noworldsystem.com

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
November 25, 2009

A prominent scientist has called for criminal prosecutions to be brought against the UN affiliated scientists involved in what has been termed “ClimateGate”.

Australian geologist and long time opponent of anthropogenic global warming theory, Ian Plimer, has condemned what he describes as “alarmism underpinned by fraud”.

“This behavior is that of criminals and all the data from the UK Hadley Centre and the US GISS must now be rejected. These crooks perpetrated these crimes at the expense of the British and U.S. taxpayers.” Plimer writes in a commentary piece.

“The same crooks control the IPCC and the fraudulent data in IPCC reports. The same crooks meet in Copenhagen next week and want 0.7% of the Western world’s GDP to pass through an unelected UN government, and then on to sticky fingers in the developing world.” Plimer continues.

He points out that the emails intimate that figures were manipulated to cover up the medieval warming period, and continued global cooling, in addition to artificially inflated data to emphasize warming during the 20th century.

Plimer, author of the best selling book on the global warming debate, Heaven and Earth — Global Warming: The Missing Science, has long been a vocal critic of what he describes as the hijacked environmental movement.

Plimer has stated many times that he feels vast swathes of the scientific community have been co-opted to manipulate data in return for millions in continued research funding.

The leaked emails from the Hadley centre reveal that CRU chief P.D. Jones has received 55 endowments since 1990 from agencies ranging from the U.S. Department of Energy to NATO, worth a total of £13,718,547, or approximately $22.6 million.

Another document titled (potential-funding.doc) lists sources of potential funding and shows that the scientists considered pressing “energy agencies” that specifically deal in new technology to reduce carbon emissions.

Three agencies listed as potential sources of funding are UK based Carbon Trust, the Northern Energy Initiative, and the Energy Saving Trust. Renewables North West, an American company promoting the expansion of solar, wind, and geothermal energy, is listed as a fourth potential benefactor.

Of course, all these potential financial backers have a vested interest in maintaining the conception that human-induced global warming is a reality backed by science.

Anthropogenic global warming theorists have long attacked skeptical scientists, claiming they are bought and paid for by oil companies, yet here we have the most influential group of climate scientists acknowledging that they are a shoe-in to receive funding from energy companies with vested interests.

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
November 24, 2009

A prominent German scientist who was attacked in the leaked CRU emails by UN affiliated climate scientists has stated that the group should be barred from taking part in the peer-review process and excluded from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Hans von Storch, who is referred to in very unflattering terms several times in the leaked emails, points out that the CRU scientists acted as “gatekeepers”.

“Mike Mann [climate scientist at Penn State University] was successful to exclude me from a review-type meeting on historical reconstructions in Wengen,” von Storch comments on his blog.

“I found the style of communication revealing, speaking about other people and their ideas, joining forces to “kill” papers, exchanges of “improving” presentations without explaining.”

“Interesting exchanges, and evidences, are contained about efforts to destroy Climate Research’” von Storch writes.

“… scientists like Mike Mann, Phil Jones and others should no longer participate in the peer-review process or in assessment activities like IPCC. […]” the professor concludes.

Yesterday we reported on the fact that the leaked emails revealed the warming alarmist scientists effectively hijacked the peer-review process as they alluded several times to efforts to shut down evidence they did not agree with, regardless of its scientific merit.