World Bank, Global Warming, Journals, and CRU

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

http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4953

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

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
125 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Roy UK
November 24, 2011 12:26 pm

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?).

thorne
November 24, 2011 12:30 pm

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!

dave38
November 24, 2011 12:35 pm

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

Sean Peake
November 24, 2011 12:36 pm

Gail, your discovery helps explain the content of the READ ME file and what FIOA wants to expose

crosspatch
November 24, 2011 12:42 pm

What is the going price for a few votes for or against to keep the “Cause” rolling along.

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.

Steve C
November 24, 2011 12:53 pm

Very nice work, Gail! Quite a can of worms you’ve dug up.
RockyRoad says: (November 24, 2011 at 11:22 am):

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.

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/.

The Global Community is defined as being all that exits or occurs at any location at any time between the Ozone layer above and the core of the planet below. It is defined around a given territory, that territory being the planet as a whole, as well as a specific population, which is all life forms on Earth.”

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”.

DesertYote
November 24, 2011 1:10 pm

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?

DesertYote
November 24, 2011 1:33 pm

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.

November 24, 2011 1:46 pm

Rattus Norvegicus says November 24, 2011 at 9:40 am
..
[Gail] You really are trying too hard on this conspiracy thing.

A strong ‘confirmation bias’ she has … beware, all, going ‘a bridge too far’ (as SMc puts it) in establishing perceived ‘connections’.
.

johanna
November 24, 2011 2:01 pm

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.

Dennis A
November 24, 2011 2:35 pm

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?

crosspatch
November 24, 2011 2:41 pm

385 of the emails mention Tyndall

crosspatch
November 24, 2011 2:46 pm

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.

crosspatch
November 24, 2011 2:53 pm

0040.txt

Mike,
It would be worth consulting Peter (in US at the moment) & Martin. I would
also suggest consulting Tim O’R who knows many in big business & Andy
Watson who is well-connected. Characteristics are a good starting point. We
may have to consider special arrangements , but I would regard based in
London as a real downer – OK for say 2 days per week.
Names – Gell-man is how it’s spelt, I think. Grubb – I am very anti (but I
wonder if the RCs have him in mind? Hunt – I am less anti after the TSUNAMI
meeting – he is making a genuine attempt to ‘open out’. Additional name –
Bob Watson. Another long-shot (& I find myself surprised that I am
suggesting this) – Geoff Boulton (I’ll update on what he’s been up to).
I’ll sound out Martin. Tim etc in time for your return on Tuesday.

Apparently this is a discussion about who to select as Tyndall Centre Research Director (RD). Interesting set of desired characteristics:

>Characteristics
>—————
>Good academic reputation
>able to be impactive with business
>Innovator/integrator/inspirational
>Must complement my strengths, not duplicate
>I must be happy we can work together
>

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.

November 24, 2011 2:59 pm

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.

Nik
November 24, 2011 2:59 pm

Who was it that said creating a religion is the best business?
The AGW saga seems to be confirming it.

DesertYote
November 24, 2011 3:13 pm

Nik
November 24, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Who was it that said creating a religion is the best business?
###
L Ron Hubbard …

November 24, 2011 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.

Gail Combs
November 24, 2011 3:16 pm

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.

crosspatch
November 24, 2011 3:26 pm

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

Business/industry links are important, as are links with relevant
institutes abroad. We anticipate writing in some industrial/business partners.

Adoption of clean technology (includes ‘alternative’ energy sources, and
removal of C from emissions). In particular, clean technologies and
solutions for developing countries link into identifying business
opportunities. The impacts of clean technologies – landscape/lifestyle
valuation. Incorporation (technological) into existing
infrastructure/supply networks.

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”.

crosspatch
November 24, 2011 3:31 pm

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.

D. King
November 24, 2011 3:54 pm

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

Robert of Ottawa
November 24, 2011 4:41 pm

These guys spend more time plotting schemes than plotting data.

Robert of Ottawa
November 24, 2011 4:44 pm

This is maybe worse than Lysenkoism.

Tom Harley
November 24, 2011 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.