A few items revealed from the Climategate email release.  The arguments at hand are not important. What has to be understood is that the viability of our systems are being destroyed by a desire for a certain end.  The information herein it taken from a Congressional Briefing.  One has a hard time criticizing Anonymous. 

Do not read into different fonts and sizes; the items are from a pdf presentation and I am not conversant enough to edit.


This first one ends any continued logical consideration of the IPCC, Jones, Mann etc.  The "peer review" charade continues still, but the cat is out of the bag and the bag holders will vanish back to academia where  they can espouse nonsense to nineteen year olds:

􏰀 Feb 23 2005, Jones to Hughes:   Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.

May 2008: Faced with FOIA request that would show Wahl and Briffa had violated IPCC rules, Jones requested Mann, Briffa, Wahl and Ammann to delete all their IPCC- related emails:

􏰁 Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise... Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same

􏰀 Jones 1999

􏰁 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) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline.

Neither one is Mann’s “Nature” trick

􏰀 Jones’ trick: 

􏰁 replace the data and smooth over thesplice to hide the decline 

􏰀 Mann’s IPCC trick: 

􏰁 delete the decline

YOU HAVE TO CLICK TO THE DOCUMENT TO SEE GRAPHS.  I have no idea how to grab them.  p. 39

Jones’ trick: hide the decline  

􏰀 Change this:  several results on a graph, the only one going up is Mann's Hockey Stick, the others going down.

􏰀 To this: the hockey stick becomes the conclusion.

Mann’s trick: delete the decline:  

􏰀 (Later used by Briffa too)  (SEE GRAPH, p.40)  A graph was falsified for the IPCC to show what  did not exist.  Even we non-scientists can see the fraud. 

Mann’s trick

􏰀 Mann to IPCC colleagues, Sept 22, 1999

􏰁 Keith’s series... differs in large part in exactly the opposite direction that Phil’s does from ours. This is the problem we all picked up on (everyone in the room at IPCC was in agreement that this was a problem and a potential distraction/detraction from the reasonably concensus viewpoint we’d like to show w/ the Jones et al and Mann et al series.

If this sort of stuff were revealed in, say Enron, people go to jail. There is moral outrage.  If it goes on at Goldman Sachs or the US Government, assuming there is some difference, there are bonuses upon the resulting theft.