Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding “Climategate” scandal

Lift up a rock and another snake comes slithering out from the ongoing University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) scandal, now riding as “Climategate”.

Obama Science Czar John Holdren is directly involved in CRU’s unfolding Climategate scandal. In fact, according to files released by a CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball terms “a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people”.

“The files contain so much material that it is going to take some time t o put it all in context,” says Ball. “However, enough is already known to underscore their explosive nature. It is already clear the entire claims and positions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are based on falsified manipulated material and is therefore completely compromised.

“The fallout will be extensive as material continues to emerge. Reputations of the scientists involved are already destroyed, however fringe players will continue to be identified and their reputations destroyed or sullied.”

While the mainstream media is bending into pretzels to keep the scandal under the rug, Climategate is already the biggest scientific scandal in history because of the global policy implications.

Apparently there are emails which even show that our new "Science Czar" Holdren is involved in the climategate scandal.

Part of what the emails and the entire climategate scandal is about is the fact that the perpetrators, which include Holdren, have wanted to taint the reputation of scientists like Baliunas and Soon. Because these two scientists were some of the main researchers who have proved that the Medieval warm Period was warmer than the 20th century.

There have been other scientists who have proven this, and research from all over the world shows that the Medieval Warm, and part of the end of the Roman Warm period which Michael Mann's MBH98, MBH99 and subsequent rigged data didn't show up, and this has been the same data used by the IPCC to claim that the 20th century warming was exceptional, when it was not.

Here is what some of the emails state.

Indeed, Holdren’s emails show how sincere scientists would be made into raw “entertainment”.

How the deed was done
“A perfect person and opportunity appeared. On 16th October 2003 Michael Mann, infamous for his lead in the ‘hockey stick’ that dominated the 2001 IPCC Report, sent an email to people involved in the CRU scandal; “

Dear All,

Thought you would be interested in this exchange, which John Holdren of Harvard has been kind enough to pass along…” At the time Holdren was Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy & Director, Program in Science, Technology, & Public Policy, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government. (Editor’s Note: He is now Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology—informally known as the United States Science Czar. )

““In an email on October16, 2003 from John Holdren to Michael Mann and Tom Wigley we are told:

”“I’m forwarding for your entertainment an exchange that followed from my being quoted in the Harvard Crimson to the effect that you and your colleagues are right and my “Harvard” colleagues Soon and Baliunas are wrong about what the evidence shows concerning surface temperatures over the past millennium. The cover note to faculty and postdocs in a regular Wednesday breakfast discussion group on environmental science and public policy in Harvard’s Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences is more or less self-explanatory.”

The Wednesday Breakfast Group
“This is what Holdren sent to the Wednesday Breakfast group.

“I append here an e-mail correspondence I have engaged in over the past few days trying to educate a Soon/Baliunas supporter who originally wrote to me asking how I could think that Soon and Baliunas are wrong and Mann et al. are right (a view attributed to me, correctly, in the Harvard Crimson). This individual apparently runs a web site on which he had been touting the Soon/Baliunas position.”

“The exchange Holdren refers to is a challenge by Nick Schulz editor of Tech Central Station (TCS). On August 9, 2003 Schulz wrote;

“In a recent Crimson story on the work of Soon and Baliunas, who have written for my website [1 techcentralstation.com, you are quoted as saying: My impression is that the critics are right. It s unfortunate that so much attention is paid to a flawed analysis, but that’s what happens when something happens to support the political climate in Washington. Do you feel the same way about the work of Mann et. al.? If not why not?”

“Holdren provides lengthy responses on October 13, 14, and 16 but comments fail to answer Schulz’s questions. After the first response Schulz replies, “I guess my problem concerns what lawyers call the burden of proof. The burden weighs heavily, much more heavily, given the claims on Mann et.al. than it does on Soon/Baliunas. Would you agree?” Of course, Holdren doesn’t agree. He replies, “But, in practice, burden of proof is an evolving thing-it evolves as the amount of evidence relevant to a particular proposition grows.” No it doesn’t evolve; it is either on one side or the other. This argument is in line with what has happened with AGW. He then demonstrates his lack of understanding of science and climate science by opting for Mann and his hockey stick over Soon and Baliunas. His entire defense and position devolves to a political position. His attempt to belittle Soon and Baliunas in front of colleagues is a measure of the man’s blindness and political opportunism that pervades everything he says or does.

All excerpts were taken from.
canadafreepress.com...


