?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
28 June 2010 @ 07:32 pm
Deliberate Fraud? 7 The IPCC - Its Reason For Being  

In my opinion.
The simple fact is that it has never been about climate. Had it been, CO2 emission levels across the world would not have been allowed to continue to increase. Year in year out. E.g. China is building a coal fired energy plant a week until 2030 without CO2 capture. (See China Makes Western CO2 “control” Pointless) The EU cannot reduce its emission increases except by printing carbon credits.

Each of the italicized statements is an outrageous lie.

The IPCC, (charged with proving human produced CO2 is dangerous) is a politically motivated advocacy that has used propaganda and deceit to persuade world governments that CO2 emitted by humans is harmful, that the science is settled and that action needs to be taken to curtail CO2 emissions.

The IPCC with help has taken an unproven broken fingernail and convinced the political world and the public via the compliant media that amputation is the only way to fix it. A confidence trick combining brilliance, duplicity and stupidity.

IPCC reports have been found biased to show almost exclusively papers that have been fund-directed to support IPCC claims. Some were peer reviewed. Most rely on the assumption that CO2 drives warming (and CRU or GISS data), none proved it. The journals from which the IPCC drew their "evidence" have been strongly influenced by threats from central scientists and by dogmatically biased editors evidenced by "climategate" and that one editor was excluded from the Oxburgh review for just that reason.

The proof that the IPCC is controlled by incompetents, self-serving liars and propagandists is shown not just by the disconnect of the summaries for policy makers but in the full report AR4 that took a disgusted public to find the truth.

All 18,531 references cited in the 2007 IPCC report were examined
5,587 are not peer-reviewed
IPCC chairman's claim that the report relies solely on peer-reviewed sources is not supported
Each chapter was audited three times; the result most favorable to the IPCC was used
21 out of 44 chapters contain so few peer-reviewed references, they get an F
43 citizen auditors in 12 countries participated in this project
Full report card here
Detailed results here

The IPCC is guilty of lying by omission. The overwhelming benefits of warming (longer growing seasons, more rain, lower energy use etc.) and the benefits of rising CO2 levels (free fertiliser, increased crop yields needing less water etc.) have been ignored in their entirety.

Pachauri, IPCC leader is a proven liar, a seeming compulsion and qualification for the role very likely the same for panel members. So called scientists seem oblivious to reality or the need for competence. Two famous examples of wrongness are the Briffa et al hockey stick and the Mann et al hockey stick that the IPCC used as a motto for years after it was proven false.

After decades of research and worldwide more than £50 billion spent, the best evidence the IPCC can produce is a selection of computer scenarios that are produced based on assumptions, that still fail to deliver. Hence the argument  that models could become right in decades hence and just in case they are, civilization should be impoverished and governance centralised.

Change the data to suit the purpose is the IPCC motto.
The IPCC used only one Solar Physicist. Her name is Judith Lean. On the basis of this "consensus of one" solar physicist, the IPCC proclaimed solar influences upon the climate to be minimal.
Judith Lean, along with Claus Frohlich, are responsible for the scandalous rewriting of graphs of solar activity. Satellites showed that the TSI (measured in watts) between 1986 and 96 increased by about one third. Judith Lean and Claus Frohlich (authors of the single study noted above) "manipulated" the data.

Another lie, a consensus for AGW of thousands of scientists turned out to be a few dozen.

Whole organisations central to the IPCC (not just individual players) are being shown either deceptive or wholly incompetent. Hadley CRU data has been shown to be manipulated and rather than accept the charge, the CRU claimed lost raw data and skulked off to Turkey to begin to redo the whole series claiming it would take 3 years. (Does it work the same for government accountants and bankers?)

One wonders how heavily the data needs to be massaged to eliminate the siting and other problems with over 80% of the gold standard US temperature measuring stations? Obviously if the US is the best, then there are going to be many times worse problems with none US stations.

One has to question whether the 3 years claim is a hibernation tactic hoping the storm will blow past by then. If heads don't roll, it won't. If the lies about CO2 continue, it won't. If the abuse of science for political and profit purposes continues, it won't. If ideologues and profiteers continue their whitewashes of what is criminal misuse of public funds, I assure you, it won't.

GISS has stated that their data products are not as good as CRU's.

NOAA has several times been found publicising data favouring warming and omitting moderating data.

GHCN, the originator of data on which products from the above organisations are based has been found to be biased.

Surface Temperature Records: Policy Driven Deception? A documenting of the deceit.

We now have satellites that produce far more accurate data. CRU, GISS, NOAA, GHCN, with regard to surface temperature measurement are untrustworthy dinosaurs and more, unnecessary dinosaurs.

There is no credible evidence that natural and human CO2 additions since WWII have influenced the climate significantly or adversely influenced weather. (No evidence of CO2 influence in deserts here.)

Every event blamed on CO2 emissions has been due to warming, not CO2.

