Changes

===Subverting the scientific peer review process===

===Subverting the scientific peer review process===

From a June 11, 2008 press release at the University of East Anglia, the CRU stated that they set the agenda on climate change, "The University of East Anglia, particularly its Climate Research Unit, is the only university to be included in a list of the key bodies that have set the environmental agenda in the UK over the past 30 years."<ref>http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2008/june/CRU+key+to+setting+environmental+agenda</ref> James Randerson in the UK Guardian commented on this environmental agenda in the article, ''Western Lifestyle Unsustainable, Says Climate Expert Rajendra Pachauri''. The author was writing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for the United Nations. Randerson referenced comments about global warming made by Mr. [[Rajendra Pachauri]], the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change at the United Nations who was also awarded a [[Nobel Prize]] along with [[Al Gore]] for his work. Randerson quoted Pachauri and argued, "Hotel guests should have their electricity monitored; hefty aviation taxes should be introduced to deter people from flying; and iced water in restaurants should be curtailed, the world's leading climate scientist has told the ''Observer''."<ref>James Randerson. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/29/rajendra-pachauri-climate-warning-copenhagen Western lifestyle unsustainable, says climate expert Rajendra Pachauri], [[The Guardian|guardian.co.uk]], November 29, 2009.</ref> On this environmental agenda and the scandal that Climategate revealed all together, Glenn Beck rebuked with the following statement:

The CRU scientists, from the e-mails, on several occasions discussed methods of subverting the scientific peer review process to ensure that skeptical papers had no access to publication. As scientific data began showing a downtrend after 2001, the e-mails show a criminal intent to create fraudulent data, and defraud the public of millions of dollars with a cap and trade scheme as part of a Global Warming movement. From a June 11, 2008 press release at the University of East Anglia, the CRU stated that they set the agenda on climate change, "The University of East Anglia, particularly its Climate Research Unit, is the only university to be included in a list of the key bodies that have set the environmental agenda in the UK over the past 30 years."<ref>http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2008/june/CRU+key+to+setting+environmental+agenda</ref>  

 

James Randerson wrote in ''[[The Guardian]]'' on this environmental agenda and headlined, ''Western Lifestyle Unsustainable, Says Climate Expert Rajendra Pachauri''. The author was writing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for the United Nations. Randerson referenced comments about global warming made by Mr. [[Rajendra Pachauri]], the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change at the United Nations who was also awarded a [[Nobel Prize]] along with [[Al Gore]] for his work. Randerson quoted Pachauri and argued, "Hotel guests should have their electricity monitored; hefty aviation taxes should be introduced to deter people from flying; and iced water in restaurants should be curtailed, the world's leading climate scientist has told the ''Observer''."<ref>James Randerson. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/29/rajendra-pachauri-climate-warning-copenhagen Western lifestyle unsustainable, says climate expert Rajendra Pachauri], [[The Guardian|guardian.co.uk]], November 29, 2009.</ref> On this environmental agenda and the scandal that Climategate revealed all together, Glenn Beck rebuked with the following statement:

{{cquote|[The scientists] were asking each other to delete messages to avoid [[Freedom of Information Act]] requests. That doesn't sound legal. Scientists are working together to try and change the definition of [[peer review]] journals so that anybody who said global warming wasn't real couldn't get their papers published. [...] [And then with] these thousands of E-mails ... Shouldn't this be - oh, I don't know - everywhere now? All of them are, to varying degrees, important. But how much could any of those actually cost you? This scandal will literally cost you trillions of dollars. That's what's at stake worldwide. It's on how we deal with the climate.<ref name=nbstaff>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2009/11/24/glenn-beck-cites-newsbusters-bash-tvs-climategate-boycott Glenn Beck Cites NewsBusters to Bash TV's ClimateGate Boycott], ''NewsBusters'', November 24, 2009.</ref>}}

{{cquote|[The scientists] were asking each other to delete messages to avoid [[Freedom of Information Act]] requests. That doesn't sound legal. Scientists are working together to try and change the definition of [[peer review]] journals so that anybody who said global warming wasn't real couldn't get their papers published. [...] [And then with] these thousands of E-mails ... Shouldn't this be - oh, I don't know - everywhere now? All of them are, to varying degrees, important. But how much could any of those actually cost you? This scandal will literally cost you trillions of dollars. That's what's at stake worldwide. It's on how we deal with the climate.<ref name=nbstaff>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2009/11/24/glenn-beck-cites-newsbusters-bash-tvs-climategate-boycott Glenn Beck Cites NewsBusters to Bash TV's ClimateGate Boycott], ''NewsBusters'', November 24, 2009.</ref>}}

===Freedom of Information Act===

===Freedom of Information Act===

The Freedom of Information Act explicitly forbids deletion of any material subject to a [[FOIA]] request. The penalty for such a criminal act is a fine of up to £5,000. Presumably being found guilty of such an act, or even suggesting it, would also bring about significant disciplinary procedures at any reputable [[university]].

