Big news on the Climategate front. The chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Dr. Rajendra K. Pachauri, has issued a major response to the Climategate scandal. As a result a big rift has developed between the IPCC and a delegate to that organization on the topic of Climategate. This is big news, is it not? Does this not sound like a huge news story? Well, guess how many MSM reporters have covered this story? The answer as of this moment is one. ONE!
The sole reporter who went where the rest of the MSM dares not tread was Andrew Revkin, the New York Times environmental reporter, who covered this story in his Dot Earth blog. Revkin is hardly what one would call a global warming "denier" or skeptic but to give him credit he will report on breaking climate stories even if contradicts the prevailing MSM agenda on this topic. And his latest report covers both the IPCC chairman's response as well as the huge rift over Climategate that has now developed as resuult of that scandal:
Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has distributed a statement on the unauthorized disclosure of thousands of e-mail messages and documents involving a variety of contributors to the panel’s reports. One e-mail message from July 8, 2004, particularly related to the workings of the climate panel, has been the subject of much discussion.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓In it, Phil Jones, the now-embattled head of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, the source of the leaked files, discusses several papers that challenge the status quo with Michael Mann, a longtime colleague from Pennsylvania State University. This is the take-home line, now reverberating around skeptics’ Web sites:
I can’t see either of these papers being in the next I.P.C.C. report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!
Here’s Dr. Pachauri’s statement defending the climate panel’s procedures:
Statement on news reports regarding hacking of the East Anglia University email communications
It is unfortunate that an illegal act of accessing private email communications between scientists who have been involved as authors in I.P.C.C. assessments in the past has led to several questions and concerns. It is important for me to clarify that the I.P.C.C. as a body follows impartial, open and objective assessment of every aspect of climate change carried out with complete transparency. IPCC relies entirely on peer reviewed literature in carrying out its assessment and follows a process that renders it unlikely that any peer reviewed piece of literature, however contrary to the views of any individual author, would be left out. The entire report writing process of the I.P.C.C. is subjected to extensive and repeated review by experts as well as governments. Consequently, there is at every stage full opportunity for experts in the field to draw attention to any piece of literature and its basic findings that would ensure inclusion of a wide range of views. There is, therefore, no possibility of exclusion of any contrarian views, if they have been published in established journals or other publications which are peer reviewed.
Dr. Pachauri goes on at greater length defending the IPCC peer review process which you can read in the rest of Revkin's report. However, if it weren't newsworthy enough that the IPCC chairman has responded to the Climategate scandal at length, it turns out that a delegate of that organization strongly disagrees with the chairman's assessment of the scandal.
Here is the reaction to the IPCC chairman's response to Climategate from Saudi Arabia's liaison to that organization, Mohammad Al-Sabban. Note that he does not use vague diplomatic language in his very direct reaction to the position of IPCC chairman:
A lot of damage has already been done to this international scientific body and I do not think the attached response by Dr. Pachauri was convincing enough to remove such a damage.
So there you have it. The IPCC chairman gives a lengthy response to the Climategate and a liaison to that organization claims a lot of damage has been caused by that scandal and is unsatisfied with the excuses provided. And yet the MSM still does not think this worthy of coverage.
The lengths that the MSM has gone to avoid mentioning Climategate has now entered the realm of the absurd. It is the scandal that dare not speak its name as far as the MSM is concerned. Of course, they risk embarrassing themselves yet again if Climategate explodes as an issue at the Copenhagen summit which President Obama will be attending. Then the MSM, as in the case of the ACORN and Van Jones scandals, will have to go through the embarrassing task of explaining to its readers and viewers what Climategate is all about even though most folks familiar with the Web would have already known all about it...no thanks to their ridiculous non-reporting of this major event.
Oh, and a big round of applause to Andrew Revkin for reporting on all aspects of climate news...including Climategate.
—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
State Controlled Media
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 08:31 ET by allanfA sad moment for the soon to be fringe media. Even Pravda was more challenging of Soviet leaders at the end. CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and the New York Times cannot be relied upon any longer for information.
The media is in on the
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 08:37 ET by kefkaThe media is in on the scam. We won't forget.
I have read these reports and more - The MSM shall not prevail!
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 08:43 ET by acaiguanaThis morning, being interested in what is probably the greatest exposure of fraud and deceit ever witnessed by the US, nay, the world, I found the following.
