Circle of Dupes

As ClimateGate unfolds, I am continually amazed that many politicians and most of the main stream media cannot seem to come to grips with the fact that the science behind the IPCC Reports is under question and will require further scrutiny. Many of the journalists that have spread the man-made global mantra are reluctant to admit – even to themselves – that they have been duped. Since many of them have no scientific training they may not even understand the depth of what has transpired. Most AGWers in the main stream media continue to tow the party line and call for action at Copenhagen. Short of ice burgs raining out of the sky they will continue to do so.

George Monbiot, who has been one of the one of the stronger voices in the AGW camp, is one of the few (suddenly lonely) journalists that has had the intelligence to absorb the event and the professional courage to discuss its impact honestly. In “Pretending the climate email leak isn’t a crisis won’t make it go away,” Monbiot captures the essence of the issue that indicts his peers in the media, “No one has been as badly let down by the revelations in these emails as those of us who have championed the science. We should be the first to demand that it is unimpeachable, not the last.” As much as I admire his courage for speaking truthfully, the fact remains that the majority of main stream media journalists did cross that line between objective reporting and championing the cause. They didn’t just open the gates for suspect science, they literally pushed it through. They failed the very people they supposedly serve.

But there is one group that bears an even greater responsibility to the people. Our policy makers; those trusted with the authority to actually take action on the AGW “science.” The validity of the CRU research that underlines the IPCC Reports is clearly in question. It would only make sense that policy based on those reports were held in check until greater transparency could be brought to bear on the possible fraud that has been committed. Citizens should hope their policy makers have the intellectual and political agility to understand what has happened and to react accordingly. Unfortunately, in the U.S., we have climate czar Carol Browner.

To set the stage properly, it’s important to note that the CRU was not simply manipulating data, they were also manipulating the media and the policy makers. They were doing it in a careful and coordinated manner laid bare in the following email:

From: Joseph Alcamo
To: m.hulme@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, Rob.Swart@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:33 0100
Reply-to: alcamo@xxxxxxxxx.xxx

Mike, Rob,

Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.
…
I am very strongly in favor of as wide and rapid a distribution as
possible for endorsements. I think the only thing that counts is
numbers. The media is going to say “1000 scientists signed” or “1500
signed”. No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000
without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a
different story.

Conclusion — Forget the screening, forget asking
them about their last publication (most will ignore you.) Get those
names!

The advocacy for “the cause” was for quantity not quality. The goal was to sand-bag a number, the bigger the better. They wanted to arm sympathetic journalists and policy-makers with the type of numbers that would give them the confidence and cover to wave the AGW banner. Their plan worked. The “science is settled” argument rests on 2,500 supposed climate scientists – many of whom simply wanted their name included to improve their chances for future funding or to be a footnote in history. The numbers cited by the IPCC are disingenuous. Control is in the hands of a small number of scientists and many of them have now been implicated in the ClimateGate emails. So the trap was set. The main stream media and policy makers like Ms. Browner swallowed the big-numbers bait hook line and sinker. They have repeated “the science is settled” over and over again. Faced with evidence to the contrary. They lack the virtues necessary to spit it up.

On November 26th, Obama’s global warming czar said, Browner said, “I’m sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real.” ¹ So there you have it. Scientists plant the lie. The media reports the lie. Policy-maker Carol Browner subscribes to the lie, even after it has been exposed. The alarmists’ big-number gambit works so well, that even after they start to privately doubt their own work the press and the policy makers do not.

1 Climate czar rejects doctored data claims