This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Global warming exposed as UN-funded fraud

Project Mayhem's picture


Global warming exposed as UN-funded fraud

by Project Mayhem


Russian computer hackers have published emails and source code from the UN-affiliated Climate Research Unit showing profound corruption, fraud, and criminal activity. What's really behind the Copenhagen treaty?


Recently, Russian hackers published over 160mb of scientific emails and source code taken from the primary 'climate research unit' -- the University of East Anglia, which is the center of UN/IPCC-promoted global warming alarmism. What the emails and data prove is shocking, and may represent the greatest scandal in the history of science.


In the emails, these UN-funded scientists talk about deleting data under FOIA request, faking data for journals such as Nature, conspiring to keep opposing science out of peer-reviewed journals (which they controlled the editorial boards), using "tricks" to "hide the [cooling period]" etc.

A picture emerges of big science funded to the tune of billions of dollars for the purposes of an underlying international political agenda. The degree of collusion between big media, the UN, and corrupted scientists involved in frank criminal activity is deeply disturbing. As I have detailed before, the purpose here is a political one. Global warming, or now abstractly identified as 'climate change', has been chosen by international banks and think tanks as the method of induction of vast political and social engineering never before seen in the history of the world.  

We see based on the activities of criminals representing themselves as 'climate scientists' that the politics came first, and the science came second. They were more than happy to represent the political interests of the UN and international banks  -- as long as their lab was well-funded.  But there are politics behind this indeed.  Here is a small sample of the underlying political agenda: Billions in new taxes, International regulatory control under the UN, Goldman Sachs/CCX carbon trading, Obliteration of national sovereignty, extreme forced austerity and reduction of the standard of living, deindustrialization of the First World countries, and implementation of Orwellian state policies for the purposes of "carbon tracking". The science does not matter -- the politics does.


Let us consider for a moment the cynical political objectives behind 'global warming' before we delve into the mountain of evidence thanks to the leaked emails and source code.



Global Warming and Orwellian State Policy

The Dutch government attempts to introduce GPS tracking units in everyone's cars under the pretext of 'climate change'.


THE HAGUE — The Dutch government said Friday it wants to introduce a "green" road tax by the kilometre from 2012 aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 10 percent and halving congestion.

"Each vehicle will be equipped with a GPS device that tracks how many kilometres are driven and when and where. This data will be then be sent to a collection agency that will send out the bill," the transport ministry said in a statement.





Global Warming and New Taxes

One of the primary political aspects of the global warming fraud is the  imposition of a massive and bewildering array of new taxes.  Obviously it is plain to see how this is in the interest of governments and banks, particularly if such taxes are imposed on an individual level.

Carbon Insurance For Your Car May Be Down The Road [Green Gas Taxes at Pumps] by Terry Tamminen ( - Nov. 13, 2009.

"A carbon insurance premium could easily be included in such a gas pump surcharge so drivers pay the true cost of operating their vehicles in terms of all relevant risks, including their fair share of creating both fender benders and climate change collisions."

Carbon ration account for all proposed by Environment Agency by Ben Webster ( - Nov. 9, 2009.

"Everyone should be given an annual carbon ration and face financial penalties if they exceed it, under a proposal by the Environment Agency"





Global Warming and Personal Autonomy

Selling your house? It could be a green crime

Queensland’s flailing government has now made it a crime to sell your house without first doing a big green audit: 

QUEENSLANDERS selling their homes will soon have to complete a 56-point questionnaire detailing the property’s environmental credentials




Global Warming and Forced Austerity

The UN has advocated funding global birth control initiatives [read: 'population security'] in order to 'reduce CO2 emissions'.  Of course now we know the connection between CO2 and temperatures is based on fabricated data . . .   So where does that leave such UN population initiatives?

UN says Birth control the most effective way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions [UN Wants More Abortions and Sterilizations to cut Co2] by Ben Webster ( - Nov. 19, 2009.


The population control objectives of the global warming fraud do not end there. Andrew Revkin, an NYT correspondent identified in the leaked CRU emails exhibiting a very cozy relationship with the corrupt scientists, advocates restrictions on the number of children couples are permitted to have via the issuance of 'carbon credits'. This is similar to what was advocated by Obama's chief science advisor John Holdren in his book Ecoscience.  There is a political agenda behind global warming.

"Should–probably the single-most concrete and substantive thing an American, young American, could do to lower our carbon footprint is not turning off the lights or driving a Prius, it’s having fewer kids, having fewer children,” said Revkin. “So should there be, eventually you get, should you get credit–If we’re going to become carbon-centric–for having a one-child family when you could have had two or three,” said Revkin.