This U-Tube video is worth the time it takes. If one wants, they can click on the related videos at the site.
This Article, published in The Wall Street Journal deals rather well with the ignorance of Obama and the embedded pretentious snobs who would have our wallets in their pockets, rather than in ours.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)
Bizarro World!!
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 10:02 ET by motherbeltThe WSJ article is hilarious!
Typical liberal spin:
Yes, the wording of the some of their messages was unfortunate,
speak in a language they understand and is often foreign to the outside world,"
some of the published emails do not read well.
others use colloquialisms frequently used between close colleagues,"
I regret any upset or confusion caused as a result....
Do they say this stuff with a straight face???
They manipulated data to get a consensus, but now the lies can be ignored because they have a consensus??
Welcome to Bizarro World!!
Pathetic
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 08:46 ET by nadadhimmiThis is analogous to the msm's refusal to cover the Teaparty movement. The msm's agenda has become crystal clear to even the most dense. This political agenda is to assist the Democratics and liberal Republicans in establishing socialism and world gov't with these oligarchs themselves in complete control of every person on Earth. Even down to the temperature they keep their dwelling to how many squares of toilet paper they are ALLOWED to use. Feel a stomach attack coming on?, then you'd better apply to your congressmans office for a variance on toilet paper consumtion, or go to jail. No health Insurance? go to jail. Deny "global warming"? even after reading the conspirators emails, GO TO JAIL. Is there a pattern of control here?? Yah think!! The presstitutes must be ridiculed, marginalized, and ignored till they go out of business.
To be a fly on the wall....
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 08:55 ET by HuapakechiI have to wonder what's happening in the headquarters of the various enviro-radical groups around the globe. They've got to be in a bigger panic than acorn national headquarters when the Breitbart announced there were many more Giles-O'Keefe tapes to yet be released.
Look for the upcoming "climate summit" to be more like a meeting of mafia clan chiefs in response to legal crackdowns on their operations.
U.N. Spending A Lot Of Money On Black Friday
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 08:59 ET by dboThe U.N. and the IPCC must be rubbing their hands together this morning.
In case you missed it, in news yesterday:
And I understand Mike of
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 10:10 ET by danboAnd I understand Mike of trick fame is releasing a new paper on the MWP. (Anyone want to predict what it will say?) Just in time for Copenhagen.
I can see the spin. Tricky Mike finds the MWP to hide....
Delicious.
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
Hide the decline
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:00 ET by dboMike Mann along with the usual cast of characters.
Michael
E. Mann, Zhihua Zhang, Scott Rutherford, Raymond S. Bradley, Malcolm K.
Hughes, Drew Shindell, Caspar Ammann, Greg Faluvegi, and Fenbiao N: Global Signatures and Dynamical Origins of the Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Anomaly, Science 326 (5957), 1256. [DOI: 10.1126/science.1177303].
I wonder if this "peer reviewed science' has any pre-determined conclusions?
While it's true that much of the science associated with...
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 09:20 ET by ThalpyWhile it's true that much of the science associated with global climate change is a scam, there is absolutely no assurance that they will be indicted for it, held accountable for it, or change their political agenda as a result of it-none. In fact, many of them will continue to discredit the emails, focus on the fact that they were obtained illegally rather than what message they contain, and continue to spin all of this. That is what they do and I believe that's what we should concentrate on. We must finally come to the realization (as many already have ), that the MSM is our enemy and should be treated as such. They are and have been instrumental in degrading our society. We're running out of time.
Spat the dummy
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 09:37 ET by kangaroo5 aussie pollies spat the dummy and quit over aussie crap and tax.
Also I am poed over our PM 747 Rudd comming here to met with our ear leader next week about global warming, even though the shit is hitting the fan in oz with the carbon tax.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100018003/climategate-five-aussie-mps-lead-the-way-by-resigning-in-disgust-over-carbon-tax/
you can keep the 747 if you will take KRUDD
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 05:00 ET by surfergirl54KRUDD is busy trying to push the Crap and Tax through the Senate. On top of that Turnbull has been in cahoots with KRUDD. It looks like the LSM has done a great snowjob because it is alleged that private polling shows that people will be angry with the Opposition if they do not agree to tax households for an additional $1100 per year for a worthless scheme. This has not stopped a group of Opposition frontbenchers quitting the frontbench so that they do not have to vote for higher taxes.
