Summary: Climate projections, which are the excuse for the Copenhagen Climate Change Conferemce next month,are based on information from the East Anglia University Climate Research Unit (CRU), led by Prof. Phil Jones, Keith Briffa being a senior employee. In Sept. it was revealed that Briffa was feeding the IPCC with faked climate information, derived from tree rings, which perhaps originated from a specific location in Siberia. He had built up a climate cycle that excluded the medieval warm period, which was much warmer than now,  and making the end of the last century the warmest period ever. Now a hacker has exposed the CRU: He has obtained numerous emails that show rotten morals and lies behind the claims of global warming. Jones has admitted that the emails are from his organisation. The mails display what Lord Lawson of Blably says in The Times on 23rd November: a) the researchers have manipulated the raw temperture figures, so that they show relentlessly rising global temperature b) they have denied access to their data, c) they have discussed how they could keep articles from qualified skeptical climate scientists out of an IPCC report d) they have provided a basis for climate policy which will cost the people of the world trillions of dollars (for political - not climate purposes) - in the name of climate disasters. Jones writes that he would hide the temperature decline from 1998 to 1999. Michael Mann, who was in charge of the hockey stick fraud, writes: "It looks as if the climate science cat has slipped out of the bag." After their exposure, they are only sorry that they did not keep their thoughts better to themselves. Now even IPCC "scientists" , including Latif, admit that there is no global warming. But it does not stop politicians who have received a great trick to carry out their communist one-world government. The art of lying and dramatization of a perfectly normal climate - they have learned this thoroughly from Al Gore: Not the truth counts - but being so adept at lying, that people believe the lies.

Cru_building

The Climate Research Unit is part of the East Anglia University

The Times 23 Nov. 2009; 
Lord Lawson of Blaby: “The scientific basis for global warming projections is now under scrutiny as never before. The principal source of these projections is produced by a small group of scientists at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), affiliated to the University of East Anglia. What appears to have emerged ist (a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend; (b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data; (c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and (d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals.  Through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, claim to base far-reaching and hugely expensive policy decisions, has been called into question.”
Lord Lawson of Blaby was Chancellor of the Exchequer 1983-89. He will be speaking at an Institute of Economic Affairs debate on climate change at the Institute of Directors in London today.

This blog has previously described how the climate scaremongering is a scandalous scientific hoax – as shown by Keith Briffa´s and Michael Mann´s manipulations with Siberian tree ring data in collusion with Prof. Phil Jones of the East Anglia University, UK. Jones won´t release his secret data, which are the jumpimg off point for the political efforts to establish their world government of their New World Order regime at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference from 7 to 13 Dec. Here is the Corbett Report .com interviewing Tim Ball  on Prof. Phil. Jones´unethical climate data manipulations: video.
Phil-jonesThe following is so incredible that I should not have posted it, had it not been for the fact that the Investigate Magazine in an interview with Prof. Phil Jones has his confession that the material was hacked – and amits it looks as though the mails are from his servers. The contents are so full of inside details that it could hardly have been constructed by any one from outside.

And Prof. Phil Jones (right) recognizes and comments the first of the following mails and admits that these e-mails seem to come from his organisation (below) .

The Guardian 20 Nov. 2009 has a story of computer files having been accessed earlier this week from servers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, a world-renowned centre focused on the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.

 Professor Michael Mann (Hockey stick scam), director of Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Centre and a regular contributor to the popular climate science blog Real Climate, features in many of the email exchanges. He said: "I'm not going to comment on the content of illegally obtained emails. However, I will say this: both their theft and, I believe, any reproduction of the emails that were obtained on public websites, etc, constitutes serious criminal activity. When the Guardian asked Prof Phil Jones at UEA, who features in the correspondence, to verify whether the emails were genuine, he refused to comment.

Sunclimate_2NOAA x-ray images show dramatic changes of solar activity over the 11–year sun cycle

The alleged emails illustrate the persistent pressure some climatologists have been under from sceptics in recent years. There have been repeated calls, including Freedom of Information requests, for the Climate Research Unit to make public a confidential dataset of land and sea temperature recordings that is "value added" by the unit before being used by the Met Office. The emails show the frustration some climatologists have had at having to operate under such intense, often politically motivated, scrutiny.
Comment: Of course, insiders of the climate hoax try desperately, but in vain, to play this new scandalous disclosure  down. 
It is understandable that the "researchers are frustrated," because it is always more stressful to work with lies than with the truth. Both because it is harder to remember all the lies – and because the fear of being disclosed will always be there. Mann tries in vain to scare the bloggers from publishing the mails. The whole Internet is teeming with them.

