Comments on: IPCC: Inglorious Basterds

By: editor

editor — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:31:12 +0000

Thanks to The Washington Times for this piece. Although they left out the Amazon forest fraud and China temp data fraud (who can keep up?!) it is the most fitting editorial to-date.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/02/osama-and-obama-on-global-warming/

If you have a better one, drop it here.

By: editor

editor — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:04:25 +0000

Thanks for your contribution Pete. I saw that piece. It is still too sympathetic to the perpetrators of this fraud for me.

PS I like your signature.

By: Pete Ridley

Pete Ridley — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:07:12 +0000

Maybe that faithful supporter of all thing green, The Guardian, has at long last started reporting the truth about the Great Climate Change Swindle.
Have a look at its 2nd Feb article “Strange case of moving weather posts and a scientist under siege” at http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/01/dispute-weather-fraud

Best regards, Pete Ridley, Human-made Global Climate Change Agnos(cep)tic

By: editor

editor — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:00:08 +0000

Thanks for your contributions Vince and Mr XYZ. We do indeed have a right to be angry, and every reason. What remains perplexing is that governments continue to blindly follow the habitual patter without thought. And the editorial in The Guardian newspaper yesterday was stunning in its apparent ignorance – clinging like a child throwing a tantrum to the same old clap trap that is now indisputably discredited. I guess, as with every religion, we get fanatics.

By: Vince

Vince — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 18:43:07 +0000

I believe, for many, the leak of emails and documents have had an affect similar to the hypnotist snapping his fingers, bringing the subject back to reality.

We have been conned.

A tipping point has been reached – albeit not the catastrophic climate one – and people are angry.
This is a good thing. We have a right to be angry.
We also have a duty to ourselves, and each other, to stay awake and look around very carefully.

There are other cons out there just as big, and even more insidious.

I, for one, take hope from what are witnessing.

Thanks to the internet we start to see the power of the people in a new light.

By: Mr. Xyz

Mr. Xyz — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:07:44 +0000

This spoof of climate science may be of interest:

http://climaterealists.com/?id=4960

By: editor

editor — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:54:15 +0000

Thanks for your comment Bernie and a good point. My concern with the IPCC revelations specifically that continue to shock us daily – starting with the appalling emails – is that this was a known, voluntary, pervasive and consistent deception. I believed. I am gobsmacked. And (excuse the theft from Network) “I’m as mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore!”

By: Bernie Althofer

Bernie Althofer — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:32:58 +0000

I read the following article some time ago.

Sharpe, A.N. (1995) ‘Corporate Performance Crime as Structurally Coerced Action’ – the Australian And New Zealand Journal of Criminology, Vol 29 Number 1 pp. 73-94

It is suggested that some people lie for their organisation, not because they want, but because they have to (for various reasons). It might be a big call suggesting that people are liars, but perhaps if people are in a bind where they are forced to paint a particular picture for their organisation, they might do so if it means that they have some job security. Various shades of grey could be an important factor to consider when looking at communication practices within organisations. It might be important to consider whether or not people really do want the truth, or are they just happy to accept a variation, or even the reality of telling someone something they think that person wants to hear. After all, what is the truth and how will it impact on reputation?