Bin Laden Joins Forces With Al Gore

The latest message from the beyond blasts the US and the Western World for global warming.

With the collapse of the Copenhagen summit and the falling value of carbon credits, Gore has decided to take on a well known partner to rally his cause.

Reports are that Bin Laden and Gore will embark upon a world wide tour tentatively called "An Inconvenient Jihad."


Noam Chomsky, upon hearing that Bin Laden was so kind to reference him in the taped release humbly said, "Sometimes our enemies become our friends for the greater good." Chomsky also said he would consider joining Bin Laden and Gore on tour.

Al Jazeera, the CIA and Mossad's favorite middle east news organization, released the taped message from the dead man to counter the disrespectful laughter heard in Obama's SOTU address when he mentioned the urgency of fighting climate change. Who's laughing now?

Bin Laden Deplores Climate Change

Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader, has condemned the US and other industrial economies, holding them responsible for the phenomenon of climate change.

In an audio tape obtained by Al Jazeera, bin Laden criticised George Bush, the former US president, for rejecting the Kyoto pact and condemned global corporations.

"This is a message to the whole world about those responsible for climate change and its repercussions - whether intentionally or unintentionally - and about the action we must take," bin Laden said.

"Speaking about climate change is not a matter of intellectual luxury - the phenomenon is an actual fact."

'Grave repercussions'

In the new recording, bin Laden says "all the industrial states" are to blame for climate change, "yet the majority of those states have signed the Kyoto Protocol and agreed to curb the emission of harmful gases".

He continued: "However, George Bush junior, preceded by [the US] congress, dismissed the agreement to placate giant corporations. And they are themselves standing behind speculation, monopoly and soaring living costs.

"They are also behind 'globalization and its tragic implications'. And whenever the perpetrators are found guilty, the heads of state rush to rescue them using public money."

The Kyoto Protocol, a UN treaty aimed at combating global warming, was adopted in December 1997 and has since been ratified by 187 states, but not by the US congress.

Although a signatory to the agreement, the US under Bush refused to ratify the treaty, saying that it should contain binding goals for developing countries to reduce emissions as well as those for industrialized nations.

Targeting US dollar

In the new recording, bin Laden said: "Noam Chomsky [the US academic and political commentator] was correct when he compared the US policies to those of the Mafia. They are the true terrorists and therefore we should refrain from dealing in the US dollar and should try to get rid of this currency as early as possible. {more}

Bin Laden Joins Forces With Al Gore

The latest message from the beyond blasts the US and the Western World for global warming.

With the collapse of the Copenhagen summit and the falling value of carbon credits, Gore has decided to take on a well known partner to rally his cause.

Reports are that Bin Laden and Gore will embark upon a world wide tour tentatively called "An Inconvenient Jihad."


Noam Chomsky, upon hearing that Bin Laden was so kind to reference him in the taped release humbly said, "Sometimes our enemies become our friends for the greater good." Chomsky also said he would consider joining Bin Laden and Gore on tour.

Al Jazeera, the CIA and Mossad's favorite middle east news organization, released the taped message from the dead man to counter the disrespectful laughter heard in Obama's SOTU address when he mentioned the urgency of fighting climate change. Who's laughing now?

Bin Laden Deplores Climate Change

Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader, has condemned the US and other industrial economies, holding them responsible for the phenomenon of climate change.

In an audio tape obtained by Al Jazeera, bin Laden criticised George Bush, the former US president, for rejecting the Kyoto pact and condemned global corporations.

"This is a message to the whole world about those responsible for climate change and its repercussions - whether intentionally or unintentionally - and about the action we must take," bin Laden said.

"Speaking about climate change is not a matter of intellectual luxury - the phenomenon is an actual fact."

'Grave repercussions'

In the new recording, bin Laden says "all the industrial states" are to blame for climate change, "yet the majority of those states have signed the Kyoto Protocol and agreed to curb the emission of harmful gases".

He continued: "However, George Bush junior, preceded by [the US] congress, dismissed the agreement to placate giant corporations. And they are themselves standing behind speculation, monopoly and soaring living costs.

"They are also behind 'globalization and its tragic implications'. And whenever the perpetrators are found guilty, the heads of state rush to rescue them using public money."

The Kyoto Protocol, a UN treaty aimed at combating global warming, was adopted in December 1997 and has since been ratified by 187 states, but not by the US congress.