[edited for erros and to clarify comments]

[edit on 26-11-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Mininterpreted and out of context! Out of context I say!! Did I mention this is being misinterpreted?! *nervous laughter*

John Holdren loves us all and would never be involved in any kind of nefarious deeds! He is a moral paragon without peer! Stop slagging the good Holdren name, DENIER!

Thanks for sharing this. Very interesting indeed! I can't to see this unfold further over the next few days. Could all of this be the bombshell that exposes global warming/climate change as a fraud?

Yet another question...will the MEDIA REPORT IT!?!?!?!?!?!?

Where is the media on this? Unbelievable.

S/F

[edit on 26-11-2009 by David9176]

reply to post by David9176


FOX news has done a few segments on it. The other side won't touch it. It's like a bunch of christians just found out that jesus was a drag queen. They've got so much emotional investment in this that it would destroy them admit it.
It won't matter how much science contradicts them now - they'll invent new reasons to hate power, hate industry, hate america, and essentially enjoy the thrill of expressing self righteous, ignorant, moral indignation.

Sad thing? There's plenty of other issues to be concerned about when it comes to the environment. But working to reduce pollution in rivers, for example, doesn't give the Ego anything like the fix of 'saving the planet', which is both absurd and grandiose. We may wipe ourselves out, but the planet will go on. Like George Carlin said:

We’re so self-important. So self-important. Everybody’s going to save something now. “Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails.” And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet. What? Are these f**king people kidding me? Save the planet, we don’t even know how to take care of ourselves yet. We haven’t learned how to care for one another, we’re gonna save the f**king planet? I’m getting tired of that s**t. Tired of that s**t. I’m tired of f**king Earth Day, I’m tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is there aren’t enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world save for their Volvos. Besides, environmentalists don’t give a **it about the planet. They don’t care about the planet. Not in the abstract they don’t. Not in the abstract they don’t. You know what they’re interested in? A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They’re worried that some day in the future, they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn’t impress me. Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet. Nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are f**ked. Difference. Difference. The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years. Did you ever think about the arithmetic? The planet has been here four and a half billion years. We’ve been here, what, a hundred thousand? Maybe two hundred thousand? And we’ve only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over two hundred years. Two hundred years versus four and a half billion. And we have the CONCEIT to think that somehow we’re a threat? That somehow we’re gonna put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue-green ball that’s just a-floatin’ around the sun? The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles…hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages…And we think some plastic bags, and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet…the planet…the planet isn’t going anywhere. WE ARE!"

[edit on 26-11-2009 by TrueTruth]


[edit on 26-11-2009 by TrueTruth]

mod edit, quote tags and source
www.perspectives.com...
www.amazon.com...


[edit on Fri Nov 27 2009 by DontTreadOnMe]

reply to post by TrueTruth


That Carlin statement was awesome. Thanks for sharing. The man always makes great points...and he does it with intelligence and humor.

The earth will be here long after we are gone. It's funny that I was just talking to my father about this same subject. We may blow ourselves up and wipe the entire earth of most life...but the earth will fix itself. People don't realize how quickly the earth can retake what has been destroyed by man. We need to stop trying to control everything.

We cannot "save" the world...we can only save ourselves.

reply to post by Neo_Serf


hehe, not to mention that Holdren NEVER had any nefarious plan for population control.... After all he NEVER was a co-author of a book which advocated population control by a one world government...

This comes from a Liberal source.

Holdren's Controversial Population Control Past

White House science czar John Holdren co-authored a textbook in the 1970s that discussed coercive population control. Should this disqualify him as a serious voice on science?

Michelle Goldberg | July 21, 2009 | web only

There's a conservative campaign against White House science czar John Holdren, and it seems to be ratcheting up. At the heart of it is a textbook book that Holdren co-wrote in 1977 with the famous neo-Malthusians Paul and Anne Ehrlich. Quotations from the book about coercive population control have been floating around the Internet for a while, but it's only in the last week or so that they've really broken through. They are indeed shocking, treading a fine line between describing and condoning outrageous proposals to curtail reproductive autonomy. They're a reminder of an ignominious chapter in American intellectual history. But they tell us very little about where Holdren stands today.
................
That said, it's not surprising that the right is jumping on this. On July 10, a Web site called Zombietime published scans of various offending passages from the textbook, Ecoscience. Reading them, it's hard not to conclude that the authors looked kindly on government-mandated limits on fertility. "In todays world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern," they wrote. "For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent people from having more than two children?

www.prospect.org...

