xeZtuqqZ
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/richardblack/
“What struck me is how long term the plans were. These guys do not think in terms of quarters or five year plans but in terms of DECADES long plans or more and that frightens the heck out of me.”
———————-
It needs to be stopped. Think of the children.
I mean, I’ll probably be dead when these evil conspirators may or may not have their evil way, given their very long term planning approach to world domination. But my children will inherit their hellish future, if the control is not taken away from them.
First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984).
Thank you Gail. This caused me to revisit a summary I found a long time ago.
http://heartland.org/press-releases/2009/03/08/climate-alarm-what-we-are-against-and-what-do
When I archived this two years ago the group http://www.iigcc.org/ claimed they represented 4 trillion pounds to invest in climate change.
Today their website says: “currently over 70 members, including some of the largest pension funds and asset managers in Europe, representing around €6trillion.”
also archived:
…..four groups representing more than 190 investors with more than US $13 trillion of assets – Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), Investor Group on Climate Change (IGCC) and the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI). http://www.unepfi.org/signatories/index.html
At Durban, according to the above link, they intend to promote three ideas:
• Designing a Green Climate Fund which is effective in unlocking private investment for low-carbon and climate-resilient growth in developing countries
• Mobilising the risk management skills of the insurance industry to address loss and damage from the impacts of climate change
• Building an effective global funding mechanism for forest-based climate change mitigation
Aside from investment banks here is a partial list of multinationals that support/promote AGW
Apple
BP America
Chrysler
Coca-Cola
Dell
E-Bay
Ford Motor Company
Gap Inc.
General Electric
General Motors
Google
Hewlett Packard
Nike
PepsiCo
“Why?” You ask.
This letter helps explain and should be a centerpost of any political movement to slow the AGW movement. http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~shorwitz/open_letter.htm
For example, on Wed, Nov 18, 2009, Coke Submit wrote in response to my email criticizing their motives:
:
Thank you for your recent email message,
At The Coca-Cola Company, we recognize that the implications of climate change are profound and wide-ranging, with expected impacts on biodiversity, water resources, public health, business and agriculture. We believe business can play a powerful role in helping drive climate solutions through innovation and competition, as well as by taking measures to reduce our own carbon footprint.
We are committed to working alongside government and civil society to address the root causes of climate change, and one way we have demonstrated that commitment is through our endorsement of the Copenhagen Communiqué.
We are among more than 500 companies in more than 60 countries that have endorsed the Copenhagen Communiqué, which calls on world leaders to agree to “an ambitious, robust and equitable global deal on climate change that responds credibly to the scale and urgency of the crisis facing the world today.” The signatories to the Communiqué agree that business will suffer if credible solutions are not found.
For our part, the Coca-Cola system continually works to reduce our carbon footprint by implementing new technologies and conservation measures for our refrigeration equipment, our packaging, our fleet and our bottling operations. For more information on these efforts, please visit the Environment section of our corporate web site.
If you have additional questions or comments to share, please feel free to contact us again.
Sheila
Industry and Consumer Affairs
The Coca-Cola Company
On a slightly tangential issue, I found it surprising that the Royal Society gave the CRU a clean bill of health after ClimategateI.
One expects hanky-panky from governments, UN, World Bank, IMF and other such highly political bodies, and financial companies, but why was it that a premier scientific institution- the Royal Society, did not have any doubts about the quality of the research, or the people conducting it.
I just wonder if there is any reference to the Royal Society in these emails?
file=0744
“Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:17:21 +000 ???
To: Mike Hulme
From: Nicola Sheard
Subject: Fwd: Climate Change Adaptation Fund
From: “michael see”
To:
Cc: ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
Subject: Climate Change Adaptation Fund
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 18:05:05 -0000
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
27 November 2000
Dear All
Proposal for a Climate Change Adaptation Fund to assist countries vulnerable to effects
of climate change/global warming – in the presence or absence of Kyoto Protocol
ratification
/ Communication 2
Copies: Dr Klaus Tofper, Mrs Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel (UNEP); Michael Z. Cutajar
(UNFCCC)
Dear All,
I have met Henderson Investors this afternoon to discuss the proposal.