Although a signatory to the agreement, the US under Bush refused to ratify the treaty, saying that it should contain binding goals for developing countries to reduce emissions as well as those for industrialized nations.

Targeting US dollar

In the new recording, bin Laden said: "Noam Chomsky [the US academic and political commentator] was correct when he compared the US policies to those of the Mafia. They are the true terrorists and therefore we should refrain from dealing in the US dollar and should try to get rid of this currency as early as possible. {more}

The Media and Al Gore

Right after the release of the hacked CRU files, Al Gore traveled to SNL for some not so funny attempts at comedy. We're not very amused at his lies either.

The media still gives Al a pass....

“It is a characteristic of all movements and crusades that the psychopathic element rises to the top.” Robert Lindner

How much longer will Al Gore get a pass from the mainstream media? A little bit longer if their failure to react to the devastating revelations of files hacked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia is a measure. Their behavior reflects how most, especially from the left, have abetted the scientists who deliberately perverted climate science.

The definition of delusional is, “An idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument.” You decide.
{more - Tim Ball via The Peoples Voice}

Instead of reporting on the CRU and having real debates, ABC today continues to spin the 'scientists' conspiracy. (thanks for the link to willyloman)

Global Warming Report Finds Time Running Out

26 Scientists Say Assessment Gives World Leaders Solid Data for Climate Summit

There's even less time for humanity to try to curb global warming than recently thought, according to a new in-depth scientific assessment by 26 scientists from eight countries. {more}

While most of the media hides, there has been one report that if even close to being true should be a Gore talking point but he tends to stay away from real pollution.

How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

The press gives Al a forum in Alberta Canada.

Extracting oil from Alberta's tar sands jeopardizes the survival of our species, says Al Gore.

He called such projects "crazy."

"They have to tear up four tons of landscape, all for one barrel of oil. It is truly nuts. But, you know, junkies find veins in their toes."{more}

If words don't work, computer simulations may do the trick...all real of course.

Al Gore: Supercomputers can sway global warming ways

Supercomputers with visualization programs can also make the case for the increase in global warming and provide simulations as evidence to reverse that trend.

That's where supercomputers come in — they can illicit that visceral response by showing what the future will be like if we don't change our ways, according to Gore. {more}

Mike Rivero's assessment.....

Folks, Climategate is not just about CRU. The damage-control limited-hangout strategy will be to confine the issue to CRU. The corporate media will whine and try to play victim and claim they were fooled along with the rest of us ... except that the blogs and alternative media were not fooled at all.

In order to believe that ABCNNBBCBS are innocent victims in all this, then you have to believe that gigantic TV networks with millions of dollars in budgets and staffs in the thousands, all failed to find the obvious signs of deception spotted by bloggers operating on spare change found under seat cushions.

That is simply beyond belief.

Far from being innocent parties, the TV networks were co-conspirators in the campaign to truck you into accepting more taxes, more control over your lives, and of course, the global government.

There is no need to "reanalyze" anything. That is just a dodge to delay the consequences of the public finding out the first analysis was a bunch of rubbish. And how can they reanalyze anything since CRU admitted destroying the raw data last August!

There is nothing to reanalyze. CRU lied to us all. The corporate media lied to us all. The US government lied to us all. The United Nations lied to us all. The proper course of action is to brand all these liars in public, not out of revenge, but to severely limit their ability to lie successfully to the public again.

The Media and Al Gore

Right after the release of the hacked CRU files, Al Gore traveled to SNL for some not so funny attempts at comedy. We're not very amused at his lies either.

The media still gives Al a pass....

“It is a characteristic of all movements and crusades that the psychopathic element rises to the top.” Robert Lindner

How much longer will Al Gore get a pass from the mainstream media? A little bit longer if their failure to react to the devastating revelations of files hacked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia is a measure. Their behavior reflects how most, especially from the left, have abetted the scientists who deliberately perverted climate science.

The definition of delusional is, “An idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument.” You decide.
{more - Tim Ball via The Peoples Voice}

Instead of reporting on the CRU and having real debates, ABC today continues to spin the 'scientists' conspiracy. (thanks for the link to willyloman)

Global Warming Report Finds Time Running Out

26 Scientists Say Assessment Gives World Leaders Solid Data for Climate Summit

There's even less time for humanity to try to curb global warming than recently thought, according to a new in-depth scientific assessment by 26 scientists from eight countries. {more}

While most of the media hides, there has been one report that if even close to being true should be a Gore talking point but he tends to stay away from real pollution.

