An overview of all the "gates" that came after Climate-gate

Here's a good culmination and introduction of all the various "gates" that have since been brought to light after Climate-gate hit in November. At least with this list you will know the correct terms to google

www.ocregister.com...

It has been tough to keep up with all the bad news for global warming alarmists. We're on the edge of our chair, waiting for the next shoe to drop. This has been an Imelda Marcos kind of season for shoe-dropping about global warming.

At your next dinner party, here are some of the latest talking points to bring up when someone reminds you that Al Gore and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won Nobel prizes for their work on global warming.

ClimateGate – This scandal began the latest round of revelations when thousands of leaked documents from Britain's East Anglia Climate Research Unit showed systematic suppression and discrediting of climate skeptics' views and discarding of temperature data, suggesting a bias for making the case for warming. Why do such a thing if, as global warming defenders contend, the "science is settled?"

FOIGate – The British government has since determined someone at East Anglia committed a crime by refusing to release global warming documents sought in 95 Freedom of Information Act requests. The CRU is one of three international agencies compiling global temperature data. If their stuff's so solid, why the secrecy?

ChinaGate – An investigation by the U.K.'s left-leaning Guardian newspaper found evidence that Chinese weather station measurements not only were seriously flawed, but couldn't be located. "Where exactly are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China?" the paper asked. The paper's investigation also couldn't find corroboration of what Chinese scientists turned over to American scientists, leaving unanswered, "how much of the warming seen in recent decades is due to the local effects of spreading cities, rather than global warming?" The Guardian contends that researchers covered up the missing data for years.

HimalayaGate – An Indian climate official admitted in January that, as lead author of the IPCC's Asian report, he intentionally exaggerated when claiming Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 in order to prod governments into action. This fraudulent claim was not based on scientific research or peer-reviewed. Instead it was originally advanced by a researcher, since hired by a global warming research organization, who later admitted it was "speculation" lifted from a popular magazine. This political, not scientific, motivation at least got some researcher funded.

PachauriGate – Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman who accepted with Al Gore the Nobel Prize for scaring people witless, at first defended the Himalaya melting scenario. Critics, he said, practiced "voodoo science." After the melting-scam perpetrator 'fessed up, Pachauri admitted to making a mistake. But, he insisted, we still should trust him.

PachauriGate II – Pachauri also claimed he didn't know before the 192-nation climate summit meeting in Copenhagen in December that the bogus Himalayan glacier claim was sheer speculation. But the London Times reported that a prominent science journalist said he had pointed out those errors in several e-mails and discussions to Pachauri, who "decided to overlook it." Stonewalling? Cover up? Pachauri says he was "preoccupied." Well, no sense spoiling the Copenhagen party, where countries like Pachauri's India hoped to wrench billions from countries like the United States to combat global warming's melting glaciers. Now there are calls for Pachauri's resignation.

SternGate – One excuse for imposing worldwide climate crackdown has been the U.K.'s 2006 Stern Report, an economic doomsday prediction commissioned by the government. Now the U.K. Telegraph reports that quietly after publication "some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified." Among original claims now deleted were that northwest Australia has had stronger typhoons in recent decades, and that southern Australia lost rainfall because of rising ocean temperatures. Exaggerated claims get headlines. Later, news reporters disclose the truth. Why is that?

SternGate II – A researcher now claims the Stern Report misquoted his work to suggest a firm link between global warming and more-frequent and severe floods and hurricanes. Robert Muir-Wood said his original research showed no such link. He accused Stern of "going far beyond what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence." We're shocked.

AmazonGate – The London Times exposed another shocker: the IPCC claim that global warming will wipe out rain forests was fraudulent, yet advanced as "peer-reveiwed" science. The Times said the assertion actually "was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise," "authored by two green activists" and lifted from a report from the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group. The "research" was based on a popular science magazine report that didn't bother to assess rainfall. Instead, it looked at the impact of logging and burning. The original report suggested "up to 40 percent" of Brazilian rain forest was extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall, but the IPCC expanded that to cover the entire Amazon, the Times reported.

PeerReviewGate – The U.K. Sunday Telegraph has documented at least 16 nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCC's climate change bible, which calls for capping manmade greenhouse gases.

