The Myth of the Copenhagen Conspiracy
By Nick Gier, New West Unfiltered 12-18-09
THE MYTH OF THE COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CONSPIRACY
By Nick Gier, Professor Emeritus, University of Idaho
In the first of his two alarmist, hyperbolic, and scatological columns on the “Copenhagen Conspiracy” (Nov. 28 & Dec. 12), Idaho State Journal columnist Richard Larsen calls on the authority of the Lord Christopher Monckton, a journalist and adviser to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
Larsen must be referring to Monckton’s October 14 speech to the Minnesota Free Market Institute in which he declared that man-made global warming is a hoax.
In this address Monckton revealed the Copenhagen Conspiracy, which predicts that in Copenhagen Obama and other world leaders will set up a Communist world government under the guise of flawed climate studies.
Earlier in the year scientists from RealClimate.org studied some of Monckton’s graphs, and they decided that the Third Viscount of Brenchley misrepresented data from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and manipulated other evidence to conclude that there has been substantial cooling since 2002.
The World Meteorological Institute, that left-wing organization that feeds lies to your weather reporter every evening, just released a report indicating that the first years of the 21st Century (except for 1998) were the warmest on record.
After pointing all of the errors and deceptions in one of Monckton’s graphs on CO2 emissions, NASA’s Gavin Schmidt asks “How can this be described except as fake?” Larsen’s failure to check out Monckton’s credibility seriously undermines his own.
Larsen joins other global warming deniers in capitalizing on illegally obtained e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University. At least seven experts in science ethics have read the e-mails and they have concluded that, while there was intemperate language about climate skeptics, there was neither fabrication nor manipulation of data.
A very recent study done by two University of Washington scientists, posted on RealClimate.org, compared the CRU weather data against independent variables and demonstrated that there was no cheating on their part. An Italian scientist did a check using a different method and also vindicated the embattled researchers.
Much hay has been made of East Anglia researcher Phil Jones’ use of a “trick” in one of his papers, but in this context it simply means an ingenious way of presenting data.
One e-mail indicated that two papers by climate skeptics might be withheld from the 2007 IPCC report, but in the end both papers were included and discussed.
Larsen calls on the authority of three other climate skeptics. The first one is Tim Ball, who lied that he was the first Ph.D. in climatology in Canada. Ball has had no peer-reviewed papers in the field for 13 years, and the Calgary Herald states that he is a “paid promoter of the oil and gas industry rather than a practicing scientist.”
Larsen’s second reference is Patrick Michaels, a fellow at the free market CATO Institute, about whom climate scientist Tom Wigley states: “Michaels’ statements on the subject of computer models are a catalogue of misrepresentations and misinterpretation. Many of the supposedly factual statements made in his testimony are either inaccurate or are seriously misleading.”
Larsen’s third witness is John Theon, who has not done any science for thirty years, and therefore has no expertise to comment on sophisticated computer climate modeling.
As a former NASA official, Theon falsely claims to have been James Hansen’s boss, and he is the source of Larsen’s libelous claim that Hansen, one of the nation’s top climate scientists, manipulated data.
With regard to Lord Monckton’s visions of Communist world government, legal experts say that this is completely unfounded and paranoid.
On this issue the Truth-O-Meter at Pultizer-winning, fact-checking Politifact.com points to “Britches on Fire” for Monckton’s McCarthy-like pronouncements.
In Copenhagen Monckton confronted young protesters and called them “Hitler Youth.” Even when one of the students identified himself as Jewish and said that his grandparents died in the Holocaust, Monckton continued to insult the protesters.
This certainly is not a proper way for a British peer to conduct himself. His lordship behaves far worse in public than the East Anglia researchers did in private e-mails.
When Richard Larsen calls climate scientists’ independently validated work “execrable man-made concoctions,” one could also say that this is certainly not good form for an award-winning columnist.
Nick Gier taught philosophy at the University of Idaho for 31 years. Read or listen to all of his columns at www.NickGier.com
Comments
Can we all agree that the United States should convene its own objective, transparent Climate Truth Commission and stop outsourcing our climate science to the United Nations? It defies common sense that we allow the UN to serve as both judge and advocate (IPCC & Kyoto Protocol, Copenhagen).
-- Robert Moen, http://www.energyplanUSA.com
How exactly does one perform these studies when the original data has been destroyed?
Do your own research!!
Could it be that you like to holiday in Cuba, like so many academics seem to these days? Nietzsche's poster on your office wall?
One thing Professor, the 60's are over (the height of your dream time) and I was a teen in the 80s who heard all the same progressive drivel from my Professors. As you guys said in the 60s, never trust anyone over 30.
My generation says - never trust anyone from the 60s. They are relativists - always in the favour of themselves and willing to lie to get what they want.
They'll sell you out Prof. It happened in the Soviet empire as well. The first ones to be 'removed' were the academics.