Investigate Magazine 20 Nov. 2009 ISSN 1172-4153 | Volume 2 | Issue 50 :  A 62 megabyte zip file, containing around 160 megabytes of emails, pdfs and other documents, has been confirmed as genuine by the head of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, Dr Phil Jones.
In an exclusive interview with Investigate Magazine’s TGIF Edition, Jones confirms his organization has been hacked, and the data flying all over the internet appears to have come from his organisation. “It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”
The files were first released from a Russian fileserver site by an anonymous tipster calling him or herself “FOIA”, in an apparent reference to the US Freedom of Information Act.

Mail 1. From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@[snipped], mhughes@
[snipped]
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@[snipped],t.osborn@[snipped]
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm, Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow. 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 [sic] from1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
Sunclimate_3bMike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.
Cheers, Phil
Prof. Phil Jones, Climatic Research Unit

Sunspot activity correlates to global mean sea surface temperature (SST) over 150 years – NOAA Research. NOAA states to be a world leader in environmental science today.  Variability in the amount of energy from the sun has caused climate changes in the past. It is now accepted that the global cooling during Ice Ages is the result of changes in the distribution and amount of sunlight that reaches Earth. Even the climate changes of the 20th century may have a significant solar component. The similarity of these curves is evidence that the sun has influenced the climate of the last 150 years

TGIF asked Jones about the controversial email discussing hiding “the decline”, and Jones explained he was not trying to mislead. “No, that’s completely wrong. In the sense that
they’re talking about two different things here. They’re talking about the instrumental data which is unaltered – but they’re talking about proxy data  going further back in time, a thousand years, and it’s just about how you add on the last few years, because when you get proxy data you sample things like tree rings and ice cores, and they don’t always have the last few years. So one way is to add on the instrumental data for the last few years.” Jones told TGIF he had no idea what he meant by using the words “hide the decline”. “That was an email from ten years ago. Can you remember the exact context of what you wrote ten years ago?”
The other emails are described by skeptic commentators as “explosive”, one talks of stacking the peer-review process to prevent qualified skeptical scientists from getting their research papers considered.
Comment: When these fraudsters speak of proxies  they mean tree rings consisting of  cherry picked material corresponding to their political purposes and of basically of unknown origin.
What Jones says about adding on data from the last few years sounds reasonable. But “hiding the decline” cannot be brushed aside – in particular not because he also states a temperature decline from 1998 to 1999.. 

The following is from the Investigate Magazines Breaking News Forum, the TBRcc:
The data raises major questions about the role of scientists in what appears to be a deliberate conspiracy to mislead the public.

Mail 2 This refers to stacking the peer-review process to ensure scientific papers by the likes of NZ's Chris de Freitas don't make it past review into the IPCC's 2007 AR4:
"The other paper by MM is just garbage – as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well – frequently as I see it. I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. K and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !"

Michael-mannMail 3. This email from RealClimate's organ grinders illustrates a deliberate effort to prevent anything too challenging from being allowed on their website:From: "Michael E. Mann"
To: Tim Osborn , Keith Briffa
Subject: update
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:51:53 -0500
Reply-to: mann@xxx
Cc: Gavin Schmidt
guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we put up the RC post. By now, you've probably read that nasty McIntyre thing (world´s leading climate sceptic – the man who disclosed Mann´s hockey stick fraud). Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don't go there personally, but so I'm informed). Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you're free to use RC in any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through, and we'll be very careful to answer any questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you'd like us to include.
You're also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We'll use our best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont'get to use the RC comments as a megaphone
mike  

Here is what Real Climate has to say , besides trying to play down the contents of the mails: “There are of course lessons to be learned. Clearly no-one would have gone to this trouble if the academic object of study was the mating habits of European butterflies. That community’s internal discussions are probably safe from the public eye. But it is important to remember that emails do seem to exist forever, and that there is always a chance that they will be inadvertently released. Most people do not act as if this is true, but they probably should. It is tempting to point fingers and declare that people should not Solar-cycle-datahave been so open with their thoughts, but who amongst us would really be happy to have all of their email made public?
Comment:  Only he who has something to hide needs fear to have his e-mails published. Real Climate´s seems to be equivalent to a confession that they are trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public.

Right: The small temperature changes are correlated to 11–year solar cycles – and have nothing to do with CO2.  

Watts Up With That has more mails.
Mail 4. Here is from Hockey stick Michael E. Mann to Jonathan T. Overpeck
Director, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth: It appears that the proverbial Climate Science Cat is out of the bag.

The Telegraph 20 Nov. 2009: 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.”

