Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Flashback to the 2009 ClimateGate Exposure
Some five months ago, James Corbett devoted one of his flashback episodes to linking the November 2022 show to a show he produced in 2009.
In 2009, during a conference on the Global Climate Warming Crisis held in Copenhagen, someone leaked emails sent back and forth between various climate scientists who held positions at the prestigious East Anglia University in Great Britain. This institution’s researchers were considered the creme de la creme of the climate science scene.
These emails revealed that the whole theory of Climate Warming depended on an underpinning of deceit and a doctrine encouraging the unscrupulous destruction of the reputations of any and all researchers in the scientific community who dared to question any data and conclusions of the Climate Warming crowd.
During the program, Corbett interviewed Dr. Ball, a world renowned scientist who had remained unconvinced of the Climate Warming “science.” Instead, he worked out his own hypotheses and developed methods of research relying on actual science. His examinations showed that although climate does change, humanity’s activities were not at all the major driving force.
Ball mentioned how relieved he was that these emails were finally in the public domain, as over the years, he had held his own suspicions that something was not right with the other side. Yet he knew better to speak of his suspicions until he had a bit more proof that his cynical ideas were not fictions.
Corbett often comments on the fact that entertaining the data offered from only one side of a “scientific examination” upon which trillions of dollars of the world’s policies and economies will be structured is a most foolish way to go.
There is also an excellent examination of the modern-day premise of “gold standard scientific research demands peer review.”
Old school scientists neither approved of a peer review process or disapproved of such a thing. But what old school scientists of integrity understood was that when a paper was peer reviewed, a peer review regarding any theory was only as good as the people who were the reviewers.
These days, when the scientists releasing scientific data submit their paper to those who will peer review it, the entire process is extremely well controlled for important issues like Climate Studies as well as, of course, clinical trials involving pandemic remedy measures.
If the reviewers are hand chosen by the same group of people who promoted the scientists doing the clinical study, it stands to reason that the peer reviewers may not be objective but simply players in a game whose outcome needs a certain pre-decided solution, even if that solution is incorrect.
Dr. Tim Ball died in 2022 after leading a long and fulfilling life. He was in his eighties at the time of his death. One of his articles can be read here.
Published in General
I had no idea that Dr Ball had passed away…
Was this sparked by the Hindawi & Wiley Story? They’re the parent company to many academic journals, and they’re withdrawing more than 500 peer reviewed articles – that were published in 16 different journals that they operate. Because of what they call “Peer Review Rings”… Scientists gamed the system in order to get published and earn tenure at their universities…
The practice either isnt just for climate science – or migrated from the climate science…
The Climategate emails did not reveal outright fraud so much as clannishness and the notion that The Narrative was more vital than the science which justified some tweaks, omissions and cherry-picking. I enjoyed exchanges in which these fellows expressed annoyance at being called upon to circle the wagons around the overtly partisan, rather nasty Michael Mann. The admission that some tweaks and massaging were involved ( “Mike’s Nature trick”)
That was a small, well-defined group of specialists. The sacrifice of science and integrity by the Mandate Cult was a much broader scandal. Thus worse.
There are some good critiques of the peer review process on the Dark Horse podcast.
I recently watched or heard a review of Michael Mann’s activities. He also misrepresented his own qualifications.
I did not know about Ball passing away either. Due to the world wide web, it is hard to know whether someone of more normal stature has died or not, as an article that they might have released is still there weeks, months and years after they have left their mortal shell behind. (Although should one of the Kardashian sisters stub their big toe, it will be covered on a daily basis for a week.)
And no, I had known nothing of Hindawi & Wiley and their activities regarding academic journals. But hearing about those 500 articles being expunged does put a smile on my face.
One reason I post topics is to keep at hand what I think of as important facts in the world of knowledge, be it scientific knowledge or metaphysical.
But the other reason is that by putting my OP’s up for everyone to read and participate with often allows me to find out such valuable information as your reply provides.
There is a school of thought that any time that the justification of “some tweaks, omissions and cherry-picking” of what is supposed to be objective data and objective reviews of scientific papers occurs and is encouraged – well, those activities would be fraud.
Especially as this tweaking of facts, plus omitting and cherry picking of data, allowed for one and only one viewpoint regarding the Climate Narrative to become the “established fact.”
Go to DuckDuckGo and ask for Climate Crisis articles. Then tell me how many of those articles represent any opponents of the official Climate Crisis narrative. We are probably talking one out of every 37, if not one out of every 370.
So these “non-fraud” activities result in establishing an official narrative, propping up the CO2 myth. The establishment of this official narrative has led to the curtailment of drilling inside the USA, while allowing for the continual economic expansion of China and other developing nations even though their activities are far more polluting than ours.
On top of that, the whole method of ensuring that there now exist far more proponents of the official narrative ends up in involving on a perpetual basis the distribution of academic posts, including teaching assignments at colleges and universities, think tank positions and research monies.
It used to be that the fossil fuel industry helped to finance some of the research needed to combat the official narrative regarding climate change. But now the Big Energy firms are being subsidized for their wind turbine and solar panel farming-efforts, so good luck getting funding if you are a scientists with an alt view.
Where do these subsidies offered to Big Energy come from? From governmental programs spread across all the Western nations. Big companies care about profits. If they can get “free” monies and be touted in the media for being green, that is the route to take. (Even as people across America now find their utility bills rivaling the amounts that they pay for housing each month.)
So I for one fail to see how basing almost all of this on lies is not fraudulent. If this is not fraud, what is?
Mark Steyn has a slightly different take (Ball’s Bearing: Tim Ball, 1938-2022 :: SteynOnline). At least as it regards the end of his life as it was affected by Michael Mann.
The same Mr. Steyn has been embroiled in a defamation suit since 2012, brought by Mann in the DC courts. Steyn has a countersuit (from at least as early as March 2014) against Mann for violating freedom of speech. Mann and the judge in the countersuit took advantage of Steyn’s heart attacks in November 2022 to insist he return immediately to the US to be interviewed/deposed? while still convalescing in France. To protect his health, his doctor refused to allow his discharge.
Some serious forum-shopping by Mann to bring this in DC. I don’t think the initial trial judge was the sharpest knife in the drawer. Daunted by the scientific context but aware that in DC Mann must be the good guy and National Review and Steyn the bad guys, the rulings led to inordinate delays especially when idiot Mann failed to comply with discovery on the theory that right-wingers have no standing to scrutinize planet-saving scientists such as himself (a reprise of his efforts to circle the wagons against requests to get at the data underlying the infamous “hockey stick”.) One suspects that the court has delayed resolution because Mann’s case is silly and delay imposes costs on NR (they settled) and Steyn.
Thank you for this additional information.
I will look into the link provided regarding Mark Steyn, and his take on Tim ball.
As well as the Michael Mann end of things.
If you have more facts with which to inform me and others, I encourage you to add to the discussion. (When your schedule permits.)
I have been leery of the entire “Climate Crisis” narrative since the first time I watched an “Inconvenient Truth” at its debut, and Al Gore then stated “hockey stick.” I realized then this theory was supposition at its best, and outright lies and fraud at its worst.
When you go to his website, I think you’ll find much of interest, but I recommend reviewing his books in the Steyn Store, regarding the current topic particularly “A Disgrace To The Profession”. The world’s scientists on Mann, his hockey stick, and their damage to science – compiled and edited by Mark Steyn. Plus, “Climate Change: The Facts”. Steyn plus Richard Lindzen, Willie Soon, Nigel Lawson and many more in a must-read book on the climate debate – the science, the policy, the politics.
Yes: Considering Steyn doesn’t live in DC and neither does Mann. Doesn’t work in DC and neither does Mann. Prefers to have nothing to do with DC (OK on this point I’m sure Mann considers DC beyond friendly).
And as Steyn says, “The process is the punishment.”
I have of course followed Steyn in his many defenses of Trump, and his offering up vast parts of his shows to allow the COV vax-injured a platform.
Until you posted this, I did not know he had been part of the counter offensive against all things climate-y.
