Payday on Grant Avenue
11/28/2011 4 Comments
As I am reading the most recent batch of the Climategate e-mails it occurred to me that many of climate scientist in these e-mail are just scientific hacks on the government grant payrolls. Michael Mann, Phil Jones, Ben Santer, Tom Wigley, Kevin Trenberth, and Keith Briffa, who starred in the first set of Climategate e-mails are front and center in the current set of e-mails.
These e-mails demonstrate that these climatologist are very aware what they must do to keep the grant revenue stream flowing in their direction. They need to provide their government paymaster what they are looking for — another good reason to tax citizens. The paymasters were looking for a crisis that citizens cannot ignore, and run away global warming seemed to fill the bill.
In the Climate 2.0 batch of emails the scientists admit that the evidence behind man made global warming is paper thin, and the apocalyptic climate story is being pushed for political rather than environment reasons.
For example there was this message from the British Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), which points out how scientists are selectively using data, and colluding with politicians to misuse the scientific information.
Humphrey who is reported to work for DEFRA writes:
‘I cannot overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a message that the government can give on climate change to help them tell their story. ‘They want their story to be a very strong one and don’t want to be made to look foolish.’
In other words, reminding the scientist what it is they are being paid to do — support the government paymasters agenda.
Professor Phil Jones, IPCC Author writes:
‘Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.’
Well it turns out the reason they could not provide the station data is that it does not exist. See this post at WUWT in an An Open Letter to Dr. Phil Jones of the UEA CRU by Willis Eschenbach
Another UN IPCC lead author Jonathan Overpeck writes in an e-mail:
’The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guide what’s included and what is left out.’
In other words cherry pick the data and only publish that which supports the government paymasters agenda.
The amazing thing, well maybe not, is the lack of interest by the main stream press in the substance of the e-mails. Google Climategate 2.0 and see how few stories come up in the lame stream press about this issue. They seem to be adopting the attitude “nothing new here, move along.”
Here is an example from Discovery Magazine Bad Astronomy blog:
So, with the Noise Machine ready to blast into full gear, let me be very, very clear:
Yet, those of us who follow the issues day to day, know that there is much more that is being hidden behind the curtain. Global warming stopped in 1998, those independent studies were pal reviewed, the 97% was 77 scientists who were asked only two questions and there are over 800 qualified scientists who are disagree that the science is not over, and as yet no scientist has proven that human activity is responsible for global warming. I have bought my last issue of Discovery, as they are not discovering anything, they are just another government propaganda tool.
I think it was “Deep Throat” during the Watergate investigation that said “Follow the money.” It is time we follow the Climategate money to the root of climate science corruption – grants to support government mandated study results — human caused global warming is a danger to the planet.