Climate scientists at the CRU worked to circumvent the Freedom of Information Act process in the UK. The Freedom of Information Act explicitly forbids deletion of any material subject to a [[FOIA]] request. The penalty for such a criminal act is a fine of up to £5,000. Presumably being found guilty of such an act, or even suggesting it, would also bring about significant disciplinary procedures at any reputable [[university]].

==Climategate coverage==

==Climategate coverage==

===Other countries take notice===

===Other countries take notice===

While U.S. Democratic politicians downplayed the Climategate controversy, and despite the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scoffing at Climategate by suggesting it provided no basis for questioning the science behind global warming, other countries around the world took notice of the scandal. [[Saudi Arabia]] called for an independent investigation into Climategate, warning that the scandal over stolen e-mails threatened to undermine the global-warming negotiations. "The level of confidence is certainty shaken," said the Saudi Arabian negotiator. "We believe this scandal — or what has been referred to as the ‘Climategate’ scandal — we think this is definitely going to affect the nature of what could be trusted in our deliberations."<ref>Lisa Lerer. [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30291.html Saudi Arabia calls for 'climategate' investigation], ''[[Politico]]'', December 07, 2009.</ref> Elsewhere, Australia had planned on setting an example to lead in the fight on climate change, to become one of the first countries to install a [[cap and trade]] system. However, due to an "emissions trading scheme" Climategate revealed, [[Liberal Party]] members within Australia’s parliament realized that cap and trade is based on flawed science. Liberal MP’s resigned rather than voted for a cap and trade scheme.<ref>[http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/ripples-of-climategate-being-felt-worldwide-liberal-mps-desert-turnbull-in-australia-over-emissions-trading-scheme/ Ripples of Climategate? Liberal MP’s desert Turnbull in Australia over emissions trading scheme], ''WUWT'', November 25, 2009.</ref>

While U.S. Democratic politicians downplayed the Climategate controversy, and despite the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scoffing at Climategate by suggesting it provided no basis for questioning the science behind global warming, global reactions from other countries around the world took notice of the scandal. [[Saudi Arabia]] called for an independent investigation into Climategate, warning that the scandal over stolen e-mails threatened to undermine the global-warming negotiations. "The level of confidence is certainty shaken," said the Saudi Arabian negotiator. "We believe this scandal — or what has been referred to as the ‘Climategate’ scandal — we think this is definitely going to affect the nature of what could be trusted in our deliberations."<ref>Lisa Lerer. [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30291.html Saudi Arabia calls for 'climategate' investigation], ''[[Politico]]'', December 07, 2009.</ref> Elsewhere, Australia had planned on setting an example to lead in the fight on climate change, to become one of the first countries to install a [[cap and trade]] system. However, due to an "emissions trading scheme" Climategate revealed, [[Liberal Party]] members within Australia’s parliament realized that cap and trade is based on flawed science. Liberal MP’s resigned rather than voted for a cap and trade scheme.<ref>[http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/ripples-of-climategate-being-felt-worldwide-liberal-mps-desert-turnbull-in-australia-over-emissions-trading-scheme/ Ripples of Climategate? Liberal MP’s desert Turnbull in Australia over emissions trading scheme], ''WUWT'', November 25, 2009.</ref>

[[File:GlobalWarmingFraud Newsbusters.jpg|right|200px]]

[[File:GlobalWarmingFraud Newsbusters.jpg|right|200px]]

==Copenhagen==

==Copenhagen==

[[Sarah Palin]] called for President Obama to skip the climate summit in [[Denmark]] due to the information Climategate exposed. She commented on [[Facebook]] that the president should reconsider his trip until the e-mails can be investigated, "Boycotting Copenhagen while this scandal is thoroughly investigated would send a strong message that the [[United States]] government will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices."<ref name=obamacopenhagen>Wendell Goler. [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/05/obama-s-shift-copenhagen-visit-defies-climate-gate-controversy/ Obama Ignores 'Climate-Gate' in Revising Copenhagen Plans], FOXNews.com, December 5, 2009.</ref> Instead, the [[The White House|White House]], in its attempt to downplay the controversial leaked e-mails of climate scientists, announced that [[President Obama]] was "doubling down" on his commitment to the summit's goals, hoping to secure a "meaningful" agreement. Originally, the [[President of the United States of America|President]] was supposed to attend the U.N. Climate Conference in Copenhagen for the beginning of the conference, "bless the occasion and leave," said Roger Simon of ''Pajamas Media''. After Climategate became known, ''Pajamas Media'' reported that President Obama, "[S]witched his itinerary to be there at the end of the two weeks in order to give his blessing and impetus to the decision itself."<ref>Roger L. Simon. [http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2009/12/06/climategate-why-obama-switched-his-copenhagen-itinerary/ Climategate: Why Obama switched his Copenhagen itinerary], ''[[Pajamas Media]]'', December 06, 2009.</ref>