And thanks for the additional names. I lost the few files I had on those people when I switched to a newer computer two years ago. (Okay they are somewhere on some flash stick, but which one and where I don’t yet know.)
Conservapedia says, “The CRU scientists deliberately falsified data, and then used the results of the falsification to obtain additional research funding. This is criminal fraud under English Law. “
I remember Hide the decline
Hide The Decline – Climategate – YouTube
I can never miss a chance to opine on the climate change charade. 3 years and counting, I’ve been perusing Watts Up With That, and other sceptic sites.
It has been revelatory, for me. The believers call the skeptics ad hominems. They deny refutation, there’s documented lies, and obfuscation, and admitted purposeful manipulation of data, and presentation.
This is a mass scale program of anxiety, fear, and malevolence. I’m at a loss, when I see how fear, and lies, propagate mass hysteria, and religious belief, and absolute certainty, amongst the orthodoxy.
And all this was occurring before the endless Pandemic fears.
Now so many people have become afraid of their own shadow.
Add in the total replacement of decent dialogue and decent plot development in film and TV series, with continual references to the need to have an EV, to focus on re-cycling, and the approved outlet of shunning and hating those who do not conform, and our young people are being ultra-conditioned to the idea of 15 minute cities, where a perfect new order of humanity will live environmentally perfect lives. (All under the Watchful Eye of that benevolent goddess of local, state and federal governments, an Eye who exists to protect and love us all to death.)
Bottom lining it. A life without purpose, or meaning, is fertile ground for utopian idealism. Humans need hope. Chasing the unicorn of perfect climate, perfect equity, perfect acceptance…..
Well, there’s going to be alot of broken spirits, and disenfranchised husks of once hopeful, idealistic human capital. The truly sad thing is that the attendees of the utopian orthodoxy are being whipped into a frenzy by the elite. Useful idiots, to be run over by the same bus that they are fueling.
CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) has always been a scam. In fact, it is chain of five big lies:
1) the earth is warming
2) the warming is caused by humans releasing CO2 into the atmosphere
3) the warming will be catastrophic
4) the only remedy is to reduce CO2 emmissions
5) there is certainty to all of the above
The first is partly true and the rest are lies. Many people are getting wealthy based on these lies and they are all evil, because most humans will be made much poorer.
The earth is warming if you start the comparison at 1850. 1850 was 1 C warmer than the coldest year in 10 000 years. It was the end of the mini ice age. So yes when you’re coming out of a mini ice age, it will be warmer. Start the comparison at another year 1900, 1750 and there would be less change. They picked the coldest year possible in recent history (geological time scale) to accentuate their claims. Political manipulation of science.
Also as the glaciers recede, archeologists are excited to find Roman artifacts under the ice. Meaning that the mid-evil warm period that spurred the growth of the Roman Empire – was much warmer than it is today – or will be in the near future.
The climate science is not a science at all. Its computer modeling gone wrong. You can not enter the data from 1970 and get a prediction of weather in 1990, 2010 or ever. The earth’s climate is dynamic and we simply do not understand it well enough to accurately model it.
Roman Empire was a thing at the time of the “Roman Warm Period” (hence the name). The “Medieval Warm Period” was about 1000 years later and about 1000 years ago. Both periods were a little warmer (2-3 degrees C) than today.
The place where I’m sitting was under 6000′ feet of ice 24,000 years ago. That wasn’t the first time that had happened.
You’ve just proved the Climate Crisis crowds’ point, Percival!
Was anyone driving a Hummer 24,000 years ago? Were people centrally heating and air conditioning their caves back then?
No of course not. So now it is totally easy to see how correct the theory is!
<joking, joking>
Don G: you say, “Many people are getting wealthy based on these lies and they are all evil, because most humans will be made much poorer.”
My current utility bill that is for this month and for the past several months now based on electricity at the rate of somewhere between 36 and 42 cents per kilowatt units.
My house is all electrical – nothing is fossil fuel.
Recently due to the big snows we had here in No Calif, we lost power for 36 hours.
We plugged in our fossil-fuel driven generator, and had it up and running for 5 hours.