Since I have not seen the question that was asked, I am sceptical that the general population, if they knew the truth would be upset over these pollies spitting the dummy.
However, I am prepared to say that USA can keep KRUDD. We do not want him. He is as narcissistic as Obummer. They deserve each other.
Same with the majority of
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 05:31 ET by kangarooSame with the majority of people here that don't have a clue whats going on, unless they watch fox. As usual I read about it in a UK paper.
How did I forget this basic fact??
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 09:53 ET by jon_torlinI just thought of something after someone had posted the comment about Mars' atmosphere and CO2 amount with temperatures that are freezing.
What is in some fire extinguishers as a main ingredient to putting out fires? Carbon Dioxide.(not all extinguishers, but some)
What's used to create fog or a bubbling effect with fog? Dry Ice, also known as solid Carbon Dioxide.
If that's the case with those two things, why are people being led to believe that an increase in Carbon Dioxide will cause "warming?" Good grief, you might as well say that boiling hot water will cause paper to catch fire using that kind of logic!
So much for basic science these days, geez!
-Jon
We're not crooks
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 09:59 ET by ThisnThatIPCC chairman's "I'm not a crook" statement: The I.P.C.C. as a body follows impartial, open and objective assessment of every aspect of climate change carried out with complete transparency.
Compare this with Baghdad Bob: "They're not even [within] 100 miles [of Baghdad]. They are not in any place. They hold no place in Iraq. This is an illusion ... they are trying to sell to the others an illusion."
Frankly, Baghdad Bob has more credibility. Memo to IPCC: We can see behind the curtain. Time to fess up.
__________
"mmm, mmm, mm. Barrack-Hussain-Øbama↓." - The liberals coolaid drinking song
I cannot think of a bigger scientific scandal
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 10:07 ET by casel21and Rush characterized this situation in a memorable and accurate fashion: In the Universe of Lies, there are 4 corners of deceit: academia, MSM, science, and government. (Though I wish he'd said 4 pillars instead of corners.) The MSM is simply holding up its end so their universe doesn't collapse on itself.
Why would anyone expect the MSM to act any different to this...
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 10:15 ET by JohnMcGrew...than they have to any other aspect to the climate scam? The current strategy will remain in place: Ignore any and all news hostile to the AGW agenda, and keep repeating the lie. It's worked well up to this point. Why change? Like with all the other scandals, they will just continue to hope that this goes away.
From Russia Today. Global
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 10:27 ET by danboFrom Russia Today. Global Tricks: Climate change we can't believe in.
One of the scientist. "America was right." (apparently the Bush Administration) Trying to get people not to sign on. Unfortunately we now have Obama.
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
Dilemma
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 10:48 ET by slickwillie2001This is a dilemma for the liberal media. Do they ignore the controversy, hoping that if they don't report on it, it didn't happen, or do they report on it with an attempt at writing it off as inconsequential. The former may have worked in 1980, but not so much today.
losing viewers/readers/listeners
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:06 ET by jon_torlinAll that would do if they ignore the controversy as they have ignored other things at their own peril is drive viewers to watch Fox News, not that it would be a bad thing, or more listeners to conservative talk show hosts, or readers to more conservative news sites.
Not to mention how complicit they were in pushing the AGW agenda as well as all those media outlets (USA, Weather Channel, NBC, MSNBC, Bravo, Disney, and so on) that pushed it, once people get the picture and saw they have been fooled, there should be an uproar and those folks that pushed it are going to lose.
Talk about it or don't, either way, they are going to lose.
-Jon
I pick . . .
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:17 ET by WingletDriverdouble down on stupid.
"I.P.C.C. as a body follows
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:11 ET by w301549"I.P.C.C. as a body follows impartial, open and objective assessment of
every aspect of climate change carried out with complete transparency" so why will they not release all their emails?
"Ridiculous?" "Absurd?" I
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:15 ET by metaphorsbwithu"Ridiculous?" "Absurd?"
I think we've long run out of adjectives when it comes to these people.
Now that "Science Czar" John Holdren has been implicated in these emails, maybe people will see why his past controversial beliefs and opinions (like "de-developing" the U.S and "redistributing" resources) are so disturbing.
metaphorsbwithu
What's wrong with this?