[[Sarah Palin]] called for President Obama to skip Copenhagen, the climate summit in [[Denmark]], because of the information Climategate exposed. She commented on [[Facebook]] that the president should reconsider his trip until the e-mails can be investigated, "Boycotting Copenhagen while this scandal is thoroughly investigated would send a strong message that the [[United States]] government will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices."<ref name=obamacopenhagen>Wendell Goler. [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/05/obama-s-shift-copenhagen-visit-defies-climate-gate-controversy/ Obama Ignores 'Climate-Gate' in Revising Copenhagen Plans], FOXNews.com, December 5, 2009.</ref> Instead, the [[The White House|White House]], in its attempt to downplay the controversial leaked e-mails of climate scientists, announced that [[President Obama]] was "doubling down" on his commitment to the summit's goals, hoping to secure a "meaningful" agreement. Originally, the [[President of the United States of America|President]] was supposed to attend the U.N. Climate Conference in Copenhagen for the beginning of the conference, "bless the occasion and leave," said Roger Simon of ''Pajamas Media''. After Climategate became known, ''Pajamas Media'' reported that President Obama, "[S]witched his itinerary to be there at the end of the two weeks in order to give his blessing and impetus to the decision itself."<ref>Roger L. Simon. [http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2009/12/06/climategate-why-obama-switched-his-copenhagen-itinerary/ Climategate: Why Obama switched his Copenhagen itinerary], ''[[Pajamas Media]]'', December 06, 2009.</ref>

===Global Warming hoax===

===Global Warming hoax===

On December 08, the second day of [[Copenhagen]], news from the ''UK Telegraph'' headlined, "Starving Polar Bears Turn to Cannibalism."

On December 08, the second day of [[Copenhagen]], news from the ''UK Telegraph'' headlined, "Starving Polar Bears Turn to Cannibalism."

{{cquote|New pictures show that polar bears are beginning to cannibalize each other as global warming destroys its hunting grounds.  The images, taken in Hudson Bay, Canada, around 200 miles north of the town of Churchill, Manitoba, show a male polar bear carrying the bloodied head of a polar bear cub it has killed for food.  Polar bears usually subsist on seals, which they hunt from a platform of sea ice. But the melting of sea ice as a result of rising global temperatures has made it more difficult for polar bears to hunt seals at sea.<ref>Jonathan Liew. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/6760103/Starving-polar-bears-turn-to-cannibalism.html Starving polar bears turn to cannibalism], Telegraph.co.uk, December 08, 2009.</ref>}}

{{cquote|New pictures show that polar bears are beginning to cannibalize each other as global warming destroys its hunting grounds.  The images, taken in Hudson Bay, Canada, around 200 miles north of the town of Churchill, Manitoba, show a male polar bear carrying the bloodied head of a polar bear cub it has killed for food.  Polar bears usually subsist on seals, which they hunt from a platform of sea ice. But the melting of sea ice as a result of rising global temperatures has made it more difficult for polar bears to hunt seals at sea.<ref>Jonathan Liew. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/6760103/Starving-polar-bears-turn-to-cannibalism.html Starving polar bears turn to cannibalism], Telegraph.co.uk, December 08, 2009.</ref>}}

[[Rush Limbaugh]] blasted the story and commented, "None of this is true." Limbaugh rebuked the false claims about polar bears pointing out the continuation of fraudulent stories from the media despite Climategate, and he revealed another hoax blaming a natural event on global warming.  

[[Rush Limbaugh]] blasted the Global Warming hoax and commented, "None of this is true." Limbaugh rebuked the false claims about polar bears pointing out the continuation of fraudulent stories from the media despite Climategate, and he revealed another hoax blaming a natural event on global warming.  

{{cquote|If you know anything about polar bears, you know that there are any number of reasons why polar bears attack each other. But did you know that polar bear males are well known for eating their young if given half a chance?  They do.  The mother, the female polar bear has to protect the cubs from the father and other males.  Polar bears are a vicious species.  They're not this cuddly little old English sheepdog type thing.  People go out on ice floes to study these things, and if they attack they have to shoot them.  They're not at all in any way tame, and they're huge.  They can rip you to shreds inside of five seconds, they wouldn't care, and Reuters would run a picture and blame it all on global warming, not the fact that a polar bear is a polar bear.  Polar bears eat their young, if given half the chance, males do.  So another hoax, 100% total fraud on the second day of Copenhagen.<ref name=climatehoax/>}}

{{cquote|If you know anything about polar bears, you know that there are any number of reasons why polar bears attack each other. But did you know that polar bear males are well known for eating their young if given half a chance?  They do.  The mother, the female polar bear has to protect the cubs from the father and other males.  Polar bears are a vicious species.  They're not this cuddly little old English sheepdog type thing.  People go out on ice floes to study these things, and if they attack they have to shoot them.  They're not at all in any way tame, and they're huge.  They can rip you to shreds inside of five seconds, they wouldn't care, and Reuters would run a picture and blame it all on global warming, not the fact that a polar bear is a polar bear.  Polar bears eat their young, if given half the chance, males do.  So another hoax, 100% total fraud on the second day of Copenhagen.<ref name=climatehoax/>}}