'Climategate' Exposes the Global Warming Hoax
The Internet has been abuzz throughout the past week with the news of what everyone is calling ‘Climategate’ -- a major scandal involving leaked emails and data from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA). Located in the town of Norwich in the United Kingdom, the Climatic Research Unit is a primary center for the ‘science’ that supports the theory of Global Warming. The CRU provides ‘scientific’ advice and guidance to the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
On November 17th an anonymous whistleblower downloaded email and data files from computers at the Climatic Research Unit and, using a Internet server based in Russia, posted them on a ‘Global Warming skeptic’ website called The Air Vent. Soon thereafter the files were forwarded to numerous other ‘skeptic’ websites and news outlets. The leaked files include more than 1,000 emails and about 3,000 documents, and they provide abundant evidence of falsification of data among the scientists at the forefront of promoting the theory of Global Warming.
The leaked emails consist of correspondence between many of the top researchers in the field of climate science and Global Warming, including CRU’s Director Phillip Jones and his assistant, Keith Briffa; Michael Mann at Pennsylvania State; Malcolm Hughes at the University of Arizona; Kevin Trenberth at the National Center for Atmospheric Research; James Hansen at NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies; and James Holdren, US President Barack Obama’s new ‘Science Czar’. The authenticity of the leaked emails and documents has been verified by Phillip Jones of CRU, Kevin Trenberth, and others.
The emails and documents reveal that the scientists at the CRU and their colleagues in the USA not only falsified their data to ‘prove’ Global Warming, they also collaborated to prevent qualified scientists who disagreed with the theory of Global Warming from publishing or participating in the ‘peer reviews’ process. The belief in Global Warming among scientists is not a consensus; it is a dictatorship.
The whistleblower who downloaded and posted the CRU files worked under the username ‘FOIA’, a reference to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in the United States. The CRU has repeatedly refused FOIA requests for release of the data on which their computer models and onclusions about Global Warming are based. Obstruction of the release of information under the FOIA is a crime in both the UK and the USA, nd the guilty scientists can be punished with fines or jail time.
In the UK, former Chancellor Lord Lawson has called for an ndependent public inquiry into the facts of the CRU’s falsification of data to support the theory of Global Warming. In the USA, Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma announced that he will launch an investigation into the Climategate scandal. Inhofe’s office has sent letters to the scientists involved and to federal agencies warning them to “retain (related) documents.” In Australia this week, ten Labour Party MPs (Members of Parliament) resigned their seats in protest of their government’s support of the proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), an equivalent of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme and the pending Cap and Trade legislation in the USA.
‘Climategate’ is not an ordinary case of falsifying data by a few rogue scientists. The fraudulent theory of Global Warming has provided the basis for an international political movement which has the stated goal of completely restructuring the entire global economy based on that fraudulent theory. ‘Global Warming’ is a con game perpetrated by dishonest scientists and the government and corporate leaders who provide the corrupt scientists with opportunities for advancement.
If we fail to stop the further politicization and institutionalization of the fraudulent theory of Global Warming, we will most certainly experience a future of ‘science’ controlled by government decree and of a world government that facilitates the operations of corporate industries while imposing severe restrictions and arbitrary taxes on the general public.
That is a future which would fully justify resistance and rebellion among the international populations who will be the victims of this massive global fraud. If we fail to stop this fraudulent enterprise by legal means, we will certainly have a future of global oppression based on fraud, with its attendant institutionalized crimes, and whatever popular backlash might eventually result.