The above is significant because Revkin is identified in the leaked emails corresponding with the corrupt Climate Research Unit (CRU) and has written many pro-global warming articles for the New York Times.




Global Warming and Systemic Financial Fraud


Where would we be in a Zerohedge article without mention of the fraudsters at Goldman Sachs.  No doubt they are present in almost every evil or fraudulent enterprise known to man and global warming is no exception.  Certainly these charlatans plan on making billions trading hallucinated carbon credits on Maurice Strong's Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).


Al Gore's "Carbon Trading" Scam Reeks of Who Else? Goldman






These examples illustrate how the global warming fraud is used to push a far-reaching political agenda -- an agenda born out of the unholy fusion of governments , banks, and corrupt scientists. But let us consider now the content of the leaked emails.


Scientific corruption at the highest levels:


From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,,
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxx.xx.xx,

Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow. I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH nd N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999
for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with
data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.

Thanks for the comments, Ray.


Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) xxxxx
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) xxxx
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email


Obviously the above email speaks for itself. Despite the glaringly obvious fraud, Phil Jones and his collaborators across the world would have you believe that "trick" and "hiding the decline" are simply normal procedures in any scientific laboratory. The FORTRAN source code tells a different story.



Climate Research Unit FORTRAN code backs up claims of fraud and corruption

Neal from Climate Audit writes:

"People are talking about the emails being smoking guns but I find the remarks in the code and the code more of a smoking gun. The code is so hacked around to give predetermined results that it shows the bias of the coder. In other words make the code ignore inconvenient data to show what I want it to show. The code after a quick scan is quite a mess. Anyone with any pride would be to ashamed of to let it out public viewing. As examples [of] bias take a look at the following remarks from the MANN code files:"


function mkp2correlation,indts,depts,remts,t,filter=filter,refperiod=refperiod,$
pro maps12,yrstart,doinfill=doinfill
; Plots 24 yearly maps of calibrated (PCR-infilled or not) MXD reconstructions
; of growing season temperatures. Uses “corrected” MXD – but shouldn’t usually
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.



"Spin that, spin it to the moon if you want. I’ll believe programmer notes over the word of somebody who stands to gain from suggesting there’s nothing “untowards” about it.

Either the data tells the story of nature or it does not. Data that has been “artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures” is false data, yielding a false result."

-Anthony Watts, Meteorologist







The source code above shows that the scientists involved manipulated their data in order to achieve a predetermined outcome. This is fraud, plain and simple. What is worse is these scientists also deliberately deleted the paper trail showing their research was fraudulent when the FOA requests arrived. This is criminal activity at the highest levels, and these people should be investigated and prosecuted. The massive amounts of funding they were provided with was used to lie to the public , in order to achieve the objectives of the UN and its affiliated think tanks, whether these scientists were aware of the implication of their corruption or not. The point is these entire 'climate change' claims need to be thrown in the trash heap and evaluated by competent scientists without financial or political interests in the outcome of their research.  

And above all, the UN's Copenhagen treaty for dramatic forced austerity and international political control should be exposed for the vicious and cynical hoax it actually is.  Copenhagen is the culmination of these fraudulent policies. National sovereignty will once again be reduced under a treaty conceived and funded by think tanks and international banks. Massive taxes will be imposed. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan will make billions trading hallucinated carbon credits. Orwellian state policies for tracking individuals and interfering in personal autonomy will become acceptable under the pretext of 'stopping climate change', despite the entire rationale being fraudulent. Monopolistic international finance capital and the billionaire elitists behind it believe they are about to achieve another victory over the unwashed masses with the Copenhagen treaty.

The true political objective behind global warming was proven beyond a doubt in the Club of Rome publication The First Global Revolution. Keep in mind Al Gore is a member of this elitist group of policymakers, and even chaired a full Club of Rome meeting in Washington DC in 1997. 


"“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself."

-Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, 1991.

We should understand that the international political agenda underlying the falsified global warming scandal is, at its core, an ideology of corrupt banks and politicians intent on framing humanity as the enemy , in order to achieve purposes of social control.  Thus, it is no surprise that the 'science' behind global warming has been exposed as fraudulent.

For in-depth coverage of this growing scandal, see:


You can download the full copy of the leaked documents and source code here: 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 06/27/2011 - 06:30 | Link to Comment mediahuset
mediahuset's picture

Very good info that is presented in this post. I prefer to read this kind of stuff.Thanks for your kind support.

