the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Global Warming IPCC Meltdown

Posted by Jeff Id on January 25, 2010

This is the biggest story in climate science right now.  There are a number of well known exaggerations in the IPCC report i.e. drought, hide the decline paleo chapter, all are 100% in the direction of expanding IPCC funding influence and control.  Only now are some of the ugly bits coming to light.  I’m sick of it though, so instead of blogging, I’ll put up a few links on the topic.

Climate Audit on Glaciergate.

WUWT on intentionall omission of information which would run contrary to my point above.

Bishop Hill on the fact that FOI law apparently was designed to be broken. NO prosecutions are expected.  — This is particularly troubling becasue although there is now an unrealistic 6 month timeframe for prosecution of FOI law, there have got to be several other laws that these boys broke in colluding to break FOI.  The police apparently can’t find any.

So that means that the government, investigating itself, can find no reason why the government should look too hard to see if there was any wrong doing by said government.

9 Responses to “Global Warming IPCC Meltdown”

  1. Kenneth Fritsch said

    FOI laws are pretty much a device that allows governments to point to them to say that their actions are transparent, but that without real political pressure from elsewhere can be rather easily avoided. This in my judgment makes using them a rather useless and frustrating means of obtaining information, ie. without political influence and the threat of political consequences. I do think, however, that like Steve M and others have done, it is important to have them tested to show others how the system really “works”.

    If one has an organization that has real political influence and takes the “popular” side of issues, like the current green groups have, then the FOI system is forced to work.

  2. commentisfree28 said

    is this the light at the end of the tunnel?

  3. Schiller Thurkettle said

    The six-month timeframe for prosecution of FOI law may not be as troubling as it first appears to be.

    The question is: when does the six-month period begin running?

    Depending on the violation, the six months could begin on the date when the emails etc. were ‘liberated’. There is a rule of thumb in the law that statutes of limitation don’t ‘start ticking’ until the violation is discovered.

    Such as, solicitation to participate in the destruction of public records subject to FOI law. That wasn’t discovered until the data were ‘liberated’.

  4. John F. Pittman said

    JeffID, Steve has an interesting post here that goes very well with the meltdown idea. http://climateaudit.org/2010/01/25/the-wwf-and-the-epa-endangerment-finding/

  5. Peter of Sydney said

    It’s time to take this fight to the next level – in the courts. There’s more than enough evidence to prove the AGW thesis as peddled by the likes of the IPCC is both a hoax and a fraud. Otherwise, the “debate” may go on for decades. Who wants that?

  6. Peter of Sydney said

    Yet more lies: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/25/de-jour-gate-flavor-amazon/

    Does the IPCC report any truth? It appears not. So, why isn’t being investigated for fraud? If all that appears to be correct about the IPCC telling porkies is in fact true then it should be a walk in the park to prove the IPCC and it’s chairman is committing fraud on a grand scale.

  7. jef said

    Here’s another piece by Pielke Jr. if any has missed it:

    http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-tangled-web-we-weave.html

  8. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by HotInHur, ClimateGate_RT. ClimateGate_RT said: #AirVent : Global Warming IPCC Meltdown http://bit.ly/7aGJHc #climategate [...]

  9. RuhRoh said

    Apparently CNN took IPCC and then Pauchuri to task today.
    Via newsbusters.org
    RR

    First;

    ‘…Jim White, and asked him about the IPCC report- you know, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. There was a bit of snafu the past week or so, where they said that the glaciers in Himalayas we’re going to be gone by 2035. Well, that ended up being bad science, and this is what Jim had to say about that.’

    btw, Jim is eager to excuse it as an accidental…

    then later;

    SANCHEZ: And here we go- time now for the ‘List You Don’t Want to Be On.’ It’s a tricky name to pronounce, but it’s an important story. He is Rajendra Pachauri. He is not just a global warming expert. He is in charge of the United Nations panel on climate change. He signed off on a memo that said the Himalayan glaciers will melt by the year 2035. Really? That soon? Just 25 years from now, you say?

    one little step at a time…
    RR

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 147 other followers

%d bloggers like this: