Due to unforeseen circumstances, Al Gore has had to cancel a Copenhagen speaking event at which he had hoped to charge starry-eyed believers in his ManBearPig religion $1200 a piece for the privilege of shaking his hand, breathing in his CO2 and having his latest book inflicted on them.
Could those unforeseen circumstances have anything to do with Climategate?
I think so. Climategate is now huge. Way, way bigger than the Mainstream Media (MSM) is admitting it is – as Richard North demonstrates in this fascinating analysis. Using what he calls a Tiger Woods Index (TWI), he compares the amount of interest being shown by internet users (as shown by the number of general web pages on Google) and compares it with the number of news reports recorded. The ratio indicates what people are really interested in, as opposed to what the MSM thinks they ought to be interested in.
North explains:
Tiger Woods delivered 22,500,000 web and 46,025 news pages, giving ratio of 489. That is the “Tiger Woods Index” (TWI) against which I chose to measure a raft of other issues.
Here are the rankings:
1. Climategate: 28,400,000 – 2,930 = 9693
2. Afghanistan: 143,000,000 – 154,145 = 928
3. Obama: 202,000,000 – 252,583 = 800
4. Tiger Woods: 22,500,000 – 46,025 = 489
5. Gordon Brown: 12,300,000 – 37,021 = 332
6. Climate change: 22,200,000 – 68,419 = 324
7. Sally Bercow: 25,000 – 86 = 290
8. David Cameron: 545,000 – 4837 = 113
9. Meredith Kercher: 261,000 – 3,471 = 75
10. Chilcot Inquiry: 125,000 – 4,350 = 29
[More]
Related:
UN panel promises to investigate leaked ‘climategate’ e-mails
Climategate: hide the decline – codified
Attempted breaches show larger effort to discredit climate science: researcher
Copenhagen targets not tough enough, says Al Gore
Arnold Schwarzenegger unveils dramatic climate change map
Mr. President: Boycott Copenhagen; Investigate Your Climate Change “Experts”
Rex Murphy on Climategate
Updates:
3:00 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – India will not sign binding emission cuts-minister
3:02 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – Climate-Gate Heats Up But Mainstream Media Ignore Firestorm
3:02 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – Climate Gate is YOUR fight
3:04 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – Beck: What Separates Climate-Gate From Other Conspiracies?
3:07 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – Global warming’s new clothes
3:08 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – How Much Longer Before Climategate Explodes?
3:10 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – Tainted science
3:11 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – World risks 4C rise even if there is a deal
3:12 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – Forget climate change – save the planet from the thermomaniacs
3:13 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – Climategate researcher denounces ‘smear’
3:17 pm EST, December 4th, 2009 – The Big Question: Does ‘climate-gate’ matter politically?
Yikes ! AGW Wheels falling off, wheels rims being ground down in a festival of sparks, gas tank scraping on the pavement, gas tank exploding ! ( SMILE ).
We might still end up with a Copenhagen treaty …… ( GROAN ) !
Not losing hope, YET !
Jack have you seen this clip of Rex Murphy I found on the BT site ?
http://kitchenerconservative.wordpress.com/2009/12/04/rex-murphy-weighs-on-climategate/
So I wonder what Peter Mansbridge thought about it ? At the end of the clip there is a small fragment of Peter going to the next story where I think I see a little uncomfortable body language ? I didn’t see the entire CBC news broadcast of that night since I hardly ever watch CBC news anymore …. gave up on them a while ago !
So will the CBC be reporting on this fully from now on ? How neutral or fair the coverage we can sort of guess ….. maybe they will pleasantly surprise us, but I don’t give it high odds LOL.
OOOOPS: Seems like that is a yes ! I think it wasn’t there when I started typing my previous message or I didn’t notice is was already there !? Anyway, good work Jack I should have assumed that you would post this as it’s a good one …… Too bad / so sad so few people watch CBC anymore LOL. If they started giving us real impartial news I might start watching again.
I’m reading your mind, Jean. I came across the clip somewhere else and just added it. It’s very good.
$1200 bucks to listen to that gas bag?!! Even environmental jihadis can’t be that dumb, but then again, they would have used someone else’s money to buy the tickets of course….
Billions if not trillions of dollars in, I would say that the only thing that global warming scientists have proven conclusively so far is that lefties are pathological liars who should never have been trusted to do science stuff without adult supervision in the first place, except that also “settled” by now is that the left’s journalistic skills and integrity are in pitiful shape as well. Is there in fact anything that the left does well? Math? No. History? Nope. Teaching? No again. Anything? Well, perhaps lefties would score high marks in empathy and compassion, that is if so much of it was not misplaced, and they were not so easily manipulated into following a destructive socialist agenda.