Sun, 06/26/2011 - 04:22 | Link to Comment mediahuset
mediahuset's picture

I found your website perfect for my needs. It contains wonderful and helpful posts. I have read most of them and learned a lot from them. You are doing some great work. Thank you for making such a nice website.

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 07:59 | Link to Comment sun1
sun1's picture

I have to admit that I have never heard about this information I have noticed many new facts for me. Thanks a lot for sharing this useful and attractive information and I will be waiting for other interesting posts from you in the nearest future.keep it up. car insurance

Sun, 12/06/2009 - 08:48 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 10:03 | Link to Comment AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture

November 29, 2009

Climate change data dumped

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years


November 29, 2009

U-turn on climate change 'cover up' as university says it will publish leaked email data

The university said it will make all the data accessible in conjunction with the Met Office Hadley Centre as soon as the CRU had negotiated its release from non-publication agreements. However, how much information this will include was today thrown into doubt, as the Sunday Times reported that scientists had admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data.

Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:45 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 18:28 | Link to Comment Cistercian
Cistercian's picture

 The wall st journal article today is harsh...on the fraudsters!Epic.

Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:57 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:56 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:31 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:05 | Link to Comment ShankyS
ShankyS's picture

PM - thanks for catching the fringe items that deserve front page status. This is a enormous issue that ties in with a lot of other possible fraudulent activity. This bluff has to be called and why the hell people are not marching with pitchforks now I simply don't understand. I'm sure is has nothing to do with the MSM's stellar coverage of this historic event. Anyway, thanks for posting this and spreading the good word. I appreciate it.

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:56 | Link to Comment Lexington Duffet
Lexington Duffet's picture

Project Mayhem and the other RW bloggers filling this site with their worldview-  

I do not see how you get from the emails you published--a minority out of thousands of emails by your admission--to the conclusions which you reach that the vast majority of scientists are criminals and liars.  

Such a position was adopted by the Catholic church in the 1600's.  They burned to death various persons and tried to keep the scientists from doing anything.  I'd suggest that if you actually believe in such government rules, that the scientists are mostly liars, that you stop using your car, reading books, using computers, or the internet.  None of  wld exist if the anti-scientist crowd runs things. 

Let me suggest that it is normal for their to be disputes within a scientific community.  And?  Your point is?

The overwhelming physical evidence shows that the Climate is changing--as do the measurements buts its hard to measure because there are so many local variables involved.  Is it really so controversial to conclude that SOMETHING is changing the climate?   

The best model which the scientists now have predict that if the tempature rises, then we should see wider swings of weather:  higher highs, lower lows, changing in rainfall patterns, bigger storms.  That seems to be happening too.  Overwhelming evidence throughout the world.  Melting ice, droughts, changes in tree patterns, rain falls, etc.

I'd suggest that the RW refusal to admit science, the collective wisdom of open minded individuals, is usually right is contributing to the US downfall and weakening the country. 

Not the Republican's opposite conclusion, that the collective judgment of the scientific community is usually wrong.   And that ignorance should be praised and promoted. 

On a somewhat related issue:

The RW bloggers using this site to claim that science and regulation will leading us on some road to  serfdom should read  Hayek's book of that name.  Hayek discusses how the Nazi's rose to power.   His book does not discuss science.  Hayek ACTUALLY concludes honest democracy, regulations, and the rule of law will PROTECT against serfdom and abuses of power--not the point for which the book is cited by the RW, who obviously either never read Hayek's book The Road to Serfdom and are ignorant or delusional or read the book and are lying about what it said. 

Since that book is thrown around quite a bit by the RW attackers of democracy and law, let me suggest the readers of this blog get the book and read chapter 3 of the Road to Serfdom, in which Hayek concludes that society should allow more competition over central planning, derides monopoly power, and writes "To prohibit the use of certain poisonous substances or to require special precautions in their use, to limit working hours or to require certain sanitary arrangements, is fully compatible with the preservation of competition.  The only question here is whether [the benefits outweigh the costs]."

I'd suggest from reading Hayek's book that he SUPPORTS the liberal establishment and the scientific community-- and the idea neither is perfect only that its the best we've got. 

That some cheat and lie is nothing new.  The idea that everyone does is not always correct. 




Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:30 | Link to Comment tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

i have read the road to serfdom, and i have always consciously considered my perspective more from the LW than the RW (according to your acronyms).  and i do understand much of where you're coming from and very much appreciate your recognition of hayek's work as one that respects human rights as a foundation for economics.

with that said, let me ask you a couple things:

do you have a compost bin? 
how many gallons of petrol did you personally burn in the last month?
how many plants are you growing/taking care of?
what is your monthly usage of coal-derived electricity in KwH's?

(answer honestly please)


Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:05 | Link to Comment AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture

    #142725  says "Let me suggest that it is normal for their to be disputes within a scientific community.  And?  Your point is?

    The overwhelming physical evidence shows that the Climate is changing--as do the measurements buts its hard to measure because there are so many local variables involved.  Is it really so controversial to conclude that SOMETHING is changing the climate? "

If you take a few moments and speed read the thousands of emails you will find that these titans of anthropogenic global warming have a unique approach in  dealing with disputes. A random example (one of many in regard to FOIA requests):

    Phil Jones said the following on 6/19/2007 4:22 AM:
    Wei-Chyung and Tom,
    Nothing much else to say except:
    1. Think I've managed to persuade UEA to ignore all further FOIA
    requests if the people have anything to do with Climate Audit.
    2. Had an email from David Jones of BMRC, Melbourne. He said
    they are ignoring anybody who has dealings with CA, as there are
    threads on it about Australian sites.
    3. CA is in dispute with IPCC (Susan Solomon and Martin Manning)
    about the availability of the responses to reviewer's at the various
    stages of the AR4 drafts. They are most interested here re Ch 6 on


Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:58 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:24 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:09 | Link to Comment lookma
lookma's picture

Every single one of my science professors at school (the Nicholas School of the Environment) was very certain that global warming will be a very real threat in the not-so-distant future.These are people who have dedicated their lives to researching geology, oceanography, marine biology, chemistry, physics and the energy industry.

Do you think this weighs in favor of their credibility?  It would appear to suggest an enourmous bias.

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:08 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 06:09 | Link to Comment Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now's picture

An error in a priori logic.  Most of these arguments begin with an assumption that is relied upon to try and prove an argument where the facts do not fit the hypothesis but that is not science.  You see, this is like an argument that God exists by starting with the premise that God exists and using it for proof - the same goes for evolution, they are both theories that start with an assumption to prove the argument - in reality both evolution and intelligent design both require faith because we can't put either under a microscope to prove either. 

Many of us believe what we have been taught to believe and what we have seen on TV and what we have read in the paper - they are real, because they are real to us and what we have been led to believe.  Truly objective individuals are a rare breed.

Relevant Rousseau Qutoes:

  • Falsehood has an infinity of combinations, but truth has only one mode of being.
  • General and abstract ideas are the source of the greatest errors of mankind.
  • The less reasonable a cult is, the more men seek to establish it by force.
  • The first step towards vice is to shroud innocent actions in mystery, and whoever likes to conceal something sooner or later has reason to conceal it.
  • I prefer liberty with danger than peace with slavery.
  • Truth is no road to fortune.

I can understand wanting to save the world and being told your profession will do just that.  Take solace in saving the world from tyranny - including the tyranny of the dishonorable corporations poisoning the earth and the food supply (and measuring the impact of pollution - not CO2) if you want to fight a real enemy.

A good movie to watch would be Network, here's an excerpt:

"Because the only truth you know is what you get over this tube. Right now, there is a whole, an entire generation that never knew anything that didn't come out of this tube! This tube is the Gospel, the ultimate revelation. This tube can make or break presidents, popes, prime ministers... This tube is the most awesome God-damned force in the whole godless world, and woe is us if it ever falls in to the hands of the wrong people, and that's why woe is us that Edward George Ruddy died.

Because this company is now in the hands of CCA -- the Communication Corporation of America. There's a new Chairman of the Board, a man called Frank Hackett, sitting in Mr. Ruddy's office on the twentieth floor. And when the twelfth largest company in the world controls the most awesome God-damned propoganda force in the whole godless world, who knows what shit will be peddled for truth on this network?

So, you listen to me. Listen to me: Television is not the truth! Television is a God-damned amusement park! Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, side-show freaks, lion tamers, and football players. We're in the boredom-killing business! So if you want the truth... Go to God! Go to your gurus! Go to yourselves! Because that's the only place you're ever going to find any real truth...

"We're all you know. You're beginning to believe the illusions we're spinning here. You're beginning to think that the tube is reality, and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you! You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube, you even *think* like the tube! This is mass madness, you maniacs! In God's name, you people are the real thing! *WE* are the illusion! So turn off your television sets. Turn them off now. Turn them off right now. Turn them off and leave them off! Turn them off right in the middle of the sentence I'm speaking to you now! TURN THEM OFF...

