Investigate data behind global-warming theory
Published: December 6, 2009
The climate science community has been shaken by the posting of thousands of e-mails and internal documents originating from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University, England. The inconvenient truths of the workings of this science community cast doubt on the integrity of some promoting catastrophic climate change.
Documents show a small cabal of climate scientists actively suppressed dissenting views, denied opposing views publication in journals they control and fostered manipulation of temperature data to conform to global warming dogma.
As a consequence, the Internet has multiple entries on the fallout from “climategate” at the Climate Research Unit, which is principal advisor to the United Nations’ Intergovern-mental Panel on Climate Change, to the U.S. Goddard Institute for Space Studies and to Al Gore’s climate advisor, James Hansen. Additionally, articles and editorials about the disclosures have appeared in the American and European press.
Charlottesville readers will recognize in these diverse documents two climatologists, formerly associated with the University of Virginia: professor Patrick Michaels and professor Michael Mann.
The alarmists’ basic premise for the need to combat climate change is based on:
The temperature record of the past 150 years.
The assumption that rises in atmospheric carbon dioxide from fossil fuel usage have caused an unusual rise in global temperatures.
Climate computer models masquerading as reliable predictors of future global climate states. The veracity of the temperature record is now in doubt; some claimed global temperature rises may have been fabricated and cooling trends suppressed.
Hosting the Copenhagen Climate Change conference, the Danish government, the IPCC and other climate change alarmists have been promoting this meeting as an essential, world-saving followup to the original Kyoto treaty.
It is proclaimed that failure to impose a new, worldwide energy rationing system and wealth redistribution scheme will provoke a global climate meltdown. A global government is promoted to administer the redistribution of wealth and energy. Government, industry, research institutions and the financial community are giddy with the prospects of a trillion-dollar-a-year funding source. Our own government is pushing “cap and trade” as necessary because “the science is settled.”
There may be ample reason now to believe there is “something rotten in the state of Denmark.”
The scientific community and the public deserve a full and open investigation of the data behind the conclusions made to support the global-warming theory.