How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

The press gives Al a forum in Alberta Canada.

Extracting oil from Alberta's tar sands jeopardizes the survival of our species, says Al Gore.

He called such projects "crazy."

"They have to tear up four tons of landscape, all for one barrel of oil. It is truly nuts. But, you know, junkies find veins in their toes."{more}

If words don't work, computer simulations may do the trick...all real of course.

Al Gore: Supercomputers can sway global warming ways

Supercomputers with visualization programs can also make the case for the increase in global warming and provide simulations as evidence to reverse that trend.

That's where supercomputers come in — they can illicit that visceral response by showing what the future will be like if we don't change our ways, according to Gore. {more}

Mike Rivero's assessment.....

Folks, Climategate is not just about CRU. The damage-control limited-hangout strategy will be to confine the issue to CRU. The corporate media will whine and try to play victim and claim they were fooled along with the rest of us ... except that the blogs and alternative media were not fooled at all.

In order to believe that ABCNNBBCBS are innocent victims in all this, then you have to believe that gigantic TV networks with millions of dollars in budgets and staffs in the thousands, all failed to find the obvious signs of deception spotted by bloggers operating on spare change found under seat cushions.

That is simply beyond belief.

Far from being innocent parties, the TV networks were co-conspirators in the campaign to truck you into accepting more taxes, more control over your lives, and of course, the global government.

There is no need to "reanalyze" anything. That is just a dodge to delay the consequences of the public finding out the first analysis was a bunch of rubbish. And how can they reanalyze anything since CRU admitted destroying the raw data last August!

There is nothing to reanalyze. CRU lied to us all. The corporate media lied to us all. The US government lied to us all. The United Nations lied to us all. The proper course of action is to brand all these liars in public, not out of revenge, but to severely limit their ability to lie successfully to the public again.

Is the Hadley Climate Research Unit hack the straw that breaks Al Gore's back?

"We'll get these hackers and waterboard 'em."



Maybe too late Al.



Megaupload has the 'stolen' files. I just downloaded them. Better get them before they disappear although it appears they are being mirrored widely across the net.

It will take an effort to go through them all to find all the 'good stuff' but I'd say there will be many who will in the coming days.


From the Examiner....

Hadley CRU hacked with release of hundreds of docs and emails

The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

As embarrassing as the e-mails are, some of the documents are more embarrassing. They include a five-page PDF document titled The Rules of the Game, that appears to be a primer for propagating the AGW message to the average subject/resident of the United Kingdom. The document suggests that it is a precis of a longer document housed at the Web site of the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. {more}

From gather....

If these emails prove authentic (which it appears many do), this is a scandal on the scale of The Pentagon Papers.

Here are several of the published emails:

From Michael E. Mann (witholding of information / data):

Dear Phil and Gabi,

“I’ve attached a cleaned-up and commented version of the matlab code that I wrote for doing the Mann and Jones (2003) composites. I did this knowing that Phil and I are likely to have to respond to more crap criticisms from the idiots in the near future, so best to clean up the code and provide to some of my close colleagues in case they want to test it, etc. Please feel free to use this code for your own internal purposes, but don’t pass it along where it may get into the hands of the wrong people.”

From Nick McKay (modifying data):

“The Korttajarvi record was oriented in the reconstruction in the way that McIntyre said. I took a look at the original reference – the temperature proxy we looked at is x-ray density, which the author interprets to be inversely related to temperature. We had higher values as warmer in the reconstruction, so it looks to me like we got it wrong, unless we decided to reinterpret the record which I don’t remember. Darrell, does this sound right to you?”

From Dr. Phil Jones (modification of data to hide unwanted results):

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

From Kevin Trenberth (failure of computer models):

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.”

