The Waterloo of the AGW scam?
comments on the leaked global warming documents (discussed by A. Zarkov in a previous entry
This has gone viral overnight. The file is out in the wild of the Internet and there is nothing that can be done to prevent people from getting a copy of it now.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 21, 2009 09:11 PM | Send
I’ve been scanning some of the downloaded material, and if authentic it is indeed devastating.
Those on various science blogs “in the know” about this field claim that the documents look real to them, like the private correspondence between educated men. It also rings true as to the details. However, at this hour it’s not clear who is actually responsible for releasing these alledged documents from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit” or “CRU” (the “Enron” of AGW agitprop). The hacking accusation may be a red (or better, a “green”) herring that attempts to minimize damage and try to write this off as a reactionary attack by “evil capitalistic forces”. They’re claiming to have been “hacked”, but it’s just as likely that prior to the upcoming Copenhagen summit a disgruntled, conscience-driven employee of the organization may have finally had a bellyful of AGW shennanigans and simply decided to download his or her e-mail record and publish it for the world to see.
If this was a leak and not a hack, then what we have here is a “whistle-blower”; someone with integrity who was outraged at science being misused for political purposes. In that event they may well come under certain “whistle-blower” protections. Yes, they crossed a line, but when the true history of the “Anthropogenic Global Warming” scam is written it will treat them kindly. Whoever that person is ( if the documents prove to be genuine) they have performed a public service. Jones claims the files were obtained illegally as if that absolves them of their content. It doesn’t, and what is contained in them is enough to destroy all their careers.
There is potentially massive collateral damage for AGW alarmists with this bombshell development, for it consists not only of the damning emails, but certain data files as well. They describe how these pseudo-scientists have engaged in a systematic cover-up, coordinating with each other and going to outrageous lengths to hide contrary data, keep skeptic’s papers from being published, manipulate both their findings and public opinion and even conspiring to delete emails they are supposed to retain for FOIA purposes.There are many documents the mere presence of which show a serious conflict of interest in what is supposed to be a publicly-funded science body. There are Greenpeace-related docs, plus one on “Communicating climate change” which is basically a handbook for how to propagandize effectively. My favorite so far is email 1048799107.txt with the eye-opening title “Formation of Earth Government for the good of all.”
What is revealed in these alledged documents is that in the end it wasn’t about “global warming”; it was about bent scientists seeking to secure funding for their junk science studies, suppress dissent and drive a partisan political narrative. They found themselves part of something which went far beyond the academic world. They were priests guarding the secrets of the AGW priesthood. In short, the whole thing degenerated into the sort of pseudo-religious rubbish you get when a university is crawling with idealistic leftwing zealots looking for a cause and a research grant.
In a sane world this would mean not only their own public disgrace, but also the undoing of the AGW trade, with the trail inevitably leading to the conspiracy of globalist politicians to push forward their dream of world domination through the levying of crippling carbon taxes on Western nations. Heads would roll. U.S. and European political careers would come to an ignominious end.
Which means, of course, that the “Global Warming/Climate Change” co-religionists will have to dissemble, obfuscate and double down on their bet. Nevertheless, as far as the AGW alarmists are concerned, in the words of one commenter on a science blog:
“The Greenies must be bitterly disappointed that their fraud didn’t have the necessary “sustainibility”.