Worst of all, this wasted effort and the countless billions already spent on it could have done some good in the world if the left could simply prioritize. Lefties will as always counter that they alone hold the keys to compassion, but this is another lie. It is not at all generous of the left to want to spend money not yet earned by future generations, at best it is simple minded. If the left ever does achieve its goal of equal outcomes for all through one world governance, due to its past efforts at wealth redistribution, the left will soon discover that global debts already outstrip global wealth, so in the end there will be nothing but more debt left to share in.
Mostly this exercise in futility is proving that while the left is not above corrupting such principled notions as scientific method, the peer review process, and tenureship, in order to further its own agenda, we all share in the blame for not yet finding a way to wrestle academia from its grasp, as we knowingly should have long ago.
Short Brian S.: Progressives are ideological sociopaths.
Is there in fact anything that the left does well? Math? No. History? Nope. Teaching? No again
The right fares no better in this regard. That’s because both the left and right operate as religions and will quickly stomp over the aforementioned to enforce their points … while pretending that only the other side does it.
That said, most of the mathies I know tend to be rather liberal in the classical sense, since their fields are about discovery, which implies that they don’t know everything already. This runs counter to a philosophy bent on preserving the past for its supposed moral perfection.
I’m just trying to provoke at least one progressive into attempting to defend this global climate lunacy, but as usual, whenever such a pet cause is exposed, lefties go all quiet and unopinionated, like the trend-following, weak-willed, dim-wits they are. (that might do it)
Shouldn’t you at least do it in a place where someone actually advocates AGW? JNW is hardly a den of Al Gore fans.
I tried but as per usual I got banned in a matter of minutes.
Lindsay made the same claim. Where are you all getting banned from, exactly?
Scrabble, and then some I found through progressivebloggers, but the left seems oddly quiet on this particular topic at the moment, and I see no point in the drive-thru opinion clearinghouses.
/Back on topic.
There’s nothing to add to the topic. You’re looking for AGW people to gloat at, but there aren’t any here. You’ll have to convince yourself that UV or stageleft or myself are (as per usual) so you can sneer about all things “leftist”. Or go to a forum with a more representative sample of opinions (though for biased reasons I cannot recommend that)
I have no problem with UV, he just disagrees with me, which is fine. Stageleft however has been known to cut and paste my comments into his own blog posts out of context and without attributing them to me or pointing back to the original thread here at Jack’s Newswatch. Not being up on the rules of blog etiquette, I have decided that Stageleft is deserving of all the scorn I care to heap on him. You can be every bit as intolerant as those of us you like to sneer at, so you can get used to my counter sneer. All of you are big enough to defend yourselves.
There’s no need for a defense since I never claimed to support AGW and in fact said the opposite on more than one occasion. Your counter-sneer is once again void, but every mob needs a witch …
What you call “intolerant” is usually just me calling a spade a spade instead of allowing people to hide their malicious intentions behind euphemistic language. It irks many people who think they’re simply too slick for the rest of us, or have some divine right to beat up on who they want because of what their ancestors may or may not have accomplished, but too bad. Sneer away (just be more accurate next time)
Rex Murphy’s covered the ClimateGate revelations more than adequately, retrieving CBC’s denial mode for up to two weeks.
Late last night a report was circulated to the effect that the gov’t would go to Copenhagen concentrating on the need for pollution reductions as opposed to presenting any carbon intensity target reductions.
Earlier reports Prentice issued stated to the effect that the CRU e-mails release were serious reports and needed investigations.
Today, those reports can’t be found anywhere — the ones I saw.
I caught an interview between Campbell Brown (CNN) and Thomas Friedman where he minimized the exposure, but said he did find the contents of the CRU e-mails “disappointing.” In the end, he basically said that the two camps are 50/50 right and it’s unknown at this point.
There’s too much money to lose if cap n trade goes down, but what’s clear is that it should as the financial scam of the 21st century. The on-coming unavoidable train is a democratic tax revolt into 2010, 11 and 12.
Ottawa Citizen ha s up a Ontario Harmonization Tax calculator. I punched in $50.00 for auto gas and it was supposed to come up with the value added tax charge. It printed Nan which I interpreted as zero tax added.
NOM, as a reality check why don’t you grab the link and do some calculations for everybody and your own expenses.