Liberals can't deny the fact that this man, Holdren, who is now the "science Czar' of the United States by nomination from President Obama, has advocated and still advocates alongside all of the Obama administration for a One World government, and for a body like the UN to have power over the U.S., taking away the sovereignty of the U.S.

Now we find that he is also involved in the "Climategate scandal", and that he alongside some others who want a One Worlf government have been using excuses like AGW, which is nothing more than a hoax, to be able to implement their main goal, a One World Government and the destruction of the Republic of the United States.

So Holdren admits we are being sprayed in his first white house press release, in order to combat the now disproved AGW, and he admits in his own words that hes aware of the AWG fraud...so my question to him is, why are we *really* being sprayed?

Hmmm perhaps his big book of death Ecoscience could provide some clues...

Would that be the same John Holdren that said we were going into a new "Ice Age" back in the seventies? Yeah, what a hole.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Good Job EU - They really hate things like truth don't they.

I've never posted or discussed my thoughts on climate change because
there seems to be no scientific technique that is advanced enough to
prove that human creations are affecting the global climate to any
meaningful degree.

Even though more than 99% of the Earth is under our feet, it is
conceivable that our emissions could be affecting the lower few miles
of atmosphere to a greater degree than natural phenomenon do, such
as volcanos.

But is our artificially generated heat, smoke, pollutants, etc., the cause
of ice melts and other things that Vice President Al Gore talks about?
Since there's so many scientists on both side the climate change debate, it
seems pretty obvious that an accurate assessment is beyond our technical
capability. Because of this lack of ability, the scientists seem to have
degenerated down to basic ego-vs-ego type arguments with whichever
one yelling the loudest in the room that day being the winner...until their
next meeting/summit/debate..then it starts all over again. -cwm

Rope is cheaper than bullets.......

and emits no carbon

I love how all this has gone down It does not surprise me that the books have been "cooked" in regards to global warming. This equals the wmd debacle of the Iraq war. The scary part is now we must really question the integrity of the rest of the scientific community. Somehow me thinks this maybe how that little club does things.

please dont let this thread die.....

let us all concentrate on the string pullers not the servants.

lets cut the head off the snake this time, never allowing it to slither amongst us or our children ever again

peace and determination

hope you are sleeping well tonite

2nd line

Originally posted by factbeforefiction
Would that be the same John Holdren that said we were going into a new "Ice Age" back in the seventies? Yeah, what a hole.

I was ok with that. I've got plenty of snowmobiles!

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Stop right there... look at this quote from your link.

Elsewhere, the authors consider the possibility of adding a sterilant to "drinking water or staple foods."

What is the odds of it being fluoride?

Did he have any connections or "friends" to Manhattan Project, in the 1950-60s?

Or perhaps the Kettering Laboratory founded by General Motors who hid their fluoride toxicity research in an University of Cincinnati vault in the basement?

[edit on 27-11-2009 by jjjtir]

Originally posted by huntergatherer

Rope is cheaper than bullets.......

and emits no carbon

This one made me smile. But let us not stoop to their level.

Originally posted by carewemust

But is our artificially generated heat, smoke, pollutants, etc., the cause
of ice melts and other things that Vice President Al Gore talks about?

With satellites, like with temp monitoring, ice sheet monitoring goes back to about 1979. Not a very long record. Meanwhile, even in recent years with summer reports of record ice sheet melting, typically we find record ice growth during the winter.

At the same time, ice surplus in Antarctica is greater than the deficit in the Arctic:
LINK

Now that AGW is debunked (by themselves no less), they'll start claiming that the ice offset in Antarctica will cause a 2012'esque unatural axis wobble. Give it a few months...

[edit on 27-11-2009 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by hangedman13
This equals the wmd debacle of the Iraq war.

Actually, the comparison would be if emails were leaked of Cheney, Dubya and Rumsfeld discussing their 9/11 plot.

As to your other comment, (unelected) scientists must be feared the most, in ways only they could imagine, as you will find in my work, but I wont take the thread off topic in that direction. Actually, if you guys keep up on population control I'll tell you the true reason they seek that agenda...

. Actually, if you guys keep up on population control I'll tell you the true reason they seek that agenda...

Cool, I have been wondering why that was on the menu. Always seemed a little backward to me, one would think tptb would see it as the more slaves the better.