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:16 ET by WingletDriver"IPCC relies entirely on peer reviewed literature in carrying out its assessment and follows a process that renders it unlikely that any peer reviewed piece of literature, however contrary to the views of any individual author, would be left out." - Dr. Pachauri
The peer review process was completely debunked in these emails. Besides destroying data and faking results, these boneheads were explicit in shutting out skeptics, destroying reputations and intimidating anybody who wasn't in lockstep with their worldview. And when that didn't work, these guys made it very clear that they would just redefine what peer reviewed meant. In short, AGW has never been peer reviewed. Pachauri is either incompetent or a liar.
America under attack
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:34 ET by iveseenitallThe "average" American ( middle class, hard-working, honest, patriotic, law-abiding ) has been under attack for decades. The enemy has been within for years, polluting the environment more than "climate-change" ever could. Funny, the MSM and the politicians in particular never seem to suffer the consequences of their lies and their overt attempts to undermine the principles upon which our nation was founded. They are all rich beyond want they have worked for, yet they continue to spew hypocritical b.s. every chance they get in order to line their own pockets. Their feigned indignation at anyone who dares to call them out is both disgusting and laughable. However, as history proves over and over, sooner or later the "average" person has had enough and revolts against the self-centered bastards. We the People are not as stupid as "they" think we are. This is beginning in America. High unemployment and economic suffering won't continue long before the creeps who throw parties in Washington and say "let them eat cake" have to face the music. Bogus cap and trade, stimulus packages and health-care plans which are aimed at making the few rich at the expense of the many are being exposed for what they are. Is "average" America finally waking up? Let's hope so.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
MSM
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:28 ET by PayneWWho cares if the MSM reports on it. They are in self-destruct mode anyway. More and more people are getting their news online. And when they do that they come to the enevitable conclusion that the MSM is an arm of the current administration and all liberal causes they will do like I and so many others have done, no longer watch or care what the MSM says or does. If the MSM ever wants to increase their share of reporting the news, they'll have to start doing just that, dare I say like FOX. If they don't they'll just keep dying off and that's fine with me.
Payne Walker
IPCC relies entirely on
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:45 ET by sevenIPCC relies entirely on peer reviewed literature in carrying out its assessment and follows a process that renders it unlikely that any peer reviewed piece of literature, however contrary to the views of any individual author, would be left out
...We know what their peer reviewed means. They get their temps from the CRU. Modified to fit the dogma,.
The IPCC drinks koolaid with artifical "sweeteners"
Breaking...
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 11:44 ET by acumenA new video reportedly hacked from MSLSD server surfaces in Russia of alledged establishmnent media elites gathering to assess potential damage caused by leaked emails of accomplices at CRU. Developing....
Science Czar involved
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 14:09 ET by VonuAt least some in foreign press are interested:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17183
Freedom is a vital component of human effectiveness and fulfillment.
Of course the media is
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 17:45 ET by chessplayerOf course the media is ignoring this. Saudi Arabia wants to sell it`s oil.
No news on CNN.com
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:31 ET by ThisnThatAt 6:00pm today, can't find mention on front page of CNN.com. However, I did find a story about Tiger Woods car crash. I'll bet that's followed up with multiple updates by CNN. I also see that Doc Hendley, a bartender, is tackling the lack of clean water across the globe by raising money to dig wells. And there's a classroom somewhere with 5 sets of twins. All important stories, I guess.
What really angers me, though, is MSNBC. Their only mention at 6:00pm was a fluf piece on obama attending the copenhagan conference, and especially this comment: "Administration officials don't want to repeat the mistake of the 1997 Kyoto climate accord, when the U.S. agreed to emission reductions but never implemented them." Not a single word on the e-mails and scientific fraud. Not one. According to CNN and MSNBC, no e-mails were discovered, no fraud is suspected. Everything's a GO with our hero leading the way.
__________
"mmm, mmm, mm. Barrack-Hussain-Øbama↓." - The liberals coolaid drinking song
I expect some weekend comments
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:33 ET by pbthinkerPersonally, I expect the normal Right Wing Tempest in a Teapot story from the press over the weekend, especially in the PB Post. I will be buried on page 8A (foremerly 15A). The only difference is they can't hide it with advertising any more, although it is the season where even the PB Post should be able to make a buck. I'll let you know if I'm right.
Election 2008-God's way of showing us that elections count.
I think you should look at this
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 04:50 ET by surfergirl54I came across this link on another blog. I think it is very relevant:
http://www.congregator.net/articles/majordeception.html
You will find that what Dr. Pachauri says has already been negated as far back as 1996.