Climategate: It’s all a HOAX

Global Warming has been debated for many years. The believers of this religion serve to deliver the message that humans are destroying the planet. Specifically, Americans are single-handedly causing the warming of the earth through innovation and technological advancement.  Al Gore has made millions of dollars as the Supreme Leader of the organized movement to force Americans to call the HazMat Team if they break a light bulb in their home.  He has nudged his propaganda disguised as education into the public school system in America and the mainstream media perpetuates the movement with story after story of the fate of the world at the hands of her inhabitants. 

Critics have argued that the theory behind Global Warming just doesn’t make since. Many have questioned the scientific data used in the claims. Average citizens scratch their heads when they hear Global Warming reports on the evening news; following the weather report of record lows and the earliest snow fall in 50 years. Common folk have often asked. “ If God created the earth and man, how is it that human advancement would have the ability to destroy the planet?”  Many Christians are confident in their faith and belief that God is responsible for temperature changes and to think humans could affect it is nothing short of arrogant.

Last Thursday, so many of the Global Warming questions were answered by computer hackers who managed to obtain files from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) based at the University of East Anglia. A very large file (61 mb) was downloaded and posted on the internet. 

THINK:  Have you heard this story in the mainstream media?

The Director of the CRU, Phil Jones, has acknowledged the files that contain papers, documents and emails, are real.  The emails are particularly damaging and offer very clearly the degree to which the data and information offered to the public has been manipulated.    Included in the damaging evidence are prominent names in the Global Warming Scientific Community:  Phil Jones, Benjamin Santer, Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, Jonathan Overpeck, Ken Briffa and Tom Wigley.  This small, elite, community was named by Professor Wegman in his report to the National Academy of Science (NAS).

When questioned about the data and methodology used to obtain it, Phil Jones has been quoted as saying, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” 

The information revealed in the emails includes evidence as to how Professor Wegman;s  “community of scientists” published and peer-reviewed each other’s work.  The emails show how the group controlled the process including the manipulation of major journals like Science and Nature. One of the “community members” was Andrew Weaver, editor of the Journal of Climate.

The group went on to control the global weather data used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), including the crucial chapters and preparation of the Summary for PolicyMakers (SPM).   They also had a left wing channel to the New York Times through Andy Revkin.  The emails between Revkin and the community are extremely telling and should at the very least call into question his journalistic integrity. 

Here are samples of the emails exposed:

Manipulation of evidence:

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Suppression of evidence:

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:

Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back…

The following note is part of a long series of communications that discusses how to squeeze scientists who disagree out of the peer review process.

“This was the danger of always criticizing the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice!”

The complete file download is available here. 

While the information revealed in the file was obtained through e-mail theft by hackers, it does not change the facts contained therein.  Science is dependent on accurate and complete data that can be replicated.  The Global Warming hysteria appears to have been being pushed forward on unproven theory and manipulated and false data.

THINK:  Have you heard from anyone in the media, Congress or the president call for an immediate investigation into this matter?  Has there been a call to stop all taxes, tax increases and regulations related to “saving the planet?”

Keep a close eye on this one. The media is investigating the whistle-blower, not the truth behind the hoax.  Those who seek to control through the myth of global warming are not going to go away quietly.

Stimulus Saves Jobs in Nonexistent Districts

President Obama is claiming success through his $787 billion stimulus package by way of the administration’s website recovery.gov. Visitors to the website will find that hundreds of jobs have been created or saved all across the country. Here are some of the statistics reported by recovery.gov:

• $34 million in stimulus money has been spent in Arizona’s 86th congressional district in a project for the Navajo Housing authority, which is actually located in the 1st congressional district.
• In Oklahoma, recovery.gov lists more than $19 million in spending — and 15 jobs created.
• In Iowa, it shows $10.6 million spent – and 39 jobs created.
• In Connecticut’s 42nd district, the Web site claims 25 jobs created with zero stimulus dollars.

The problem is these districts do not exist.

The list of spending and job creation in fictional congressional districts goes beyond just the 50 states. Stimulus money and job creation and saving extend to U.S. territories as well. Here is what territories outside the U.S, have received from tax payers:

• $68.3 million spent and 72.2 million spent in the 1st congressional district of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
• $8.4 million spent and 40.3 jobs created in the 99th congressional district of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
• $1.5 million spent and .3 jobs created in the 69th district and $35 million for 142 jobs in the 99th district of the Northern Mariana Islands.
• $47.7 million spent and 291 jobs created in Puerto Rico’s 99th congressional district.

The Washington Examiner has been tracking stories from media outlets who report the fake job claims being made by the Obama administration. To date, their investigation reports that of the 640,000 jobs saved or created by the stimulus package, 75,343 do not exist. The Washington Examiner provides an interactive “Bogus Jobs” map for Americans to track the bogus jobs around the country.

President Obama sold Americans on the $787 billion stimulus bill by creating a sense of urgency along with his promise that unemployment would never rise above 7.8%. The current rate of unemployment in the U.S. is 10.2%. President Obama also promised Americans that the U.S. economy would provide 138.6 million jobs. As is stands, Obama has fallen short by 7.8 million.

