With Climategate, The Other Shoe Begins To Fall Quietly, But With Inevitability

Will MSM Hear It?

Phil Jones, former head of the East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, and one of the world’s leading proponents of AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) has finally started to come clean concerning the supposed soundness of the “underlying science.”  Not that he would put it that way, of course.

But before we get to what he revealed to the BBC yesterday, we need to take a look at the way the mouthpieces for the fraud that is AGW have emerged from one embarrassment after another with a common reassurance.  As if reading from talking points, warming alarmists worldwide have repeated the mantra that the basic science is sound, and all these errors are merely fringe stuff, nothing that affects the basic premise that man-made carbon emissions are creating a green house effect that will cause global temperatures to rise several degrees over the next century and result in massive catastrophes of many sorts.

So, let me get this straight.   The part of the 2007 IPCC report that dealt with actual physical predictions is fraught with errors, but that is not important.  The underlying science is still good.  The stuff about glaciers melting, rainforests vanishing, Africa frying, the frequency and severity of hurricanes and storms escalating, all within the next few decades was wrong, (not to mention the inability to understand geography enough to figure out how much of Holland is below sea level), but, ah, don’t be alarmed, everything else in the report is accurate. 

We shouldn’t worry about other parts of the report?  What about  NASA being forced to revise their figures when caught dishonestly claiming all the warmest years of the last century were recent, when in fact they were not.  Or the fact that the CRU’s own programmer could not figure out how to make the original temperature data transmogrify into the data set used to produce the infamous “hockey stick?”

Which brings us back to Mr. Jones latest revelations.  He now admits that the data were not “well organized,” and that is why he has refused to let anyone else look at it.  Nice euphemism, very scientific indeed.   Then he goes on, now that someone is going to actually look at real data and not just their manipulated data, and fesses up that maybe, just possibly, the medieval warming period might actually exist.  If the science is not settled about the medieval warming period, then the science is not settled at all, since if that that period were as warm or warmer than the last few decades, AGW is left with very little support on which to rest.  Unless we were producing a lot of greenhouse gases back in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.

It is entirely possible that humans have contributed to some warming, but it appears the amount will eventually be found to be insignificant compared to the natural but poorly understood cycles the earth goes through.   AGW is another Piltdown Man.   Al Gore, please return all Oscars, Nobels, etc.  And all of you on the AGW gravy train please return those trillions of dollars to the tax payers; and let us pray we don’t get fooled again.