Summary of the meeting with Henderson –
1) Henderson expressed an interest in the proposal
2) It is thought that governments would be the prime donors or investors in the fund,
rest would be
large corporates
3) Assuming a 70/30 or 60/40 humanitarian aid to investment-driven portfolio, the
investment
proportion could focus on actual projects or equity investments in quoted companies
4) The next step would be for CARE Denmark to put forward a proposal to Henderson on how
CARE and Henderson could work together – and other parties – this could culminate in
an
application to UNFCCC Bonn for observer status certification of CARE to participate
in the
negotiating sessions of UNFCCC – i.e. adaptation fund proposition.
_________________
My second report is as follows:
Proposed format of application by CARE International (Denmark) to UNFCCC –
Application for observer status accreditation as a Non-Governmental Organisation in
UNFCCC negotiating sessions (a standard form may have to be completed)
CDM refers to Clean Development Mechanism (art. 12), ET Emissions Trading (art. 17), JI
Joint Implementation (art. 6)
CARE operates in 64 developing and underdeveloped countries – its OECD member countries
are
Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, Norway, UK and USA. The
Secretariat is based in Brussels.
– strategic locations
22 Least Developed Countries – Asia, Middle East, C&E Europe, South America, Haiti
– 44 projects in Africa; 25 projects in Asia; 19 projects Middle East, C&E Europe, 1999
– very strong international reputation and working relationship with developing country
governments
– capable of influencing both “North” and “South” governments on the concept of a
global climate
change adaptation fund – irrespective of Kyoto Protocol – i.e. if mandatory
contributions from
KP’s flexible mechanisms not forthcoming, voluntary donations could finance fund –
many blue
chip companies could contribute to market their global citizen image
– CARE Denmark is to employ two personnel in December – part of their remit is to look
at the
impact of climate change in developing countries
– CARE International’s global presence enables supply of real-time information on the
impacts of
climate change in LDCs and developing countries
(a) to construct a vulnerability index – humanitarian and
social-economic-linked – which
can be combined with weather effects data from the Tyndall Centre
(b) act as processing centre for the deployment of humanitarian aid once
a major
climatic disaster is reported – the needs basis may have to be
jointly approved
by the UN/UNFCCC/UNEP. ”
A bankers wet dream.
Perhaps of interest to Gail in her work
http://www.redd-monitor.org/2011/11/23/ten-of-the-worst-redd-type-projects/
kate65 says:
November 25, 2011 at 2:53 pm
This letter helps explain and should be a centerpost of any political movement to slow the AGW movement. http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~shorwitz/open_letter.htm
__________________________
Thanks for the link. As I said my anger toward the bankers is not some idiotic “Conspiracy Theroy” but a matter of following the threads.
Steven Horwitz got part of it but not all of it.
During the Clinton Admin. five banking laws were passed that tore down the protections set up after the Great Depression to prevent a second depression. These laws set-up the mess that link talks about.
However the real killer, the key to the mess that Steven Horwitz missed, Matt Taibbi picked up on. That is the CDSs that were left unregulated that allowed banks to “Insure” dicey mortgages for very little money down with AIG. The US government bailed out AIG so they could pay their “Gambling debt” when they started to go belly up after too many foreclosures because they did not charge enough $$$ to cover their side of the Credit Default Swap (CDS) gamble.
On top of that Obama got into the act with his phony “Loan Modification Program” People who were NOT in foreclosure but were having to struggle to pay their mortgages were enticed into the program. The government b-rat set up a modification plan with lower payments. After the bank lost the paper work several times thereby stalling for about a year, the bank would decide if there was one or more CDSs on the mortgage. If there was the bank sent the “mark” a letter saying they did not “qualify” for the program and now the mark owed all the amounts not paid, interest, penalties AND LAWYERS FEES, if the amount due was not paid within thirty days they would foreclose.
The Amount due was usually over $10,000. If the “mark” managed to beg, borrow or steal enough to cover the amount, the bank started the second dance. The bank would state they could not give the exact amount owed because they did not have a firm figure for the “Lawyer Fees” As the time closes in on the thirty day foreclosure date, the mark then has to hire a lawyer to get the [self-snip] bank to come up with the amount owed.
