The Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen is pressing forward in the wake of outrage expressed by many representatives at a leaked “draft” of a treaty to be presented to conference attendees. It seems that the “draft” was allegedly being produced and circulated by conference insiders at the same time that the conference president was pontificating on the importance of the “global democratic system” for solving the supposed problem of manmade climate change.

Bizarrely, the official conference website is crowing about the attention which it is receiving on the internet:

With all due respect to other qualities of the Danish capital, it is of course the ongoing UN conference on climate change, COP15, that has just made "Copenhagen" the current most frequent search request at search engine Google.

According to Treehugger.com the position was taken over from American golf player Tiger Woods.

The web media states that the figures show that "the global society is overwhelmingly interested" in the conference and also notes that other related terms like "climate change" and "global warming" are also ranking high.

And every one of these searches could easily include the word “scandal” in the search. “Climategate” is further proof that not all publicity is good publicity.

But while the delegations speechify and scheme over how draconian the cuts in human prosperity must be to save the world from industrialization, voices within the scientific community which have long questioned the legitimacy of the “science” supporting anthropogenic global warming are being raised in opposition to hasty action.

The revelations of the “Climategate” scandal are alleged to have exposed secret efforts to manipulate climate data and suppress the views of scientists opposed to the climate change theory. Now, those suppressed voices are coming to the fore. In the words of one story at FOXNews.com:

It is not just the University of East Anglia data that is at question. There are about 450 academic peer-reviewed journal articles questioning the importance of man-made global warming. The sheer number of scientists rallying against a major intervention to stop carbon dioxide is remarkable. In a petition, more than 30,000 American scientists are urging the U.S. government to reject the Kyoto treaty. Thus, there is hardly the unanimity among scientists about global warming or mankind's role in producing it. But even for the sake of argument, assuming that there is significant man-made global warming, many academics argue that higher temperatures are actually good. Higher temperatures increase the amount of land to grow food, increase biological diversity, and improve people's health. Increased carbon dioxide also promotes plant growth.

Let's take the issue of data. The three most relied-on data series used by the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment report came from the University of East Anglia, NASA, and the British Met Office. As noted in my previous piece for the Fox Forum, the problem of secretiveness is hardly limited to the University of East Anglia. NASA also refuses to give out its data. NASA further refuses to explain mysterious changes in whether the warmest years were in the 1930s or this past decade. The British Met office, too, has been unable to release its data and just announced its plans to begin a three-year investigation of its data since all of its land temperatures data were obtained from the University of East Anglia (ocean temperatures were collected separately), though there are signs that things might be speeded up.

Neither the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia nor the British Met are able to provide their raw data to other research scientists because of the confidentiality agreements that Professor Phil Jones at CRU entered into. Unfortunately, Jones did not keep records of those agreements and, according to the British Met, can neither identify the countries with the confidentiality agreements nor provide the agreements. Earlier this year the British Met wrote the following to Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit:

"Some of the information was provided to Professor Jones on the strict understanding by the data providers that this station data must not be publicly released and it cannot be determined which countries or stations data were given in confidence as records were not kept."

One scientist whose voice needs to be heard on the topic of climate change is Jasper Kirkby, an experimental particle physicist with CERN, whose research into the relationship between solar activity, cosmic rays, and cloud formation fundamentally challenges the theories of manmade climate change. According to Kirkby’s research, the cycle of climate change is being caused by causes which are well outside the range of human control, and that the present decline in the number of sunspots may herald a coming dramatic drop in temperatures. (The scientific seesaw between ‘global meltdown’ and ‘new ice age’ does leave the mind reeling, but if nothing else it certainly indicates the mind-numbing complexity of studying Earth’s climate.)

In a rare burst of common sense from Capitol Hill, members of Congress have been calling for a halt on climate-related legislation until a review of the science of climate change can be conducted in the wake of the “Climategate” scandal. In the words of Rep. Sensenbrenner, the scandal has uncovered “scientific fascism.”

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., also wrote to Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, on Monday to demand that researchers who authored e-mails and documents that demonstrate climate change data were manipulated should not be allowed to participate in the latest report written by the U.N. panel.

"I call it 'scientific fascism,'" Sensenbrenner said during a press conference with fellow climate change skeptics. "The U.N. should throw a red flag. .... They relied on these scientists unjustifiably in my opinion."

Sensenbrenner wrote that "these bad actors" limited peer-reviewed studies used by the IPCC, which is leading the Copenhagen conference on climate change.

"Their behavior has caused grave damage to the public trust in climate science in general, and to the IPCC, in particular," Sensenbrenner wrote. "They should not be allowed to do so in the future. I therefore request that you and the co-chairs of each of the three IPCC working groups ensure that none of the individuals involved in these nefarious e-mail exchanges participate as contributors, reviewers, or in any other capacity in the preparation of" the next IPCC report.

Sensenbrenner’s mistake is regarding the UN and IPCC as having been duped by “bad actors.” Considering the vast amount of power being sought by the UN, IPCC and UNEP under the guise of saving the Earth from the last 150 years of industrial development, investigations into “Climategate” which pose the simple question, “Cui bono?” will find the answer at the UN.

Reigning in the bizarre, and unconstitutional, power play by President Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency which seeks to simply nullify the role of the entire constitutional role of the legislative branch of government may prove difficult. The experience of our Republic in recent years has been one of hasty actions which will take years — even a generation — to amend. But the chaos which may envelope the Copenhagen conference — even as it has so surrounded the theory which underpins that conference — gives some hope that it is not too late to step back from the abyss of global government and imposed post-industrial poverty.