Global unifying themes are so much more attractive to the human psyche than stating we want an all powerful one world government paid for with carbon taxes because everything that can be controlled from energy, movement, and all life forms emits CO2.  The fact that thousands of scientists have bravely signed petitions stating that the science is not settled, and that evidence exists that the data has been manipulated would lead a rational individual to conclude this is a flim flam sham-wow.

Now you are in a difficult position thinking originally that you could save the world from the threat of global warming.  You can either choose to believe that you are like a comic book hero and can save the world from imminent doom, or you can get mad at the manipulation.  You've got to say, 'I'm a HUMAN BEING, Goddamnit! My life has VALUE! Stick your head out the window and I want you to get up right now and go to the window. Open it, and stick your head out, and yell, 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!'

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:54 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:22 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:10 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 15:41 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:17 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 15:39 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 15:36 | Link to Comment anynonmous
anynonmous's picture

Hey Mayhem this in from Reuters

China expert warns of pandemic flu mutation
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 13:39 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 15:50 | Link to Comment Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now's picture

Your argument is a logical fallacy, the sunspot cycles occur over hundreds of years, why do you think Greenland was called Greenland?  We are experiencing record cold temperatures, that's why they had to change the term to global climate change.

You convince nobody with your rhetoric and perhaps the most absurd reasoning I have ever seen, the same scientists that are falsifying information are also leaving anonymous comments on many articles to spread disinformation.

Stupid is as stupid types.  Either half the country is brainwashed or we have the same individuals here posting as anonymous.

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:37 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 13:17 | Link to Comment Gunther
Gunther's picture


Great stuff, Mayhem.

The Finnish TV station YLE had a documentation with a similar tone running.
It is available in Finnish and with German subtitles.
There are two interviews in English with Steve McIntyre (Canada) and Richard Lindzen (MIT) in the doc.
The Finnish took samples from trees too and found no evidence of warming and rejected the hockeystick-temperature curve.

On the website is a link to an english transcript that led me to the website of the finnish TV station where I did not understand a thing.

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 13:11 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 12:57 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:04 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 14:07 | Link to Comment Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

4 out of 5 circle jerk dentists recommend Oral B. We alway keep one person out of the circle jerk to use as ridicule bait. Meanwhile while employing our methodology our commercials get met with hostility such as "Shut the fuck up and put the stupid nylon bristles in the stupid nylon stick, I'm not giving you 8 bucks for a toothbrush you dicks."

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 12:52 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 12:44 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 15:14 | Link to Comment anynonmous
anynonmous's picture

C02 will get you every time errrrrr ummmm I mean C0 will get you every time - CO2 is the stuff humans exhale and plants "breathe" so to speak - C0 is the stuff that comes out of the tail pipe of most automobiles.

So how about sitting in your garage with a Ficus benjamina

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 12:17 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Hmmm: some people have issue with Dr. Ball being the truth savior:

Dr. Ball can't even tell the truth about his own resume. His claim to be the first Climatology Ph.D. in Canada is a total falsehood; his degree was in historical geography - not climatology - and it was nowhere near the first ever granted to someone writing vaguely in the field. It also was granted by the university as a doctor of philosophy, not the more prestigious "doctor of science" that Ball claims in these articles.

He claims as well to have been a professor (again of climatology) at the University of Winnipeg for 32 years, while he confirmed in his own Statement of Claim in a pending lawsuit (look here ) that he was a professor (of geography, never climatology) for just eight years.

Dr. Ball claims never to have been paid by oil and gas interests, but if you look here , you'll find a Globe and Mail story in which Dr. Barry Cooper, the man behind Ball's former industry front group, the Friends of Science , offers this clumsy admission: "[The money's] not exclusively from the oil and gas industry," says Prof. Cooper. "It's also from foundations and individuals. I can't tell you the names of those companies, or the foundations for that matter, or the individuals."

Wed, 11/25/2009 - 11:51 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 11:39 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 11:25 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 11:15 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 11:04 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 13:02 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 11:01 | Link to Comment trx
trx's picture

I'm puzzled by the timing of this information (just as the Copehagen meeting is about to start).....


In April this year I wrote a piece called "eco-logical miscalculations", about the exact same same issue.

I managed to piss of a few fanatics, but that was it...


(Original Post in original language here:øko-logisk-regnefeil/)




Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!