To add insult to injury all the money “loaned” by these banks was created on the spot out of “Pixie Dust” by an accounting entry!!! http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/03/us-banks-operate-without-reserve.html
Meanwhile the Media [owned by JP Morgan] is lamenting that not enough people are “taking advantage” of the Loan modification program…. GRRRrrrr
References:
Quick index of banking laws: http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/important/index.html
Matt T. Articles:
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/3/25/aig_and_the_big_takeover_matt
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/22-6
Nitty gritty:
http://www.realtytrac.com/content/news-and-opinion/how-the-aig-bailout-could-be-driving-more-foreclosures-4861
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/meet-foreclosure-experts-hair-stylists-walmart-floor-workers-and-assembly-lines-workers-all-
J P Morgan and the Media: http://www.newsandtech.com/dougs_page/article_f3a45be0-4717-11df-aace-001cc4c03286.html
John I am cross posting this to the World Bank thread so it does not get lost. Given the burning death of Friday M. It is especially telling.
__________________________
john says: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/26/newsbytes-durban-the-new-wait-and-see-diplomacy/#comment-809209
E-mail 0225
date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:57:52 +0800
from: “Helen”
subject: Re: Carbon trading in the Middle East
to:
[cid:REDACTED]
Dear Colleague,
If you’ve been buying or selling carbon credits in the last few years, you would know that about 80% of carbon credits today are coming from projects in only two countries – China and India.
Though these two giants still present attractive investment opportunities for you, having your carbon offsets sourced from only two countries can be problematic. Issues like China’s unofficial price floor, or difficulties managing Indian CDM projects, are now driving many project developers and credit buyers to seek other host countries for their carbon offsets.
Here are 3 reasons why you should be looking at the Middle East & North Africa (MENA) region as your next big source of carbon credits:
1) The countries in the region house sizeable energy-intensive and carbon-intensive industries such as energy and metals.
2) Some of the world’s wealthiest investors are based in the Middle East. They can help finance your climate change mitigation projects.
3) Middle Eastern and North African governments, investors and local industry leaders are now more open and interested in the benefits of carbon offset projects and sustainable investments.
As the carbon market explodes in the next few years to become the world’s biggest market overall, wouldn’t you want to be the first to get into this region, rich in opportunities but so difficult to get into?
Meet the people who will determine how carbon finance takes shape in the Middle East! Catch opening remarks from the UNFCCC and keynote addresses by Karan Capoor of the World Bank Carbon Finance Unit, Sam Nader, Director of Masdar Carbon (Abu Dhabi Future Energy Company), Dr. Armin Sandhoevel, Chairman of the UNEP FI Climate Change Working Group, and Dr. Tilak Doshi, Executive Director for Energy of the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre.
This will be a sold out event! Reserve your seats before August 23, 2008 to enjoy our early bird specials!
To register, please contact me today. You may call me at (65)REDACTED, fax (65) 6749 7293, or email [1]REDACTED. Visit us online at [2]www.alleventsgroup.com/emissions.
See you in Abu Dhabi.
Warmest Regards,
Garcon Thomas Bernavil
Marketing Manager
Tel: (65)REDACTED
Fax: (65)REDACTED
Email: [3]REDACTED
Website: [4]www.alleventsgroup.com/emissions
___________________________________
Article by Garcon Thomas Bernavil is the same as the email: http://www.free-press-release.com/news/200808/1217918750.html
He shows up again here: http://www.ifcci.com/docs/newsletters/business_newsletters/2009/FEB%202009/Newsletter_February%209th_2008.html
Japan for sustainability: http://www.japanfs.org/en_/outside/event.html
It starts getting really fun here:
Coal-To-Liquids Project Management Event Description
Coal EventsMine: http://coal.infomine.com/events/showeventcontent.asp?id=11201
Geotechnical Assessment – For Open Pit Mines in Tropical Countries: http://coal.infomine.com/events/showeventcontent.asp?id=11203
Asia Pacific Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Forum 2009
The China government is pushing for commercialization of its abundant coalbed methane (CBM) reserves as a clean energy source to drive its rapid economic growth…. http://www.free-press-release.com/news-asia-pacific-coal-bed-methane-cbm-forum-2009-1254212482.html
Asia Pacific Natural Gas Vehicles Association
SUMMARY ON THE 2ND ANNUAL CNG-NGV ASIA PACIFIC FORUM & 1ST GREEN HIGHWAYS ’09 TEAM…
http://www.angva.org/main.asp?pageid=48&newsid=66&Access=
Bernavil works for AllEvents Group from Milano Italy. It is a group who organizes international forms mainly dealing with the Far East and Africa.