From Phil Jones (destroying of emails / evidence):

Mike, Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

From Tom Wigley (data modification):

Phil, Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly explain the 1940s warming blip. If you look at the attached plot you will see that the land also shows the 1940s blip (as I’m sure you know). So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, hen this would be significant for the global mean — but we’d still have to explain the land blip. I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are 1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips — higher sensitivity plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from. Removing ENSO does not affect this. It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with “why the blip”. Let me go further. If you look at NH vs SH and the aerosol effect (qualitatively or with MAGICC) then with a reduced ocean blip we get continuous warming in the SH, and a cooling in the NH — just as one would expect with mainly NH aerosols. The other interesting thing is (as Foukal et al. note — from MAGICC) that the 1910-40 warming cannot be solar. The Sun can get at most 10% of this with Wang et al solar, less with Foukal solar. So this may well be NADW, as Sarah and I noted in 1987 (and also Schlesinger later). A reduced SST blip in the 1940s makes the 1910-40 warming larger than the SH (which it currently is not) — but not really enough. So … why was the SH so cold around 1910? Another SST problem? (SH/NH data also attached.) This stuff is in a report I am writing for EPRI, so I’d appreciate any comments you (and Ben) might have. Tom.

From Thomas R Karl (witholding data) :

We should be able to conduct our scientific research without constant fear of an "audit" by Steven McIntyre; without having to weigh every word we write in every email we send to our scientific colleagues. In my opinion, Steven McIntyre is the self-appointed Joe McCarthy of climate science. I am unwilling to submit to this McCarthy-style investigation of my scientific research. As you know, I have refused to send McIntyre the "derived" model data he requests, since all of the primary model data necessary to replicate our results are freely available to him. I will continue to refuse such data requests in the future. Nor will I provide McIntyre with computer programs, email correspondence, etc. I feel very strongly about these issues. We should not be coerced by the scientific equivalent of a playground bully. I will be consulting LLNL's Legal Affairs Office in order to determine how the DOE and LLNL should respond to any FOI requests that we receive from McIntyre.

From Tom Wigley (ousting of a skeptic from a professional organization):

Proving bad behavior here is very difficult. If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted.

From Phil Jones (forging of dates):

Gene/Caspar, Good to see these two out. Wahl/Ammann doesn't appear to be in CC's online first, but comes up if you search. You likely know that McIntyre will check this one to make sure it hasn't changed since the IPCC close-off date July 2006! Hard copies of the WG1 report from CUP have arrived here today. Ammann/Wahl - try and change the Received date! Don't give those skeptics something to amuse themselves with.

From a document titled "jones-foiathoughts.doc" (witholding of data):

Options appear to be:

1. Send them the data

2. Send them a subset removing station data from some of the countries who made us pay in the normals papers of Hulme et al. (1990s) and also any number that David can remember. This should also omit some other countries like (Australia, NZ, Canada, Antarctica). Also could extract some of the sources that Anders added in (31-38 source codes in J&M 2003). Also should remove many of the early stations that we coded up in the 1980s.

3. Send them the raw data as is, by reconstructing it from GHCN. How could this be done? Replace all stations where the WMO ID agrees with what is in GHCN. This would be the raw data, but it would annoy them.

Where ever you stand on the climate debate, I hope we can agree that this is a wake-up call. The climate issue is too important to tolerate the lack of transparency that characterizes the current way of doing business. {more}

Also see:

Do hacked e-mails show global-warming fraud?

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?

Damage control is already in effect...

see The CRU Hack at RealClimate

Is the Hadley Climate Research Unit hack the straw that breaks Al Gore's back?

"We'll get these hackers and waterboard 'em."



Maybe too late Al.



Megaupload has the 'stolen' files. I just downloaded them. Better get them before they disappear although it appears they are being mirrored widely across the net.

It will take an effort to go through them all to find all the 'good stuff' but I'd say there will be many who will in the coming days.


From the Examiner....

Hadley CRU hacked with release of hundreds of docs and emails

The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

As embarrassing as the e-mails are, some of the documents are more embarrassing. They include a five-page PDF document titled The Rules of the Game, that appears to be a primer for propagating the AGW message to the average subject/resident of the United Kingdom. The document suggests that it is a precis of a longer document housed at the Web site of the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. {more}

From gather....

If these emails prove authentic (which it appears many do), this is a scandal on the scale of The Pentagon Papers.