But what do cleverer scientists say?
Spiegel 19 Nov. 2009 Mojib Latif, a member of the IPCC, one of Germany's best-known climatologists from the Leibniz Institute in Kiel, says that the temperature curve has reached a plateau. "There can be no argument about that," he says. "We have to face that fact."…This has prompted many a climatologist to treat the temperature data in public with a sense of shame, thereby damaging their own credibility. Just a few weeks ago, Britain's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research added more fuel to the fire with its latest calculations of global Sun-spots2average temperatures. According to the Hadley figures, the world grew warmer by 0.07 degrees Celsius from 1999 to 2008 and not by the 0.2 degrees Celsius assumed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And, say the British experts, when their figure is adjusted for two naturally occurring climate phenomena, El Niño and La Niña, the resulting temperature trend is reduced to 0.0 degrees Celsius — in other words, a standstill.

Latif, on the other hand, attributes the stagnation to so-called Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO). This phenomenon in the Pacific Ocean allows a larger volume of cold deep-sea water to rise to the surface at the equator. According to Latif, this has a significant cooling effect on the Earth's atmosphere.
The fact is that the sun is weakening slightly. The sun´s radiation activity is currently at a minimum, as evidenced by the small number of sunspots on its surface. According to calculations performed by a group of NASA scientists led by David Rind, which were recently published in the journal Geophysical Research Hockeystick-dismantledLetters, this reduced solar activity is the most important cause of stagnating global warming. Donald Easterbrook supports the conviction of the Danish scientist, Henrik Svensmark, who has shown that sun activity produces a magnetic field which bends cosmic radiation off from the atmosphere. When this magnetic field weakens cosmic radiation penetrates into the atmoshere to create clouds reflecting the beams of the sun – this leading to global cooling.   

Comment
“The climate disaster” is demonstrably the biggest scientific lie in the history of science. The Hacking has just confirmed it, after the “Hockey-stick graph” was disclosed as a hoax (right).

Now the tragic part comes: Leading IPCC members admit that there is no global warming ( but of course it will come in 20 years time or so!!! – which no one can prdedict, but which many corrupt scientists have to admit, if they want funding to live well by. Nevertheless, the Copenhagen Climate change will next month make “a global solution to this global disaster” which they cannot even believe in themselves, given they have brains at all. They have made an entire world believe in Al Gore´s very profitable lies – and are using this hoax for their one world agenda and their own enrichment.  

Where does this leave the CO2? At just40% postulates Al Gore – as usual without any documentation – as seen by his film “An Inconvenient Truth” ruled by a British court to be an inconvenient fraud in at least 11 points. Al Gore is making  big money at the European Climate Exchange Casino selling CO2–allowances – and is expecting much more cash from the Chicago Casino alongside with GoldmanSachs, when the US anti-warming legislation is passed. Besides, the EU is planning a direct CO2–tax to enforce its communist agenda to transfer our wealth to LDC countries, contending we have accumulated a CO2 debt with those countries!!
Phil-jones-email-+connie hedegård

Picture and Text from The Wall Street Journal 23 Nov. 2009 John Christy, a scientist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville attacked in the emails for asking that an IPCC report include dissenting viewpoints, said, "It's disconcerting to realize that legislative actions this nation is preparing to take, and which will cost trillions of dollars, are based upon a view of climate that has not been completely scientifically tested."
The text may refer to Keith Briffa´s basic Siberian tree ring proxy for global temperature being exposed as a hoax by The Telegraph 29 Sept. 2009.
Connie Hedegård has nothing to do with this correspondence – but is nevertheless more guilty of this climate scam than most other politicians and media. She is a Bilderberger (2005) and  the future EU climate commissioner. Her successor as Danish climate minister, Lykke Friis, is also a Rockefeller girl
- a  member of the Trilateral Commission. 

Now what to say about that? Fox business 19 Nov. 2009: “Rather than shaming an Islamic radical for killing innocent people, they'd rather go after those of us who didn't bring a reusable hemp shopping bag when visiting the local Whole Foods. That's a real shame. They're manufacturing phony righteousness when, these days, real righteousness is so desperately needed.”
That´s what they are going to do in Copenhagen at enormous costs – both for the luxury stays of many thousands of latter day saints of the climate religion. But first and foremost because climate is only their pretext: Their agenda is a communist world state with redistribution og our wealth. The CO2– scam, which now even Al Gore is scuppering, stating CO2 is only responsible for 40% of global warming!! is the mendacious excuse for looting us who have created the wealth of the world to give it to people who – as in ancient Rome - cannot contribute anything but their ever increasing offspring (proles). In the end this will mean the eternal goal of communism: After the pillaging of the skilled and enterprising, they will distribute poverty evenly to the plebs – and keep the riches themselves. The means is: CO2 taxes, tolls – ever more. Here is just the beginning. And of course Rockefeller´s depopulation programme
As you see, The whole climate scam is a double lie:1. There is no scientifically based global warming – just the biggest corruption scandal in the history of science 2. Consequently there is no climate excuse for the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference scam – just a political conspiracy with world government as its real agenda under a cloak of lies. What real climatologists think, can be seen here.
This is the New World Order.