Despite the far likelier case that the emails were leaked from the inside, and were not illegally obtained by criminal hackers
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, December 3, 2009
In a pathetic effort to make the climategate scandal go away, the crooks involved in manipulating data to “hide the decline” in global warming are recasting themselves as the victims of the whole affair, attempting to shift the blame to criminal hackers who stole data, when all the evidence suggests the CRU emails were leaked from the inside.
Of course, the only real criminals are those who were caught fraudulently massaging climate data in order to comply with the United Nations’ agenda for a global carbon tax, a world government and complete takeover of the global economy.
One of the principle climategate suspects, Penn State University meteorology professor Michael Mann, currently under investigation by his own university in what will probably amount to little more than a whitewash, tries to absolve himself by claiming he and his colleagues are being targeted in an interview with AccuWeather.com’s Katie Fehlinger.
“I think it is unfortunate that some scientists out there are using this situation to settle personal scores, to settle a vendetta,” Mann said, claiming that the emails had been “taken out of context”.
“Phil Jones is a very honest scientist,” Mann said. “He was probably talking about getting rid of measurements that they didn’t consider reliable,” said Mann in response to emails between him and Jones that discuss deleting information.
In reality, as Lord Monckton has documented, “Contrary to all the rules of open, verifiable science, the Team had committed the criminal offense of conspiracy to conceal and then to destroy computer codes and data that had been legitimately requested by an external researcher who had very good reason to doubt that their “research” was either honest or competent.”
Additionally, scientists also “discussed ways of dodging Freedom of Information Act requests to release temperature data,” reports the Daily Mail.
The emails show that scientists relied on cronyism and cosying up to FOIA officials to prevent them from being forced to release data.
“When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by the requests,’ the email says. “It took a couple of half-hour sessions to convince them otherwise.”
“Once they became aware of the types of people we were dealing with, everyone at UEA became very supportive. I’ve got to know the FOI person quite well and the chief librarian – who deals with appeals.”
Mann’s characterization of this issue as that Jones was “getting rid of measurements that they didn’t consider reliable” is completely inconsistent with the known facts.
Despite his haughty manner in dismissing the gravity of the scandal, other climate scientists are quickly abandoning Mann.
Eduardo Zorita, scientist at the Institute for Coastal Research, is calling for Mann, Jones and others to be banned from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) process for the review and publication of climate change data.
“The scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore,” said Zorita.
Marc Morano, climate change skeptic and executive editor of ClimateDepot.com, agrees.
“Mann has been dogged for years about his scientific work. Climategate exposes his glaring weaknesses as a scientist,” he said in an e-mail to AccuWeather.com.
Meanwhile, climategate ringleader Phil Jones of the Climate Research Unit, the CRU scientist who infamously wrote about the need to “hide the decline” in global warming in one of the leaked emails, was escorted by plain clothes officers to a police station near his home yesterday.
Unfortunately, officers were only questioning Jones as the ‘victim of a crime’ rather than for his role in producing manipulated data that is being used to bankrupt national economies and launch larcenous and fraudulent tax scams upon the populations of developed countries, as well as his efforts to engage in academic witch hunts by blocking data he politically disagreed with from appearing in IPCC reports.
“Sources said the interview concerned the theft of emails from the university and alleged death threats since the contents of the emails were released, adding he was being treated as a ‘victim of crime’ rather than a suspect in any criminal investigation,” reports the Daily Mail.
How Jones is a victim of a crime is beyond explanation since it’s widely acknowledged that the CRU emails were most probably leaked from an inside source and were not obtained illegally from the outside by a hacker with a criminal vendetta.
