Trust The Experts
I have often challenged people who believed all of the man-made global warming theories and all it would ever boil down to were arguments that would state the number of scientists that verified it and that the followers of the movement stood on the ground that they trusted science and the experts. After all, they spent their whole lives studying science and weather data. “How can you argue with all these scientists who have devoted their life to studying the climate?” they would say. Others would croon, “I will put my trust in a competent climate scientist rather than a right-wing radio show host.” Never mind that not all the scientists shared the same views regarding global warming but they had a mantra of, “we trust the experts” and they would not budge. In emails we shall see later, if you were a climatologist who wanted to find facts about global warming rather than work for “the cause” of global warming, you were black balled from the program.
In 2009, some fancy computer hacking was going on and some of “the experts” at the Climate Research Unit had their computers compromised. After that incident, thousands of confidential emails were spread all over the internet and the public learned that “the experts” began fudging the numbers once the actual temperatures started to deviate from their sacred models. In fact, there has been no evidence to sustain the global warming theory since 1997. That is over a decade of deviation from the much massaged computer models that do not coincide with the upward trend of CO2 emissions that is so fragile to this argument. As of right now, the temperature has been steady or slightly declining over the last fifteen years. Those are the real facts the warmists don’t want you to realize.
Without computer models, the global warming theory is dead. Everything to do with global warming relies on a miniscule period of history combined with computer models that attempt to correlate the rise of CO2 levels with rising temperatures. It was evident that they were fooling the world, at least those who placed all their trust in “the experts”.
As it turned out, “the experts” were experts at feeding biased data into computers and recording false data and experts at concealing data that would diffuse their entire conspiracy.
The Facts Are Now Out
We were told by “the experts” that the temperature was still rising but all along they were fudging the numbers. Since 1997, the earth’s temperature has leveled off. For the last fifteen years, “the experts” have been feeding the computer model with false data so the theory of global warming would fall in line with the doomsday predictions. In addition, the emails showed how “the experts” hid all data from the public that could disprove the theory of global warming showing they knew their research was not really a science but rather a doctrine.
Here are some of the samples of text that were in the confidential emails the University East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit did not want you to see.
- “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) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”
- “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.”
- “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.”
- “Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted.”
- Pat Michaels mentioned in the above email text is a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who had this to say, “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.”
- “I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI [Freedom of Information] Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process.” –Phil Jones, a scientist working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
- “Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden” …. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.” –Phil Jones.
- “The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out” of IPCC reports. –Jonathan Overpeck, coordinating lead author for the IPCC’s most recent climate assessment.
- “I gave up on [Georgia Institute of Technology climate professor] Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but its not helping the cause,” wrote Mann in another newly released email. –Jonathan Overpeck.
So we see “the experts” working for the Climate Research Unit had an agenda or a cause, and when the data did not meet the cause, the data was manipulated or ignored in such a way as to produced the desired results. Furthermore, scientists who did not share the same conclusions to the data were shunned from participating in climate study. This is not science–this is pure madness.
Now “the experts” are exposed and they have no data to stand on any more. The followers will not give up their beliefs because it means they would have to say they were duped all along. To them, it means that their whole structure of power to change the way economies work and people live is gone. Thus their motive is not to seek truth but rather to control the people, the corporations, and our individual liberty.
So where do “the experts” go now? Well, they are now proposing that we are in for a period of global cooling. They said this in 1971, then it was a hole in the ozone, then it was global warming, then it was climate change, and now it is global cooling. Well, at least they are attributing the upcoming global cooling to something more scientific, sunspot activity.
I think I’ll just go to Wal-Mart and buy me a Chinese made thermometer, hang it in the shade in my back yard, and monitor the temperature for myself. I am sure it will be more accurate than data from “the experts”.
– by J.Wade Harrell,