2) Downplaying East Anglia's "trick" puts your credibility in the toilet: Any serious observer knows that it is not the term "trick" that is the problem, IT IS THE COMPUTER CODE THAT HIDES THE DECLINE.
3)Using indoctrinated kids to violently break up peaceful meetings is exactly what the Hitler Jugend did. Monckton was spot on with his assessment. The Jewish Hitler Jugend leader should know better. Hitler killed six million Jews. Why did you not complain to the communists who rallied in Copenhagen, since Communists massacred 100 000 000 innocent people in the last century. Your political correctness is sickening.
Conspiracy doesn't care whether warming is happening or not, so this article does nothing to dispel it.
Of course getting caught in the lie confirms it,
but whether the Science is correct or not, people are developing a healthy disrepect for science which they see to be largely in the interpretation.
'though what has insulting protestors got to do with it - as if any protestor worth their cause could be insulted.
This article just reinforces that there is a conspiracy, in need of denying.
After reading your article, I think you need to go back to school.
CLIMATE-GATE is a testament to the inadequacy of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory.
As a person who has a PhD in an applied-science discipline, if I were reviewing a PhD dissertation and it's content exhibited characteristics analogous to the CLIMATE-GATE scandal (e.g. discarding of raw data, deceptive/fraudulant software development practices, deceptive padding/shaping of data, opaqueness with scientific community, lack of depth when considering alternate hypotheses, etc.) then I would consider either failing the dissertation or, if there was no fraud but just sloppiness, demand a re-doing of the respective sections (experimental/modelling ?) of the dissertation.
People should realise the faults with computer modelling of climate systems before having faith in climate models as if they were "Gospel".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
As Bob Carter indicates (in Australia, CSIRO is the main government research organisation) ...
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2764827.htm
"(CSIRO's back is protected, of course, by the doubtless expensive lawyers who have insisted that the following disclaimer be inserted in all such reports: "This report relates to climate change scenarios based on computer modelling. Models involve simplifications of the real processes that are not fully understood. Accordingly, no responsibility will be accepted by CSIRO or the QLD government for the accuracy of forecasts or predictions inferred from this report or for any person's interpretations, deductions, conclusions or actions in reliance on this report)".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you still trusting of the computer models paraded by the "climate alarmists" ?
Science isn't a moral vocation.
Scientists are professionals who work for whoever pays them.
If the sponsor wants a particular result, it is the scientist's job to find it .
That may not be pure science, but the practise of science is far from pure and anything else would a failure in professional duty to the employer.
Did we blame the scientists for Hiroshima ?
So don't blame them for the AGW fraud, unless of course they were acting outside their remit from their immediate employer.
Nice one Professor.
My generation says - never trust anyone from the 60s. They are relativists - always in the favour of themselves and willing to lie to get what they want.
They'll sell you out Prof. It happened in the Soviet empire as well. The first ones to be 'removed' were the academics.
"
Nicely put SDH. You articulate it so well. That nagging doubt that any presumption that we just have to trust scientists, is somehow misplaced.
Look, you clearly don't have any serious technical education; you clearly don't understand the science; and you clearly don't have any idea what you're talking about. Why don't you just admit it, quit being so defiantly proud of your ignorance, and quit trying to mislead people into thinking you know something that you don't. Quit trying to mislead people into following you into your ignorance. I'd return your accusation of being brainwashed; but, you don't have the necessary foundation.
...and, frankly, your other comments on this site bear me out. You offered anti-hispanic slurs in an anti-immigration comment and downright racist innuendo in other comments; your comments against progressive mass transit systems are another dead giveaway; and you even unloaded a ridiculous rant against national parks and Ken Burns. You claim to be a liberal Democrat; but, that's just a diversionary smokescreen isn't it. You're playing a filthy little game, but not very well, Mickey.
Thats the norm for new west.
yeah it's all about taxing you into poverty....idiot.
Man is havving an effect on the climate how great/little is yet to be seen but anyone besides RWC agree there is some effect. That is not anti-human or business it's the truth whether you want ot face it or not.
RWC would destroy the entire lanet in the name of industry or short term jobs thats how they operate.
Why do RWC'ers always bring up the name thing. RWCer's are violent and seek out those that have differing opinions. Also it's stupid in this day and age to use your real name considering the amount of identity theft.
Back to the bitteroot with you mickey mouse.
Mickey= Right wing Crazy
WTF are u talking about I said man is having an effect on the climate. How is that fear-mongering? I never said it would the death of humans or anything remotley like that. Try stepping out of MT and east of the Mississippi and maybe you'll see where thousands of miles of concrete have replaced former forest land. Even a RWC'er like yopu knows that that amount of deforestation is going to have some effect on at least the local climate of the area. I see you offered no response to rants about human haters.
You constantly go WAY off topic and inject your own prejudiced, hateful spin on every topic here.
But hey thats the RWC way.