The Google engine is trifling with the links particularly with regard to CO2 studies. One study (up late last night) said that the forests around Aspen, Colorado have been tracked over a couple of decades and that co2 absorption had promoted their regrowth by an increase of 50 percent. Now, a reverse report is up at NYTimes citing how co2 presence in atmosphere is stunting forest regrowth.
Question: if the lost data was deleted can computer forensics retrieve lost data?? just asking the computer literate.
Final note: I don’t come here to be insulted as I was last night by a supposed fellow conservative. I engage here to contribute and for the most part it works out very well. So we’ll determine now it had better not occur again. Someone was trying to prove how clever they were, but ended up proving what a cad he/she was. Enough. There’s more important things to think about and this site adheres to what is at stake to its credit.
Accurate about what Cynapse? Not that you don’t have your own blog if you wish to shine a bright light on whatever malicious intentions you believe I might have, but if you have some argument you care to continue, or some previous inaccuracy on my part that you believe you can improve upon without highlighting your own ignorance, I am certain that thread will still be open, so lets stop hijacking this one.
Today the CPC is apparently still talking cap and trade. Are they deaf dumb and blind?
Re: 19 — “Are they deaf dumb and blind?”
That has nothing to do with it. The CPC does not own the media – liberals do.
As for the reporters liberal millionaires own? They don’t want to get fired. They have families to feed.
Does that mean they are biased?
“Yes” — and understood. They lie a lot.
“Nuff said.”
re the Hollywood link above. It would be a first ever if the Oscar was rescinded from Gore as recommended by Simon at Pyjamas Media.
There’s movie material in the ClimateGate story. The bet’s on that it’ll be taken up in the near future. Decades of pseudo-science in bed with politics is the story to be told.
Ratification: The approval by the principal of an act of its agent where the agent lacked authority to legally bind the principal. The term applies to private contract law, international treaties, and constitutional amendments in federations such as the United States and Canada.
As I see it there is no reason to panic unless of course we expect the Harper government to fall on an entirely symbolic sword(well pen really). Which is what each of us really does need to decide for ourselves in case Copenhagen goes ahead as planned, because ratification of any international agreement amounts to simple approval in principal and explicitly lacks the authority to legally bind the signatory country, and if that isn’t enough, the UN is completely powerless when it comes to enforcing anything that is not a matter of global security, which this is not, as well as most things that are.
Harper has always in the past rightly insisted that any agreement that allowed developing countries to foul the air with impunity would defy logic, and developing countries remain unlikely to allow themselves to be subject to emissions restrictions. Therefore, even if there is any agreement to be reached in Copenhagen, given the current global political and economic environment, it can be certain it will be as watered down as possible, and as completely meaningless as Canada’s signature on Kyoto was, because the law here and elsewhere remains that such a signature is not binding because no tax may be imposed, nor money spent without Parliament’s consent. A corresponding money bill would still have to be drawn up by the Harper government that could be debated as it made its way through parliament and the senate, and given that Harper has also taken the stance that any such legislation Canada puts forward, would have to mirror whatever commitment the US makes, such a bill would be dependent on the US passing its Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill which is currently stuck in the US senate and going nowhere.
If the past is any indication, I believe Harper is in Copenhagen to gum up the works, and whether we sign on or not, he will continue to drag our collective feet, until such time as all this AGW hot air blows much cooler.
Re: #22 — “So”…
It’s all political bullshit and this AGW argument is going nowhere fast.
Am I correct, Brian?
Cy asks “Is there in fact anything that the left does well? ”
Yes…it spends other people’s money on useless tripe.
Yes you are right Jack, they hid the science for a reason, but even as global momentum towards the acceptance of AGW is now slowing considerably, the world just cannot turn on a dime, and there are probably more blows that still must be delivered before we can be certain a beast of this size is dead.
Re: #25 — Agreed.
We need to jail these people. That will stop it all.
All online polls are indicating up to 75 percent are now ANTI-AGW. That would explain the foot-dragging of the Waxman-Markey cap n trade bill only days before Copenhagan. No one’s serious about promoting it now. The elites are dealing with the “disappointment” as Thomas Friedman referred to the exposure, only because the tax base IS SHRINKING despite the heavy propaganda circulating throughout liberal media world today. As Sarah states in the interview to the effect taxpayers are on the hook for far too long and it’s not doable. The catch-22 is the clear vice grip to be dealt with.
The practical only agenda has a real chance at a comeback now, despite the mass confusion/chaos of what’s clearly propaganda. Good thing nothing’s set in stone as said above.
