Climategate 2.0: the gift that goes on giving

Happy Thanksgiving my Ricochet buddies. You may be resting but I’m not: I’ve been busy most of the week covering Climategate 2.0 – the gift that goes on giving. (Well, if like me you’re a climate skeptic, that is; but not if your name’s Al Gore. Or Ed Markey. Or Ed Begley Jr. Or Greenpeace. Or…you get the idea)

I’ve got a piece in the Wall Street Journal today – my first – trying to explain for the benefit of the uninitiated what Climategate is and what Climategate isn’t. The latest batch of emails, leaked by a person or persons unknown (but whoever they are they deserve a Congressional Medal of Honor at the very least) comprises 5,000 files, dumped as before onto a Russian server, revealing private correspondence between many of the scientists at the heart of the Great Global Warming scam.

These are men like Penn State’s increasingly infamous Michael Mann (inventor of the discredited Hockey Stick) and the University of East Angia’s Phil Jones: not just two-bit research assistants but the “experts” whose data, research papers and lobbying forms the basis of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) pronouncements on Anthropogenic Global Warming.

The IPCC, in turn, is the organization on whose doomy prognostications of man-made climate disaster our political leaders base their policy. So when Obama pours billions of your tax dollars into failed clean-tech companies like Solyndra, when you are banned from using the kind of lightbulbs that actually illuminate a room rather than merely flicker and give you a headache, when the EPA’s Lisa Jackson tries reducing the number of showers you take or seeks to regulate when you use your aircon, when your energy bills rise and your flights grow more expensive due to carbon taxes – all these infringements on your economic wellbeing and your liberty can be traced back to these Climategate scientists. This is why Climategate matters.

Sure there’s no email (yet) which captures any of these Climategate junk scientists saying “Tee hee! I wonder how long before our conspiracy is found out”. But what there is, in overwhelming abundance, that these guys a) are a bunch of two-bit crooks (never happier than when breaching FOI or conspiring to destroy the reputations of those who disagree with them, as well as ripping off taxpayers to the tune of billions with dodgy research which, unsurprisingly, they refuse to share with outsiders) b) in private are far, far less certain about the reliability of their man-made global warming theory than they say in public. See the problem here? Trillions of dollars (no really) are being expended as Anthropogenic Global Warming is a cast iron certainty. And it’s not. Nowhere near. Even the climate “experts” have their doubts about whether it’s really happening.

Anyway, if you want further reading, you’ll find the latest here at my website. It’s also the place where you can buy my book on the subject Watermelons which gives you not only the background to the original Climategate but also explains in terrifying detail precisely why the Green movement (not Al Qaeda) represents the current biggest threat to Western Civilization. Wish I were exaggerating. But by the end of the book I think you’ll be with me.

Right. Now you get back to your turkey, close your eyes, and pretend everything is still fun and lovely.

  1. Kervinlee

    Happy Thanksgiving to you as well, James, and a happy fourth of July too, in advance.

    I am not a climate change skeptic. I am a full-throated climate change denier and have been since this sordid totalitarian project took wing. Why the Climate-gate emails have not received the same amount of j’accuse finger-pointing as the Watergate, Iran-Contra or Monica Lewinsky scandals just reinforces my fear the the bien-pensants in the government, academy and the fourth estate are all in on the scam. Mussolini would be proud.

  2. Nick Stuart

    This is why simply replacing Barack Obama next year is not enough. Liberalism must be defeated.

    We should not expect it to go quietly onto the ash heap of history however. It is going to be a hard fought affair.

    And a “close run thing” as another distinguished Britisher once said.

  3. James Delingpole
    C
    Nick Stuart: This is why simply replacing Barack Obama next year is not enough. Liberalism must be defeated.

    We should not expect it to go quietly onto the ash heap of history however. It is going to be a hard fought affair.

    And a “close run thing” as another distinguished Britisher once said. · Nov 24 at 2:47pm

    Amen bro. I’ve just come back from a Horowitz Restoration Weekend, where similar views prevailed. You’re right: this is war. They give no quarter so why should we?

  4. Ottoman Umpire

    Everything I’ve seen shows temperatures as flat since 1998. This alone — in a world of increasing anthropogenic CO2 output — would be problematic to their argument, don’t you think?  I mean, I had a political sparring partner throw the old “correlation doesn’t imply causation” argument at me, which I accept, but doesn’t a lack of correlation suggest a lack of causation? 

    Why this hasn’t completely destroyed the Climate Change parade baffles me.  I’m left with four possibilities:

    1. Public awareness of this dispositive tidbit is so low that it doesn’t even register. 

    2. I’m wrong. 1998-2011 temperatures really have gone up and I’ve been getting bad data.
    3. There’s some other event going on — El Nino or La Nina or Il Duce or whatever — this would ordinarily cause cooling, so the fact that temperatures are flat only shows the robustness of the CO2-temperature relationship.  In other words, we’d be freezing our keisters off were it not for the gaseous manipulation of our atmosphere.  
    4. The desire to Believe is so strong that the facts don’t really matter.

    Your take?

  5. Western Chauvinist
    Ottoman Umpire: …

    Why this hasn’t completely destroyed the Climate Change parade baffles me.  I’m left with four possibilities:

    1. Public awareness of this dispositive tidbit is so low that it doesn’t even register. 

    2. I’m wrong. 1998-2011 temperatures really have gone up and I’ve been getting bad data.
    3. There’s some other event going on — El Nino or La Nina or Il Duce or whatever — this would ordinarily cause cooling, so the fact that temperatures are flat only shows the robustness of the CO2-temperature relationship.  In other words, we’d be freezing our keisters off were it not for the gaseous manipulation of our atmosphere.  
    4. The desire to Believe is so strong that the facts don’t really matter.
    Your take? · Nov 24 at 3:38pm

    I’d say 1 and 4.

    And, Mr. Delingpole, may I offer an “Huzzah!” for your first editorial in The WSJ.  You have now arrived on the scene of American conservatism by joining your voice with the other distinguished voices of sanity on those pages.  Congratulations!

  6. Daniel Perez
    Western Chauvinist

    Ottoman Umpire: …

    Why this hasn’t completely destroyed the Climate Change parade baffles me.  I’m left with four possibilities:

     

    1. Public awareness of this dispositive tidbit is so low that it doesn’t even register. 

    2. I’m wrong. 1998-2011 temperatures really have gone up and I’ve been getting bad data.
    3. There’s some other event going on — El Nino or La Nina or Il Duce or whatever — this would ordinarily cause cooling, so the fact that temperatures are flat only shows the robustness of the CO2-temperature relationship.  In other words, we’d be freezing our keisters off were it not for the gaseous manipulation of our atmosphere.  
    4. The desire to Believe is so strong that the facts don’t really matter.

     

    Your take? · Nov 24 at 3:38pm

     I’d say 1 and 4.

    Me too. Especially number 4.

    In the end, it´s always about us. We are so self-centered.. I think the late George Carlin was on the money with this one. I apologize for the harsh language in advance.

  7. tabula rasa

    I understand that either Phil Jones or Michael Mann more than once referred to AGW as “the cause.”  That sounds like an evangelist, not a scientist.  

  8. Chris Johnson

    I love ya, James and agree with you, but you need to cut Ed Begley some slack.  He walks the walk.  He is very seriously into energy conservation which is just fine, aside from the climate nonsense.  Anthony Watts, too, is seriously into energy conservation and has posted great pieces on using technology to achieve conservation.

    Nothing unconservative about a bit of conservation!

    Gobble, gobble.

  9. wilber forge

     Evangelical Science for fun and profit. Wonder if  P.T. Barnum might have signed on for the show.

  10. Douglas
    CJRun: 

    Nothing unconservative about a bit of conservation!

    I have no problem with conservation whatsoever, and indeed, have a bit of a streak of it in myself (“Waste Not, Want Not” was after all, hammered into me by grandparents). What I hate is the modern environmental movement’s attempt to replace religious guilt with “Earth Guilt”. Sodomy, adultery, blasphemy, psssh, that stuff is so outmoded. But just let a greenie find out you’re not using recycled paper or that you buy bottled water. THAT’s a sin, pal. The green movement is nothing but a replacement for religion, just as communism was for many people.

  11. PJS
    Western Chauvinist

    And, Mr. Delingpole, may I offer an “Huzzah!” for your first editorial in The WSJ.  You have now arrived on the scene of American conservatism by joining your voice with the other distinguished voices of sanity on those pages.  Congratulations! · Nov 24 at 4:26pm

    Bu we had him first!