Thats really is the most ludicrous response you could come up with. A random statistic that bears absolutely no relevance to deforestation or the development of the eastern US. Have you ever been to the eastern US mickey? I see you never refuted others claims that your from California.
If you beleive that man is having absolutley no effect on climate or the environment then that places you in the category of Right Wing Crazy.
did you figure Alaska into your statistics, that plays a large role in decreasing the amount of land that is developed in the lower 48 as well as inflating the amount of wilderness in in the USA.
A common tactic by the RWC's.
Here are some other prominent climate change deniers
Dont worry Mickey I reserved a spot for you as well...;)
and then recieve millions of dollars from fossil fuel industries.
Real unbiased sources of info.
also Nick Gier becuase; Idaho is always ahead of the curve compared to the rest of planet earth.
If you beleive that man is having absolutley no effect on climate or the environment then that places you in the category of Right Wing Crazy.
Right-wing = don't want to change, don't want to think, don't want to give proper consideration to expertise that contradicts my comfortable world view.
In short: denial.
'Denier' is a succinct word to describe someone who repeatedly ignores a widespread and well-integrated body of evidence in favour of their own ideas, or the ideas of an ideology whose power-base they want to leverage for their own ends.
Holocaust deniers ignore history, and climate deniers ignore science. They're both non-rationalist, politically-motivated and, for want of a better word, 'dangerous'.
co2= good, more crops and woods
regulation=bad, commie govt.
differing opinion= bad, hippies, drugs, enviro-nazi's etc.
There is no point.
okok mick work with me here dude. I beleive you are from California probally So-Cal. You moved up to the bitteroot in MT and built a home. You brought along your RWC views/opinions. Your similar to that lady from So-Cal who moved up to the bitteroot and now leads the "Celebrating Conservatism" group. You know the folks who wear guns while they preach and all. You hate any zoning in the bitteroot yet the valley has been destroyed by second homes etc. You've never been to the eastern US and dont know anything about the develpment there. A similar story to one John Stokes who moved from snohomish county WA to Kalispell. We dont want your RWC ways in MT, you guys have destroyed the bitteroot and flathead valleys, what more do you want.
We have evidence across the planet of climate change which is normal; however at least a certain percentage is caused by humans and it's not beneficial the changes we're causing. you have a few statistics about the amount of forested/developed acres in the US. We all know the vast majority of forests in the lower 48 are not old growth or in prisitine condition. The vast majority of habitat in the lower 48 has been alterd/depleted. The way you talk about the US you'd think we live in a pristine wilderness and man has absolutely no effect on his environment. The eastern US is becoming more forested however that does not change the fact that the deciduous forest as a whole is fragmented and damaged beyond repair. We have ample evidence of pollution harming the US yet you scoff as children die of cancer next to power plants. You say you dont wanto hurt the industries yet people are dying.
Once again Mickey if you beleive humans are having absolutely no effect on climate or our environment then that places you in the category of RWC and batsh*t crazy.
As for AGW, the hack mails show certain scientists crossing the line between their values and their science. Or, at the very least, crossing over into groupthink.
Science is about repeatable data showing clear effects. Do A with B, get C. Again and again. Haven't gotten that. When Trenberth talks about "travesty" he's making a values call because the results aren't what he apparently dearly wants. So I have to question whether his "science" truly has value.
Finally, gang, let's play what if. It's 15,000 BC, and we have a technological society, with our seaports and cities about 600 feet lower than they are now, with lakefront lots at Lake Missoula Ski Area and whatnot. We find out the glaciers are starting to recede, or the Purcell Plug is about to let go.
Good thing? Bad thing?
All depends on your values, I guess.
you've been exposed, your a attention grabbing RWC who is really a miserable failure at life.
whats your solution to climate change. Deny it deny it deny it until it bites you in the as#. I dont see you offering any sort of solution, your merely an obstructionist. The very thing you always accuse the so called "greenie weenies" of being.
your still just spewing dribbble. You offer no solutions and your too RWC for even the GOP hahaha wing nut.
Your arguments are like religion.
Nothing at all to them; but they convince ignorant delusionaries.
No one here agrees with you. You just need the absolute last post becuase you dont have anything else to live for. Get a job RWC LOSER.
I have Republican friends and I'd never call them idiots.
I know they've been brain-washed by the conservative spin and vote against their own best interests, but I keep that to myself.
Guess I just respect their right to their opinion.
But then, what do I know, I'm just an idiot liberal."
ID MTN Express
Wow Mickey your known across the west for being a name calling Right wing CRAZY.
Dare I say your the "viallge idiot" of ketchum
by the way no where did insist carbon emissions were causing climate change I merely stated that humans are having some effect on their environment and the climate. Please dont put words in others mouths, that's lying.
I saw a photo of you mick and am LMFAO
Just as i pictured an aging, moustached right wing whacko.
"Village idiot"
I guess mickey will call me another name.