Accurate about what Cynapse? Not that you don’t have your own blog if you wish to shine a bright light on whatever malicious intentions you believe I might have
This was done long ago. Virtually nobody on the right was talking about the science, only the taxes (and in fact people are still linking to tax calculators on website). That is a strong indication that the science doesn’t matter – you’re trying to save a buck. Now that the science has been proven faulty, you’ve suddenly morphed into Bill Nye, out to enforce the empirical process. It’s disingenuous and most people know it. Why should the MSM feed your partisan hysteria?
Who’s Who Climategate CRU Anglia UEA Data
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCzs6SWhcVo
Cynapse — at risk of being bounced off the net — you are wrong. Al Gore and crowd intend to tax you and your children to death and I don’t know why you are arguing against people who have their heads screwed on properly.
It’s your money. Why are you arguing to spend it on a dream that won’t come true?
Jack:
1) Why would you be bounced off the net? This is a free speech zone (excepting actual abuse) and not to mention your site
2) How can you say I’m wrong then proceed to talk about taxes?
3) My only contention from the start is that AGW should be bounced out on a scientific basis and nothing else. That has now happened. We all want to pay no taxes but sometimes the cost of paying none is much higher. However if the science is faulty then none of this matters – it’s a scam. All the partisan griping on highly political sites like WND is not people with their heads screwed on properly – it’s political types driving the last nail into the coffin of their enemy’s pet project … and trying to create a situation where they can preemptively strike any profit-killing environmental initiatives in the future. This is pure politics.
I’m all for tossing bad ideas, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater
no one should doubt ‘the net’ itself is being manipulated as links are put up then disappear. fact is, hardly a one has the head screwed on and i’ll include myself, but we observe what’s out there. i think the right hand right now doesn’t know what the left is doing, but citizens know hyper-inflation, higher interests rates, and maxed out taxation as per AGW plan is directly ahead.
“Science itself is on the mat” as you say it’s been “proven faulty” i’ve read a couple of dozen of the e-mails, but apparently there’s between 1,000 and 4,000 according to a few reports. same with the fluidity par for the course of predicting the economic models, you’d know about that cy. i think what you’re implying is that misinformation is in both camps. i’d say you’re right, but politics as theatre isn’t going to continue as obama said today to the effect it’s somewhat serious when the ‘rent can’t be paid.’
i asked a question and common courtesy could be demonstrated with an answer. i read a print press report that said not one word on any computer is missed (no privacy, it’s a figment) nor one phone call goes unmonitored. i don’t disapprove since i do think domestic security is more than compromised in these times ahead.
i think it’d be safe to say the net’s fairly secure and only a natural disaster would interfere with the optic fibre lines as happened in mideast a while back.
that book, GREEN FRAUD, 2009 edition said that approx. 130,000 anti AGW accredited scientists signed a petition to be allowed to engage the warming debate with the head honcho institutions running the whole show. other reports said the critics were vastly outnumbered. so where’s the signed petition on the net??
cy the ‘baby’ is now 75 percent of the population from all political persuasions realizing that if AGW gets its way — and it hasn’t exactly been put to bed as yet, then taxation rises to 70 percent of the paycheque, not the current 50 percent> Ergo, all partisan agreement, followed by serious tax revolts. you’d know better than i. i can count accurately though still.
but, but but out of the prez’ mouth today, tax cuts are on the table!
I only comment here on what Jack posts here, and his is not a science blog, but Cynapse does have a point, my distrust of the science should be taken as my own opinion, because I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on AGW. However, as both an Electronics Engineer, and a Computer Systems Analyst, I can understand something about the basic science involved, as well the near impossible difficulties that anyone trying to undertake AGW computer modeling would most likely have to overcome given the complexity of the countless interplaying factors that affect our climate.
I’m also not going to pretend that a science as complex as to have the leading scientific minds, currently involved in its study, stumbling all over themselves looking like fools, could fit into a blog comment, but there is more than enough info out there on the internet for anyone who wishes to familiarize themselves with the science behind AGW to learn enough to defend it.
Just read Jenke’s new post where he has decided all those trying to ignore the CRU emails as suffering from Mad Climatologist Disease. MCD for short.
Cynical, you are out to lunch on this. I for one have posted here on the “science” with numerous references, to direct those who wish to educate themselves about planet earth. I have argued that “if” AGW was true, what would be so bad (especially in Canada) if our climate was warmer? Second, I have constantly asked anyone who cared if they felt that their local MP or MLA could actually introduce legislation that ensured that his or her Party could influence the temperaturer outside (our climate) of our homes and places of work.
