The Absurd Report » The Latest on ClimateGate

The stench coming out the United Nations on the falsification of climate data grows and grows and is at a point every word, every report they have issued was bogus and there is nothing that can believed.

It is the greatest Hoax that the world has every seen and it at the point where all these lying bastards should be criminally prosecuted for the pain they have inflicted on the world. Billions and billions of dollars have been spent on this worthless Hoax!

Glaciergate was a blunder, but it's the sceptics who dissemble | Robin McKie | Comment is free | The Observer

Inaccurate claims predicting Himalayan meltdown have handed gainsayers a big victory. But nothing material has changed
...
And then there were the sceptics, that regiment of angry lobbyists who say our planet cannot possibly be affected by mankind's profligate burning of fossil fuel.
...
As a result, many researchers now believe it is time for a change at the IPCC, a point backed by Mike Hulme, professor of climate change at the University of East Anglia. "The panel was set up in 1988, in a previous century," he argues. "There was no internet then, yet emails have transformed climate science. They get hacked and uploaded on to servers for all the world to read. People can follow the trail of an idea or argument in a way that was impossible 10 years ago. Climate science – like science in general – is being democratised and the IPCC needs to reflect that."
...
But this process has to proceed in both directions. Deniers say there is no connection between rising carbon levels and global warming. But how confident are they? If they persuade us to do nothing but are wrong, then the consequences will be terrible. Temperatures could rise by up to 5C. Earth will become hotter than it has been at any time over the past 30 million years. Coastal cities will drown, deserts will spread, crops will wither and billions will be left homeless.

Deniers insist this scenario is unrealistic. But how unrealistic? Can they demonstrate – with the same confidence and transparency employed by scientists working for the IPCC – that the danger of doing nothing is negligible and that greenhouse gases pose no risk to the planet? Could their arguments withstand the same rigorous examination that took place during Glaciergate? The answer to these questions is a straightforward "no". At no time have deniers ever put together a case – that inaction poses no threat to civilisation – that could withstand proper scientific peer review.

Don't let the carbon [swindle] market die | Oliver Tickell | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Some people have good reason to be shocked that banks have pulled out of the carbon market, not least recent economics graduates whose dissertations on carbon finance now qualify them only for unemployment. And JP Morgan, which paid a jaw-splitting $204m for carbon trader Ecosecurities last September, must be feeling a little sore. Perhaps it relied on the GHG Emissions Credit Trading report (yours for a mere $397), which predicts a $4.5 trillion carbon market by 2020.

No less chagrined must be Gordon Brown, who sees the carbon market as key to the global response to climate change, and to the economic fortunes of the City of London.

[How about a new swindle, much like the old swindle?]: Benn to call on world leaders to adopt biodiversity pricing | Science | The Guardian

World leaders must find a way to price the impact of their decisions on biodiversity in the same way that the international community is finding a way of pricing carbon, the environment secretary, Hilary Benn, said today.