  12. James Gawron

    Now you’ve got them in your sites Jimmy.  Hit the guns on the Spitfire and smoke the bastards.  Never have so few, stolen so much, from so many.  Crush the Climate Creeps.

  13. Larry Koler

    It’s really important to keep in mind that the climategate fiasco is just one front in our war against the left. Every one of these fronts have a legitimate pedigree from their early days. Conservation, women’s suffrage, civil rights, unions, humane treatment of animals, etc. But, each one has been taken over by people from the far left. This happens because when first braced by the left, the legitimate heirs to the movement find that the left’s ability to force changes through is simply marvelous. The leftists come with connections to the media. They can get items put right on the front page of the NY Times — whereas before the leftists got involved it was difficult to get any serious attention at all. 

    Look at Patrick Moore, formerly of Greenpeace. He saw that organization taken over by “watermelons” and really what is different in the two approaches is that Moore really would like to have some solutions found for our nation and the world. But, the leftists don’t want this at all because they need the controversy for their destructive plans. 

    Look at feminism under Clinton. All their worries about CEOs and interns simply vanished overnight.

  14. Tom Lindholtz

    On Ottoman’s list, 1. and 4., especially if 1. is amplified to include the fact that, unlike Ricochetoise, most of the public finds this a tempest in a teapot and is too concerned with keeping, or finding, a job to worry about arcana.

  15. David Williamson

    James, you missed a great speech by Glenn Beck at the Restoration Weekend (I just watched the podcast – looking forward to yours).

    “Climate change” is just one part of the “progressive” agenda towards a collectivist utopia where the few humans remaining live in tents.

    I’m not sure who will win — I hope it’s us.

  16. Aaron Miller

    Meanwhile, I keep seeing a Nissan commercial that challenges viewers to imagine a world in which “everything ran on gas” and responds with an electric car. I’d love to laugh at it, but I know too well how many people don’t realize our electricity is produced by fossil fuels or simply don’t care. Let’s not forget plastics — ever more ubiquitous.

    Discrediting fraudulent scientists and the political, corporate hucksters behind them is great. But we are not just fighting bad science. We are fighting a vague idea that “Mother Earth” needs saving. Douglas hit the nail on its head. Global warming and climate change are fundamentally religious notions which have arisen to fill a void where faith in God and objective, universal truth once stood tall.

    We are also fighting the moral indifference of the corporations who capitalize on such lies. Would the majority of American investors in a company of George Washington’s time have turned a blind eye to such profiteering?

  17. Larry Koler
    Glenn the Iconoclast: Last year my English professor told the class there are no climatologists that are skeptics about AGW, and only climatologists were qualified to have an opinion.  (Her husband is also a True Believer and is mentioned in the Climategate memos, although only as an apparently-honest provider of data on bristle-cone pines, data that looks open to different interpretations to my eyes.)

    It seemed to escape her completely that as an English prof, and her husband as a botanist, they were unqualified to have an opinion.

    In Life on the Mississippi, Twain “proves” that the Mississippi River once was 1,300,000 miles long.  He concludes by saying, “There is something fascinating about science.  One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact….” · Nov 25 at 11:09am

    That’s a great quote from Mr. Clemens. Thanks. Very funny.

    Isn’t this exactly why — in their hubris — they think they can opine in a serious way about the existence of God?

  18. Raw Prawn

    Nothing could be less surprising than politicians jumping on a bandwagon.  What is surprising is their jumping on over a decade after the wheels fell off.  They can’t really be sillier than God made them.  Political support for Global Warming policies can only be a cynical power grab.

  19. Glenn the Iconoclast

    Last year my English professor told the class there are no climatologists that are skeptics about AGW, and only climatologists were qualified to have an opinion.  (Her husband is also a True Believer and is mentioned in the Climategate memos, although only as an apparently-honest provider of data on bristle-cone pines, data that looks open to different interpretations to my eyes.)

    It seemed to escape her completely that as an English prof, and her husband as a botanist, they were unqualified to have an opinion.

    In Life on the Mississippi, Twain “proves” that the Mississippi River once was 1,300,000 miles long.  He concludes by saying, “There is something fascinating about science.  One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact….”

  20. Garnetson

    James, I’ve been following the Climategate 2.0 scandal at WUWT and ClimateAudit.  The attempts by the “team” to get a professor fired in NZ was especially shocking.  Is there an equivalent to being disbarred in the academic world?