THINK: The president’s promises have come up short and the administration has taken to reporting false information in order to make the situation look better than it truly is.  In an average business in America, what would an employer do with this? What would an annual performance review look like for the employee who engaged in falsifying data?

DO YOU TRUST THIS MAN? Do you trust the people he surrounds himself with?

Documentary Answers the Question: Global Warming Science or Religion?

A new documentary that seeks to debunk the environmental extremists Global Warming movement is scheduled to air via webcast and radio broadcast on Tuesday, November 17 at 7:00pm. The film called “Not Evil Just Wrong” is a creation by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney that will provide facts to counter the myths of the “sky-is-falling” crowd.   The webcast is set to clearly define the distortions and marketing strategy involved in the Global Warming (Climate Change) religion.

This important presentation will show why the leadership in America has embraced the movement that will ultimately end in total control over the lives of the citizens and the plan to use population control to satisfy this desire. Not Evil Just Wrong will show Americans exactly why their jobs, lifestyle and dreams for their children are at risk.  Viewers will understand just how industries that rely on fossil fuels will be crippled by government imposed, job-killing regulations during this recessionary time.  Ordinary heads-of-household will talk about how small towns will become bastions of unemployment and poverty.

McAleer and McElhinney will explain exactly how it is that the theory of Global Warming (Climate Change) is unjustified by science.    No Evil Just Wrong will go so far as to expose the deceptions that experts, politicians, educators and the media have been delivering to the public for many years.  The film will show that man-made pollution is not melting the polar icecaps; the ocean will not rise 20 feet in a flash; and the only polar bears dying because of man are the ones who try to eat men.

Finally, the film makers will shatter the myth that the hottest years in the United States were 1998 and 2006. They point the fact that the hottest year on record was 1934, and the hottest decade was the 1930s; a time when there were half as many people and no SUVs or jumbo jets.

The webcast will include Tim Wildmon and Crane Durham of AFA as well as other guests that include members of Congress and business people. Live blogging and phone calls to the program are expected. 

Not Evil Just Wrong webcast

Not Evil Just Wrong radio broadcast

AP Poll: Americans Worried About Healthcare Reform Costs

According to a recent Associated Press poll, Americans are concerned about the hidden costs of healthcare legislation. The doubters of the bill include Democrats in the Senate.

 When 1502 adults were polled from October 29 to November 8, forty-three percent said they do not like the healthcare reform that is being proposed by Congress. Forty-one percent said they support the proposal and 15 percent are still undecided on the issue.

Even though the margins seem close, the opponents of healthcare reform seem to have much stronger opinions than do the supporters. Katie Huhn of Acworth, GA summed up the opposing sentiment with this statement, “Well, for one, I know nobody wants to pay taxes for anybody else to go to the doctor—I don’t…I don’t want to pay for somebody to use my money that I could be using for myself.”  

House Bill Funds Abortions

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said in September, that she was “absolutely” committed to posting the text of the final House Healthcare Reform bill on line for 72 hours before the House is to vote on the measure.  Today, the Speaker’s spokesman, Brendan Daly, told  THE WEEKLY STANDARD that the “pledge was to have manager’s amendment online for 72 hours, and we will do that.” In other words, the final bill will not be available for public review before the House votes (possibly on Saturday).

The question is why wouldn’t  Speaker Pelosi want to give the American people an opportunity to read the 2,032-page healthcare bill that will change their lives forever?  Is she afraid they might see exactly what is in store for them?

Perhaps Nancy Pelosi is afraid that Americans may have a chance to learn about the “Insurance Rating Rules” portion of the bill which is located in section 213 on page 96, line 16.  Here a reader will learn that anyone who is enrolled in the government-run plan will be charged a monthly premium to fund abortions.  The premium will be paid into a U.S. Treasury account that will be used to pay for the abortion services.

Section 213 describes how the Health Benefits Commissioner is will assess the monthly premiums that will be used to pay for elective abortions under the government-run plan.  The Commissioner must charge at a minimum $1 per enrollee per month.

Anyone who continues to read the bill will find the section named “Abortions for which Public Funding is Allowed” which is located in section 222, on page 110, line 17.  This is where readers will find that the Health and Human Services Secretary is given the authority to determine when abortion is allowed under the government-run plan. There is also a requirement that the Exchange includes at least one insurance plan that covers abortions.

A majority of Americans believe health care plans should not be forced to provide elective abortion coverage. A majority of Americans do not believe health care plans should include any type of abortion coverage. There are two amendments that include language that would prohibit the use of federal funds to pay for abortions.  The Hyde Amendment prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for elective abortions under the Medicare and Medicaid programs and the Smith Amendment prohibits federal funding of abortion under the federal employees’ health benefits plan.

With thousands marching on Washington today to protest Obamacare, it would stand to reason that more time is needed to create a common-sense solution to healthcare reform. 

The Republicans in the House offered a 230-page solution earlier this week, complete with TORT reform and the ability buy/sell health insurance across state lines. The Republican version also protects the dignity of all human life and prohibits any federal funds from being used to pay for abortions. Being in the minority, the chances this proposal will see the light of day, are slim.