Here are several of the published emails:

From Michael E. Mann (witholding of information / data):

Dear Phil and Gabi,

“I’ve attached a cleaned-up and commented version of the matlab code that I wrote for doing the Mann and Jones (2003) composites. I did this knowing that Phil and I are likely to have to respond to more crap criticisms from the idiots in the near future, so best to clean up the code and provide to some of my close colleagues in case they want to test it, etc. Please feel free to use this code for your own internal purposes, but don’t pass it along where it may get into the hands of the wrong people.”

From Nick McKay (modifying data):

“The Korttajarvi record was oriented in the reconstruction in the way that McIntyre said. I took a look at the original reference – the temperature proxy we looked at is x-ray density, which the author interprets to be inversely related to temperature. We had higher values as warmer in the reconstruction, so it looks to me like we got it wrong, unless we decided to reinterpret the record which I don’t remember. Darrell, does this sound right to you?”

From Dr. Phil Jones (modification of data to hide unwanted results):

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

From Kevin Trenberth (failure of computer models):

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.”

From Phil Jones (destroying of emails / evidence):

Mike, Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

From Tom Wigley (data modification):

Phil, Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly explain the 1940s warming blip. If you look at the attached plot you will see that the land also shows the 1940s blip (as I’m sure you know). So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, hen this would be significant for the global mean — but we’d still have to explain the land blip. I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are 1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips — higher sensitivity plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from. Removing ENSO does not affect this. It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with “why the blip”. Let me go further. If you look at NH vs SH and the aerosol effect (qualitatively or with MAGICC) then with a reduced ocean blip we get continuous warming in the SH, and a cooling in the NH — just as one would expect with mainly NH aerosols. The other interesting thing is (as Foukal et al. note — from MAGICC) that the 1910-40 warming cannot be solar. The Sun can get at most 10% of this with Wang et al solar, less with Foukal solar. So this may well be NADW, as Sarah and I noted in 1987 (and also Schlesinger later). A reduced SST blip in the 1940s makes the 1910-40 warming larger than the SH (which it currently is not) — but not really enough. So … why was the SH so cold around 1910? Another SST problem? (SH/NH data also attached.) This stuff is in a report I am writing for EPRI, so I’d appreciate any comments you (and Ben) might have. Tom.

From Thomas R Karl (witholding data) :

We should be able to conduct our scientific research without constant fear of an "audit" by Steven McIntyre; without having to weigh every word we write in every email we send to our scientific colleagues. In my opinion, Steven McIntyre is the self-appointed Joe McCarthy of climate science. I am unwilling to submit to this McCarthy-style investigation of my scientific research. As you know, I have refused to send McIntyre the "derived" model data he requests, since all of the primary model data necessary to replicate our results are freely available to him. I will continue to refuse such data requests in the future. Nor will I provide McIntyre with computer programs, email correspondence, etc. I feel very strongly about these issues. We should not be coerced by the scientific equivalent of a playground bully. I will be consulting LLNL's Legal Affairs Office in order to determine how the DOE and LLNL should respond to any FOI requests that we receive from McIntyre.

From Tom Wigley (ousting of a skeptic from a professional organization):

Proving bad behavior here is very difficult. If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted.

From Phil Jones (forging of dates):

Gene/Caspar, Good to see these two out. Wahl/Ammann doesn't appear to be in CC's online first, but comes up if you search. You likely know that McIntyre will check this one to make sure it hasn't changed since the IPCC close-off date July 2006! Hard copies of the WG1 report from CUP have arrived here today. Ammann/Wahl - try and change the Received date! Don't give those skeptics something to amuse themselves with.

From a document titled "jones-foiathoughts.doc" (witholding of data):

Options appear to be:

1. Send them the data

2. Send them a subset removing station data from some of the countries who made us pay in the normals papers of Hulme et al. (1990s) and also any number that David can remember. This should also omit some other countries like (Australia, NZ, Canada, Antarctica). Also could extract some of the sources that Anders added in (31-38 source codes in J&M 2003). Also should remove many of the early stations that we coded up in the 1980s.

3. Send them the raw data as is, by reconstructing it from GHCN. How could this be done? Replace all stations where the WMO ID agrees with what is in GHCN. This would be the raw data, but it would annoy them.

Where ever you stand on the climate debate, I hope we can agree that this is a wake-up call. The climate issue is too important to tolerate the lack of transparency that characterizes the current way of doing business. {more}

Also see:

Do hacked e-mails show global-warming fraud?

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?

Damage control is already in effect...

see The CRU Hack at RealClimate