RussiaGate – Even when global warming alarmists base claims on scientific measurements, they've often had their finger on the scale. Russian think tank investigators evaluated thousands of documents and e-mails leaked from the East Anglia research center and concluded readings from the coldest regions of their nation had been omitted, driving average temperatures up about half a degree.

Russia-Gate II – Speaking of Russia, a presentation last October to the Geological Society of America showed how tree-ring data from Russia indicated cooling after 1961, but was deceptively truncated and only artfully discussed in IPCC publications. Well, at least the tree-ring data made it into the IPCC report, albeit disguised and misrepresented.

U.S.Gate – If Brits can't be trusted, are Yanks more reliable? The U.S. National Climate Data Center has been manipulating weather data too, say computer expert E. Michael Smith and meteorologist Joesph D'Aleo. Forty years ago there were 6,000 surface-temperature measuring stations, but only 1,500 by 1990, which coincides with what global warming alarmists say was a record temperature increase. Most of the deleted stations were in colder regions, just as in the Russian case, resulting in misleading higher average temperatures.

IceGate – Hardly a continent has escaped global warming skewing. The IPCC based its findings of reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and in Africa on a feature story of climbers' anecdotes in a popular mountaineering magazine, and a dissertation by a Switzerland university student, quoting mountain guides. Peer-reviewed? Hype? Worse?

ResearchGate – The global warming camp is reeling so much lately it must have seemed like a major victory when a Penn State University inquiry into climate scientist Michael Mann found no misconduct regarding three accusations of climate research impropriety. But the university did find "further investigation is warranted" to determine whether Mann engaged in actions that "seriously deviated from accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities." Being investigated for only one fraud is a global warming victory these days.

...Continued at the link up top

[edit on 15-2-2010 by seattletruth]

So does Gore have to give back the Nobel Peace Prize, and where is the Suzuki Foundation in all of this mess. Very quiet, because they were SCAMMING us into sending trillions of dollars to this world economies based on a "promise" to change and better the standard of livining of its' citizenry. Hmmmm how's China doing on that Al?

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Cynic]

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Cynic]

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Cynic]

reply to post by seattletruth
Here's the entire rundown for those who can't bother to look:

ClimateGate
FOIGate
ChinaGate
HimalayaGate
PachauriGate I & II
SternGate I & II
AmazonGate
PeerReviewGate
RussiaGate I & II
U.S.Gate
IceGate
ResearchGate
ReefGate
AfricaGate
DutchGate
AlaskaGate
www.ocregister.com...

Unfortunately, this list leaves out one of the most important of the "gates," the influence of MONEY on the AGW advocacy gravy train.

Many critics of AGW "deniers" resort to references to the supposed influence of "corporate dollars" or "big oil" on the chipping away at AGW misdirection.

Of course, these same critics ignore the billions of dollars already spent or allocated to the AGW advocacy programs.

AGW MoneyGate:

For a nice summary of the other side of the equation, here's a couple of links documenting the gravy train that IPCC, Pachauri, Jones, CRU and others have latched on to:

Climate makes money move ...

Climate change -- the true price

These are only the tip of the billion-dollar AGW evangelistic iceberg. So long as the flow continues, the AGW priests, parasites, and apostles will continue to suckle and bledd the public.

Deny ignorance

jw

[edit on 16-2-2010 by jdub297]

There's also Amazongategate (aka Leakegate) - the revelation that Amazongate was wrong

There may well be more.

It won't matter. People are too conditioned. My sister will yell me to tears about this. Try telling a chrisitan jesus was really lucifer. Similar reactions.

It won't matter. People are too conditioned. My sister will yell me to tears about this. Try telling a chrisitan jesus was really lucifer. Similar reactions.

It won't matter. People are too conditioned. My sister will yell me to tears about this. Try telling a chrisitan jesus was really lucifer. Similar reactions.

Originally posted by Essan
There's also Amazongategate (aka Leakegate) - the revelation that Amazongate was wrong

There may well be more.

The WWF actually went on to explain:

WWF acknowledges that a reference to Fire in the Amazon as the source of the 40% claim was omitted during the editing of the Global Review of Forest Fires.

"Global Review of Forest Fires" as proof of AGW? How far will the faithful stretch for "confirmation" of their god? The article itself speaks for itself. It has nothing to do with AGW.

jw