Ice cores show CO2 increases and decreases after temperature increases and decreases - by 600 to over a thousand years. Sediment cores confirm the ice cores represent naturally smoothed but reasonably accurate past variation, albeit the volume appears to be below reality. CO2 cannot be a driver of climate temperature without time travel.

Men claiming to be scientists relate modern CO2 increases to modern temperature when the underlying driver of CO2 levels is the Medieval Warm Period. The oceans carry CO2 down and around the thermohaline circulation that can take approx a thousand years to do a full circuit before the absorbed CO2 is available to be released.

Modern CO2 levels follow temperature. It can't time travel. The reason for the lag is that the air temperature responds to ocean temperature variation faster than the ocean can release CO2. The Sun drives ocean temperature. Ozone, clouds and aerosols regulate the solar radiation reaching the surface.

The human contribution to natural emissions is ~4% max. (UNIPCC AR4 natural emissions 98ppm human emissions 4ppm). 4% of the 1.9 parts per million per year that gets added to the atmosphere cannot in any way drive temperature.

IN FACT 1.9ppm (0.00019% of the atmosphere) cannot drive climate temperature.

Water vapour can and does regulate the air temperature. The upper troposphere is drying. That means less delay in infrared radiation escaping the atmosphere.

An honest assessment carried out by a legal eagle.
Global Warming Science: A Cross Examination (Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post, 7 June 2010)
A cross examination of global warming science conducted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Institute for Law and Economics has concluded that virtually every claim advanced by global warming proponents fails to stand up to scrutiny.
The cross-examination, carried out by Jason Scott Johnston, Professor and Director of the Program on Law, Environment and Economy at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, found that “on virtually every major issue in climate change science, the [reports of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] and other summarizing work by leading climate establishment scientists have adopted various rhetorical strategies that seem to systematically conceal or minimize what appear to be fundamental scientific uncertainties or even disagreements.” [PDF of the cross exam. here.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I suspect the Club of Rome, whose stated OWG agenda includes using climate scares is the principal driver behind the scam with the Fabian Society that has similar objectives to the CoR in alignment.

Maurice Strong, (2nd link) an alleged fraudster, former UN star, Kyoto architect, instrumental in forming UNEP and the IPCC with superstitious crank Sir J Houghton, advisor to Blair. Known earth worshipper with strange ideas on how the world should be. Club of Rome member.

George Soros, (remember Black Wednesday?) regularly associated with financial misdealing, recently in court for his dishonesty. Friend and associate of Strong and Obama (Chicago Climate ExchangeSoros). Club of Rome member.

Al Gore, friend and associate of Strong and Soros, with past and present business dealings with both. Known liar. Club of Rome member.
-----
Politicians and their advisors are the duplicitous participants and or stupid means used to implement the scam on an unaware public.

The UN is a fraudulent instrument strongly influenced and possibly controlled by CoR. Funding should stop immediately. The UK has £1 billion earmarked to gift it.

The EU's EC is a fraudulent instrument strongly influenced by the Fabian Society and CoR (both have similar objectives), with members of both societies in influential positions. Participant in the scam.

It seems A. Blair, Club of Rome member, set the UK up to be fleeced and G. Brown delivered the goods.

Banks.

Image Source A Tougher Cap on Size

Rockefeller is a Rothschild. He was instrumental in founding CoR and UNEP and establishing the agenda of the Club of Rome that looks to have been written by the Rothschild family.

Rothschild advises the UK government and controls the major banks. The Rothschild family and close associates control almost all the central banks in the world. They want bankers to be the world government.

George Osbourne and Dave Cameron are friends and associates of Rothschild.

The Royal Society and the Grantham Institute were instrumental in convincing the public of the need for action where it was obvious to a child that it could neither be achieved nor was it needed. One can only wonder why.

Lord Oxburgh, RS, is impartial.

Fraud 1. Maldives, Tuvalu, sea levels
Fraud 2. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
Fraud 3. Carbon credits
Fraud 4. The Wind Energy Boondoggle
Supplement to Fraud 4. Wind Energy
Fraud 5. Biofuel Boondoggle
Fraud 6. AGW by CO2 is settled science (by consensus)
Fraud 7. The IPCC - Its Reason For Being
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wannabe Napoleons posture while a serious change in climate is being precipitated. Dust clouds have triggered (or been the signal for) rapid climate change to cooling every time it happened during the last 80,000 years that can be observed so far, possibly every one that has happened ever was triggered by them. East Africa has seen drought for 15 years, that means 15 years of major dust storms. Cooling commenced in 2003. It will accelerate. It is probably too late to stop, meanwhile throwing public money at private ne'er do wells and pretending CO2 is a problem is an act of utter, utter stupidity or self serving duplicity.

Thar she goes.

Dr R Spencer discusses El Nino's demise on WUWT here.
 
 
 
clothcapclothcap on June 30th, 2010 12:00 am (UTC)
Update
Updated to include "An honest assessment carried out by a legal eagle."