Do you think that “we” can influence the climate of this planet? If so, how? CO2 won’t do it. The planet has a built in buffer system to deal with CO2 and the past geological history of this planet explains most of those processes. The only known source of heat on this planet is interior heat and external, from the Sun. Who manages the power output? Humans? Al Gore? David Suzuki? The past gelogical record is rife with sun-generated climate, they are called Ice Ages in some cases and they are outside of human control. We are in the inter-glacial period of one now and overdue for a reversion to what our pre-historical ancestors had to deal with.
Again, can your MP or MLA influence the advance of glacial ice? Humans “adapt” to their environment, that is why humans live and survive in some of the most hostile environments on this planet with no real technological advantages, outside of any human influence on the local climate.
Argue all you want on left/right issues, but all I hear is somone enamoured with their own voice on that issue. You have yet to expound on any issue of climate “science” other than the left/right issue. Give it a rest, will you.
correcting it’s approx. 31,000 scientists’ signatures found on the net opposing AGW, not 130,000 typo. they’re listed by state, Ball calls out approx. 40 of them. so how many in both camps? i suppose that’s irrelevant, but it’s obviously only about CYA as per usual and the paycheques. only following the dollars on this saps up the stoked confusion and spin out there. slowly donning on the elites pouring over the bill in senate.
agree, jt, after all the screaming/whining to distraction from all camps, “adaptation” will kick in cuz all the computer generated legislation isn’t going to stave off ice ages and/or warming. that’s the scam in a nutshell.
jt, do you know if computer forensics could retrieve the whole series of files they deleted?? supposedly investigators are onto it.
mary t. while the silly acronym’s accumulate toward proving how clever diehard partisans can be NOT it’s got to get beyond the propaganda. in fact, if it doesn’t it’s every man for himself. ruddy anti-civilized it is when the conversation turns viral and no one’s listening or cares.
agree, jt, after all the screaming/whining to distraction from all camps, “adaptation” will be the main discussion to kick in cuz all the computer generated legislation isn’t going to stave off ice ages and/or warming. that’s the scam in a nutshell.
jt, do you know if computer forensics could retrieve the whole series of files they deleted?? supposedly investigators are onto it.
mary t. while the silly acronym’s accumulate toward proving how clever diehard partisans can be NOT it’s got to get beyond the propaganda. in fact, if it doesn’t it’s every man for himself. ruddy anti-civilized it is when the conversation turns viral and no one’s listening or cares.
I don’t really think it’s fair to say that that nobody on the right talked about the science. From my recollection, the initial entry point was the science since this was long before it was widely known that the “protocols”, when analyzed, did little to alleviate warming and simply transferred wealth. And that’s when it became a “taxes” issue. It’s inconsistent to rant and rave about the coming catastrophe and then claim everything will be okay if we just atoned for our sins with a massive transfer of wealth to failed cultures.
I don’t think the Right has ever given up on arguing the science of global warming however it quickly became a public relations war, one that had the backing of billions of dollars on the warming side which included thwarting of legitimate inquiry into the scientific methods of the proponents.
That the right brought up “taxes”, otherwise known as unjustified massive wealth transfer, as an issue shouldn’t be surprising for a couple of reasons. First, it is only the Right that recognizes that “wealth” belongs to the citizen and so constitutes private property. It is only the Right which believes that private property should be protected from unjustified government confiscation. Secondly, while very few people understand the complex science behind climate, virtually everyone understands taxes. So it is an effective tool for persuasion.
Argue all you want on left/right issues, but all I hear is somone enamoured with their own voice on that issue. You have yet to expound on any issue of climate “science” other than the left/right issue. Give it a rest, will you.
I know enough about data modeling to know that they don’t have enough data to make a good one (basically nothing before the 1900′s). A lot of guestimating going on. That and the fact that the last warming period was beneficial to most of Europe led me to doubt validity of this science. No, will not be giving a rest to stopping opportunists from capitalizing on this scandal. You don’t need to be a scientist to spot a political move.
Murphy’s law blipped out for once to a Canadian’s credit. Courtesy Rex Murphy’s eloquent as always analysis of the CRU e-mails leak.
The scientific forum jt put up is a valued link and Rex Murphy’s youtube has been highlighted there, along with the predicted, newly coined and often used, “paradigm shifts” to happen, namely ‘political correctness’ is in ‘death row’ status.
jt can’t find the link, but everything now’s on hold for the twelve days of Christmas. So, no hurry, but link’s invaluable to the science-challenged blogosphere and politicians.