When you look at who runs the World Wildlife Fund you see big corporations and banks (GE, Goldman Sachs, Cargill, etc., etc.) and when you look at some of the things the WWF does – i.e. collaborating with Monsanto to greenwash the company – you’re left with one conclusion: the WWF is a public relations firm created by and for rich corporations. They hide behind the WWF to make themselves look politically correct and very green and they’ve been pushing the climate change scare for years.
Is there a connection between the corporate greens at WWF and the World Bank? If someone can connect the dots for me I’d appreciate it, I lack the time to do the research.
I don’t follow the climate circus on a daily basis like WUWT readers so sometimes what I read here goes over my head. Is there a good ‘climate change fraud for dummies’ article that I can print and read in the bus? I know there are a couple of books but I’d prefer a shorter version.
Michael says:
November 26, 2011 at 11:23 am
When you look at who runs the World Wildlife Fund you see big corporations and banks (GE, Goldman Sachs, Cargill, etc., etc.) and when you look at some of the things the WWF does – i.e. collaborating with Monsanto to greenwash the company – you’re left with one conclusion: the WWF is a public relations firm created by and for rich corporations. They hide behind the WWF to make themselves look politically correct and very green and they’ve been pushing the climate change scare for years.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=0876250531.txt&search=Bank
1997 WWF email very annoyed at Japan re Kyoto which was sent to Hulme but by whom blocked out, in it WWF getting their troops to get “progessive businesses” to join in condemnation:
This whole thing is incredible. I loved the Solar threads here with Leif. Now i’ve got a new favourite: Cash threads with Gail. Agent FOIA gambled a great risk—he/she waited for this anniversary to release the next tranche of emails assumnig he’d be alive to do so. I wouldn’t put it past this conglomeration- deluded into thinking no one should stand in the way of them saving the planet- into investigating FOIA and perhaps ‘intervening’. The access to the emails points to a inside job. We know it was dumped into a Russian server. The few who are the web gate keepers should be able trace the time and location of the uploads. What is incredible is the feat was repeated. The leaks derailed the Copenhagen meeting Sark, Merk, Brown and O’bama. The combined secret service power of these nations seems unable to ‘deal with’ FOIA. A clue to his/her identity. Who ever it is needs to make provision for the password release incase of a visit from the heavies. The Climate Science perversion is total. Why would ‘Russia’ want to derail the AGW steam roll. Who………………..without the protection of state, would wait a year and repeat the release of these damaging emails.
I wonder where this “Globe International” fits into the picture?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8469883/Lobbyists-who-cleared-Climategate-academics-funded-by-taxpayers-and-the-BBC.html#disqus_thread
Thanks Gail for the time and effort you have put in that shows up the scoundrels and fraudsters.
Speaking of “scoundrels and fraudsters” SPREAD THIS SO IT BECOMES VIRAL
History of Money: The Money Masters 1/2
Thanks Gail for the time and effort you have put in that shows up the scoundrels and fraudsters.
Speaking of “scoundrels and fraudsters”in the U.N, the World Bank,Global Government and the W.W.F etc.
SPREAD THIS SO IT BECOMES VIRAL
History of Money: The Money Masters 1/2
“SPREAD THIS SO IT BECOMES VIRAL”
Shouldn’t that be ANTIDOTAL?
Michael wrote: They (GE, Goldman Sachs, Cargill, Monsanto) hide behind the WWF to make themselves look politically correct and very green and they’ve been pushing the climate change scare for years.
I submit their actions are designed to crush any competition. And it has worked. Monsanto has a strangle-hold on farm seed, for example. Monsanto also co-sponsored Amy Klobuchar’s “food safety” bill regulating all food production.
Gail: Did you watch those links to Youtubes?? What do you think of them?? I know very little of economics. I foud the quotes rather alarming. Is the ideas in them fringe?
http://sppiblog.org/news/a-nest-of-carbon-vipers
The Carbon Rating Agency openly boasts of its highly influential management team and ratings committee: “which includes ratings experts, financial market professionals, UN climate change negotiators and former senior managers from development agencies such as the World Bank, a combination which ensures that the full range of risks facing carbon projects are taken into account by the ratings process.”