REVEALED! FEDS' DEMANDS TO
MANIPULATE GLOBAL-WARMING DATA, 30
pages on 'how to change the IPCC's science document', 4/16/16, WND
It’s something climate skeptics have
long suspected: Government involvement in science has skewed data to reflect
the government’s agenda.
“Many have suspected that U.S.
political intervention in climate science has corrupted the outcome,” notes Ron
Arnold in an essay posted on
CFact.org. “The new emergence of an old 1995 document from the U.S.
State Department to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change confirms those suspicions, or at least gives the allegation credence
enough to ask questions.”
Though a FOIA request for the 1995
document came up empty (“No such correspondence in our files”), the pdf is available
online. The 30-page document, entitled “U.S. Government Specific
Comments on the Draft IPCC WG I Summary for Policymakers,” gives detailed
instructions on “how to change the IPCC’s science document and the summary for
policymakers.”
“The document itself consists of a
three-page cover letter to Sir John Houghton, head of IPCC Working Group I
(Science), from Day Mount, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Acting, Environment and
Development, United States Department of State, along with the thirty-page
instruction set with line-by-line ‘suggestions,’ written by scientist Robert
Watson and others,” writes Arnold.
He also notes, “Among the more
revealing tidbits is a remark scolding a scientist for being honest about the
weakness of aerosol forcing data: ‘We clearly cannot use aerosol forcing as the
trigger of our smoking gun, and then make a generalized appeal to uncertainty
to exclude these effects from the forward-looking modeling analysis.’ One
instruction was to change a correct statement about warming rates into a flat
lie: ‘Change “continue to rise” to “rise by even greater amounts” to provide a
sense of magnitude of the extended change.'”
This verbal manipulation as far back
as 1995 illustrates how government involvement in climate science is skewing
the outcome to reflect an agenda.
In an article entitled “Climate
Policy’s Advocates Take Page From Same-Sex Marriage Playbook,” Coral
Davenport notes, “Two months ahead of a federal court hearing on President
Obama’s signature climate change rule, a coordinated public relations offensive
has begun – modeled after the same-sex marriage campaign – to influence the
outcome of the case. … While developing the campaign, the environmental
advocates closely examined the messaging tactics of the same-sex marriage
efforts – particularly the message that the issue affects individual lives
beyond the gay community.
“‘On gay marriage, it was that
everyone has a friend, a neighbor, a sibling who could be impacted,’ said
Joshua Dorner, a strategist at the Washington political communications firm
SKDKnickerbocker, who worked on the same-sex marriage public relations
campaigns ahead of the Supreme Court argument. The same message could be
applied to a campaign on climate change, ‘showing how it directly impacts
people’s lives,’ he said.”
NASA is noted to have altered its
own temperature data by 0.5C since 2001. “NASA temperature data doesn’t even
agree with NASA temperature data from 15 years ago,” notes the article “Global
temperature record is a smoking gun of collusion and fraud.” The
article also chronicles similar manipulation by the Japan Meteorological
Agency; and that much of the Southern Hemisphere data is “mostly made up.”
“The claimed agreement in
temperature data is simply not legitimate,” it notes. “The people involved know
that their data is inadequate, tampered and largely made up. They all use
basically the same GHCN data set from NOAA (which has lost more than
80 percent of their stations over the past few decades) and E-mails
show that they discussed with each other ways to alter the data to make it
agree with their theory.”
WND has reported extensively on global warming, including
a few months back when, despite no rise in average global temperature for
nearly two decades, some two-dozen scientists with major U.S. universities
urged President Obama to use RICO laws to prosecute opponents who deny mankind
is causing catastrophic changes in the climate.
That’s the Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations Act, which can put people in jail.
The scientists said their critics’
methods “are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry,”
which was the target of a RICO investigation that “played an important role in
stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people
about the dangers of smoking.”
Tim Ball, a former University of
Winnipeg climatology professor, said global temperatures have been dropping
since the turn of the century, prompting the change in terminology from “global
warming” to “climate change.”
Activists are also spending less
time discussing temperatures and more time pointing to more extreme events such
as tornadoes, droughts, cold snaps and heat waves. Ball said there’s a shred of
truth there, but it’s being badly distorted.
Marc Morano is executive editor and
chief correspondent for ClimateDepot,
as well as host and producer of the upcoming film “Climate
Hustle.” In an interview with WND, he said, “These documents further
reveal how the grand narrative of man-made global warming has been crafted and
forged into a partisan like campaign cause. The U.N. reports were altered as
needed to promote the ideological and political goals of the establishment
pushing climate fears.
“Any talking points that did not fit
their narrative were cast aside and any expression of uncertainty quashed,” he
added. “The ‘global warming’ movement is a pure lobbying movement on some
levels. These old documents echo the 2009 Climategate scandal where the upper
echelon of the U.N. scientists were exposed colluding on now to craft a
narrative and mold the science to persuade the public, media and policy makers
of the urgency of ‘acting’ on ‘global warming.'”
Manipulation of public emotion
through various strategies influences public policy in massive ways, which
makes the 1995 document noteworthy for how far back this goes.
“The 1995 document raises 2016
questions about the State Department’s actions in the subsequent United
National IPCC Assessment Reports,” notes Arnold. “What did they do? Where are
the correspondence and instructions to change the science in all the IPCC
Assessments? What is the Obama State Department doing to corrupt climate science
to its forward its radical social and political agenda? Some of that is
obvious. It’s the clandestine part we need to know.”
http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/revealed-feds-demands-to-manipulate-global-warming-data/
No comments:
Post a Comment