Rt. Rev. James Heiser has served as Pastor of Salem Lutheran Church in Malone, Texas, while maintaining his responsibilities as publisher of Repristination Press, which he established in 1993 to publish academic and popular theological books to serve the Lutheran Church.  Heiser has also served since 2005 as the Dean of Missions for The Augustana Ministerium and in 2006 was called to serve as Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America (ELDoNA). An advocate of manned space exploration, Heiser serves on the Steering Committee of the Mars Society. His publications include two books; The Office of the Ministry in N. Hunnius' Epitome Credendorum (1996) and A Shining City on a Higher Hill: Christianity and the Next New World (2006), as well as dozens of journal articles and book reviews.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (6)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

rprew

December 10, 2009

72.201.107.33

Votes: +5

• 
• 
• 

The Ox-Bow Incident revisited

In The Ox-Bow Incident, a mob of angry men, acting upon a rumor, form a posse and go on the hunt. Ultimately, they come upon a small group of men who match some of the characteristics of the villains who supposedly committed the crime. The men are apprehended and hung without a trail. The mob is egged on my a influential person with an oversized ego and undersized accomplishments. When it is all said and done, the men who were hung were not only innocent, they hadn't even been any crime in the first place. Even though the truth came out in the end, the damage had already been done, and there was no way of undoing it.

Copenhagen is unfolding just like Ox-Bow.

John John

December 10, 2009

99.244.30.184

Votes: +4

• 
• 
• 

...

This train has been picking up speed for a full decade.. The EPA calling soda pop bubbles a dangerous pollutant.. Obama answering the hard questions on weather Santa is coming to the Whitehouse.. Obama picking up his Nobel (for things to come)on his way to Cop-15 where he intends on handing over 300 years of freedom..

DDW

December 10, 2009

173.74.213.85

Votes: +2

• 
• 
• 

This thing just keeps getting better

All the time. Is it a horror? A comedy? A tragedy? A mystery? A drama? One thing it most certainly is: sickening. As I said in an earlier posting, I wish them all nothing but the worst.

Andrew30

December 11, 2009

66.78.119.241

Votes: +1

• 
• 
• 

CRU Funding

The Climate Research Unit (CRU) in the UK was set up in 1971 with funding from Shell and BP as is described in the book: "The history of the University of East Anglia, Norwich; Page 285)" By Michael Sanderson. The CRU was still being funded in 2008 by Shell, BP, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate and UK Nirex LTD (the nuclear waste people in the UK)

This is important to know, for two reasons.
Firstly, the key institution providing support for Global Warming theories and the basis for the IPCC findings receives funding from "Big Oil" and the nuclear power industry.

Secondly, the research from the institution which is perceived to be independent publicly funded research, is actually beholden to soft money, CRU is in fact a business.

The funders of the CRU are on the bottom of this page from their website:
http://web.archive.org/web/20080627194858/http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/

You can not put coal through a pipeline, nuclear power is expensive.

Andrew30

December 11, 2009

66.78.119.241

Votes: +2

• 
• 
• 

Can’t hide the medieval warming period

It was much, much warmer during the medieval warming period than it is today.

This is not so complicated

There are Vikings that were buried (interred) in the permafrost in Greenland.
The permafrost was not disturbed since it froze.
It was not frozen when they were buried.
I would call that warmer then today, a lot warmer.

They were interred hundreds of years before the Industrial Revolution. The CRU tried to hide this.

The ironic thing is that this evidence of the medieval warming period is in a museum in Copenhagen.

The Fate of Greenland's Vikings February 28, 2000 by Dale Mackenzie Brown
www.archaeology.org/online/features/greenland

Also, the medieval warming period was global.

Fraudulent hockey sticks and hidden data
joannenova.com.au/2009/12/fraudulent-hockey-sticks-and-hidden-data

For a satirical look at the climategate computer programming (hiding the decline):
Anthropogenic Global Warming Virus Alert.

www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s5i64103

Lawrence Baker

December 13, 2009

74.33.56.240

Votes: -1

• 
• 
• 

Mr.

Global Warming-IS- Human / Industrial Waste!
The best indisputable SCIENCE example that should be the #1 item on the Copenhagen Agenda would be the toxic waste dump, the size of Texas, 900 miles off of the United States and Canadian West Coast.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GreatPacificGarbagePatch
That is a Big SCIENCE problem with no dedicated U.S SCIENCE and INNOVATION DEPARTMENT to address the issue. The U.S (or Canada) has not even sent out a SCIENCE research vessel to evaluate this ecological disaster; neither country wants to take the responsibility for the industrial/human pollution or even acknowledge its existence.
No Profit-No Action!-No SCIENCE! Will the World Trade Organization and the New Industrial World Order address the issue? Where is their World SCIENCE Department?
Can the problem be solved with SCIENCE? Probably so, Americans are very ingenious primarily because we were raised with the compliments of Freedom and Democracy and are free thinking individuals. We could probably figure a way to clean up the mess and possibly make a profit doing so.
We can do nothing until we have a DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE that is free to address SCIENCE and to develop the advancement of SCIENCE. (Yes, for the sake of humanity; SCIENCE FIRST-PANDERING SECOND.)

Write comment

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.