The generator allowed us to have household lights, our computer, and a heater for the back office running smoothly for 5 hours. The back office is nice sized.
Cost for this was about $4.50.
Normal household use of utilities when power is available is some 14 hrs a day. The heat and lights are turned off at night. Only thing running at night is the water heater and the fridge.
Of course we also use the stove and the washing machine. Also my tape deck and amplifier.
But for this we pay some 24 bucks a day!
Environmentalists – please note: our clothes dryer is 100% solar powered. The installation of the entire system was DIY and back in 2007 cost us $7 bucks for 75 feet of clothesline.
Then over the years we have spent some $21 for clothespins. Of course, in the winter, we do succumb to using our huge clothes dryer powered by regular old electricity – but not more than twice a month.
To be paying only one third less for our utilities than we pay for our rent is extremely off putting. We also have faced a severe decline in customers because when households are paying so much for food, for utilities, for gas to get to work etc, they do not have the funds to purchase books and counseling.
I find it extremely interesting how one of the items that the “conservation”-concerned utility promotes is to to run around the house & make sure there are no tiny appliance lights on, like on the convection oven or stereo. They encourage turning these off as if none are on, I will save 10 dollars over 12 months!!
Never a word to encourage people who are retired or who work from home to use a clothesline… I wonder why that is?
Don G: you say, “Many people are getting wealthy based on these lies and they are all evil, because most humans will be made much poorer.”
My current utility bill that charges me for this month and for the past several months is now based on electricity at the rate of somewhere between 36 and 42 cents per kilowatt units.
My house is all electrical – nothing is fossil fuel.
Recently due to the big snows we had here in No Calif, we lost power for 36 hours.
We plugged in our fossil-fuel driven generator, and had it up and running for 5 hours.
The generator allowed us to have household lights, our computer, and a heater for the back office running smoothly for 5 hours. The back office is nice sized.
Cost for this was about $4.50.
Normal household use of utilities when power is available is some 14 hrs a day. The heat and lights are turned off at night. Only thing running at night is the water heater and the fridge.
Of course we also use the stove and the washing machine. Also my tape deck and amplifier.
But for this we pay some 24 bucks a day!
Environmentalists – please note: our clothes dryer is 100% solar powered. The installation of the entire system was DIY. Back in 2007, it cost us $7 bucks for 75 feet of clothesline.
Then over the years we have spent some $21 for clothespins. Of course, in the winter, we do succumb to using our huge clothes dryer powered by regular old electricity – but not more than twice a month.
To be paying only one fourth less for our utilities than we pay for our rent is extremely off putting. We’ve also faced a severe decline in customers because when households are paying so much for food, for utilities, for gas to get to work etc, they do not have the funds to purchase books and counseling.
I find it extremely interesting how one of the items that the “conservation”-concerned utility promotes is to to run around the house to ensure there are no tiny appliance lights on, like on the convection oven or stereo. They encourage turning these off. With none on, I will save 10 dollars over 12 months!!
Never a word to encourage people who are retired or who work from home to use a clothesline… I wonder why that is?
Like a frog in a pot of water, people did not notice how “green” utilities have raised the cost of living. Cheap energy creates prosperity.
I think your assumption about this Nov 2022 article by Corbett might be dead on.
I think it was in Aug or Sept 2022 that the Hindawi & Wiley story came out.
Here is one 13 min youtube video that discusses the overall implications of what that story involved:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-K3obvnKYQ
Idealism should be for the vast majority, not what is ideal for a small self-righteous, utopian fanatical group.
Prosperity, and human thriving, are the ideal that is seldom heard of, much less, promoted. Abundance in fossil fuels, is why humans have flourished in modern times.
Seeking reality-aligned ideology, isn’t idealistic enough. Utopian fundamentalism, and striving for perfection is the only option.
It’s always the collectivists who become tyrants. We live in anarcho tyranny. Their hyper reactive provocations, result in equally provocative reaction. The Individualist is beset on all sides, by the tyranny of evil men.
And if you asked the people who lived through that year how they liked it, they’d probably say it
waswasn’t (sorry edit) so good.