It’s about time!

So the 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving most of the most prominent scientists pushing the man-made warming theory - a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science. (Source: Herald Sun)

I’ve downloaded the files and gone through only a handful of emails. Here is one I thought interesting:

You can delete this attachment if you want. Keep this quiet also, but this is the person who is putting in FOI [Freedom of Information] requests for all emails Keith and Tim have written and received re Ch 6 of AR4. We think we’ve found a way around this.

    Cheers
    Phil
    Prof. Phil Jones
    Climatic Research Unit     Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
    School of Environmental Sciences   Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
    University of East Anglia
    Norwich                 Email   (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
    NR4 7TJ
    UK
(Source: Climategate)

Another one:

I guess that my point is that climate continues to fluctuate within broad bounds.  Everything that we are now calling ‘climate change’ is well within the bounds observed within the prehistoric record of climate fluctuations.  Do we call any variation ‘climate change’ or should we limit the term climate change for anything considered to be caused by humans?  To my mind it is not so much what we call it, but rather that we keep a clear idea of what we actually talking about.

      Bob Keeland
      USGS, National Wetlands Research Center
      Lafayette, LA
      (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) (Source: Climategate)

FYI - The nuts call it ‘Climate Change’ now because they don’t have favorable recent data to call it Global Warming anymore, and anthropogenic isn’t understood by most people. Bob Keeland must have missed this briefing on the marketing for their scam.

And Another one:

From: Mick Kelly

To:

Subject: RE: Global temperature
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 09:02:00 +1300

Yeah, it wasn’t so much 1998 and all that that I was concerned about, used to dealing with that, but the possibility that we might be going through a longer - 10 year - period of relatively stable temperatures beyond what you might expect from La Nina etc.

Speculation, but if I see this as a possibility then others might also. Anyway, I’ll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I give the talk again as that’s trending down as a result of the end effects and the recent cold-ish years. (Source: Climategate)

Mick also says “Be awkward if we went through a early 1940s type swing!”

Awkward for the climate to swing? Only awkward if it doesn’t support your agenda and funding desires!

Absolutely absurd. Reading through some of these emails makes me think of the DIRECTV commercials showing the cable companies strategize!

Perhaps: “We can find people with disposable incomes that will believe our phony charts and presentations and they can dispose of their income to us!”