I think we all need to take a deep breath and perhaps rethink our excitement about the CRU leaks … especially in light of the most recent stunning revelations by CTV.
It would appear that the leak was … “politically motivated”.
Oh my:
The head of Greenpeace Canada says the timing of the release of stolen climate change emails is “politically motivated” to distract people ahead of the Copenhagen summit.
“People are going to look at the solid body of scientific evidence that is out there and realize that this is really a distraction and a politically motivated one,” said Bruce Cox, the Executive Director of Greenpeace Canada.
“I think there are probably vested interests out there that knew that this would harshly — I don’t want to say derail — but would act as a distraction,” he said in an interview with CTV News Channel Sunday.
“Clearly it’s a huge distraction from what needs to be done in Copenhagen.”
A distraction? No kidding Sherlock!
jeezez, to LIVE is to be politically motivated.
Al Gore REVEALED:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ymxLA5oRYI
Hilarious
Someone should ask Greenpeace whether they think the timing of the countless stories from the MSM about the “Crisis” of global warming are politically motivated too
Hit the poll boys and girls 😉
Today’s Question
Should Canada put its climate change policy on hold due to information gleaned from the ‘ClimateGate’ emails?
http://www.ctv.ca/news/
All Green, all Global Governance all the time.
http://green-agenda.com/greenweb.html
“Is” is a strong word. Do Greenpeace personnel
know the identity of the whistleblower, much less
his motivation? Why then do they say that they
do?
“Whistleblower” is mildly approbatory but at least
describes what he or she (or perhaps they) did.
Every rule of evidence, every principle of fair
play, of due process (if indeed the whisteblower committed a crime)
is being ignored in this huge effort to
bring us to our harm.
Playing “whack a mole” with a warmist in the comments.
HA HA
CTV and Greenpeace have one thing in common …….incredibility.
As far as I can tell, that is the first story CTV has put out in regards to the fudged Hadley CRU story in two weeks.
Globemedia/CTV is a corporate laugher, still pimping Greenpeace and Suzuki Foundation on climate.
Every day it becomes more clear to me that the liberal media and green organizations studied Joseph Goebbels propaganda technics and follow them to the point.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/copenhagen/article6946281.ece
here we go again.
You would think Greenpeace would be happy if global warming was shown not to be true …..
You would think Al Gore would be happy if global warming was shown not to be true …
You would think David Suzuki would be happy if global warming was shown not to be true …..
It is as though they WANT global warming …. let’s continue to expose them for what they are.
Join the brand spankin new climategate facebook page. Just do a friends search “climategate” its the one with picture of Al Gore – only 15 minutes old. Interesting videos – some already posted here some not.
Those who attempt to defend “climate science” on the basis that the CRU hacking was illegal and/or politically motivated only make themselves look incredibly lame.
Was the hacking illegal? Yes, it appears it certainly was. Was it politically motivated? Maybe but, not knowing who the hackers were, we can’t say for sure. What we can say is: so what?
Imagine for just a moment that someone hacked into a US Government classified archive and released documents clearly implying that – oh, I don’t know – President Bush and Vice-President Cheney had some conspiratorial connection with the destruction of the Twin Towers after all.
Do you think for one fleeting nanosecond that the media would recuse itself from the story because, after all, it was an “illegal hacking” and obviously “politically motivated”?
Was the timing of the CRU whistleblower leak politically motivated?
Well there is a strong rumour that the whistleblower leaked this data dump to BBC a week earlier, but that is a rumour.
Let’s look at the fact that skeptics have been asking for this information for years and been evaded and finally blocked even though the requests came through FOIA.
Clearly the refusals to accede to the requests were politically motivated.
If the skeptics requests had been honoured when first asked would there even be a Copenhagen Conference?
Answer: I don’t think so.
Questioning the timing of the release is a red herring to divert from the content of the release and the content shows that the CRU obstructed FOIA request for YEARS.
Greenpeace was almost dead as a organization until they were revived as a AGW doomsday proponents.
My real hope from all this Climategate and Copenhagen fervor is that as the whole meme unravels that these organizations like Greenpeace and WWF will start to turn on each like the pack of rapid dogs they are as they try to “re-message” the crisis for each organization’s fringe core issue.
I’ll drive the bus… you make the popcorn.
Politically motivated by whom? The environuts and scientists have positioned themselfs to snork at the trough for decades to come, now that the data has been contaminated we will be forced to fund climate change research for decades all over again. Second the Euro wienies shall go ahead with carbon taxes and sell carbon credits, and the scientist shall get millions more in grants to do research they’ve already done but falsified. Actually if you think about it the so called hacking is going to double the warm-mongers profits via research and carbon credits. I think we’ve been scammed by a double whammy. Junk science outed, thus the socialists will continue their junk science via our taxdollars in the form of grants and our Dear Leaders are salavatating at the mouth to charge us carbon taxes. Harper can tackle the deficit via carbon taxes, I don’t trust him atall.
I saw this interview this morning, and as just amazed at the statements by the watermelon stooge. Does he really believe what he says? Very likely, he is a shining example of the faith-based rhetoric of the watermelon crew.
Cherry pick facts, match it with convenient examples, ignore everything counter to the message, and pound away.
It is abundantly clear, that greenpeace, sierra club, Rainforest action network, WCWX, and all the other fellow travellers have no time for facts, but are emotional reactionaries, with a true socialist/communist dogma and belief system.
There is no common sense within their framework, just panic, hype, innuendo, and guilt based rhetoric.
They must be fought and countered at every opportunity, to show their true agenda, control of the people, and regulation to stifle freedom
As one who has witnessed Greenpeace *thugs* *hijacking* a huge log barge in BC, I dare to say that virtually everything Greenpeacers DO is politically motivated by their fundraising desires. The impetus is to shoot videos and raise more money for their coffers.
As for the climategate email leak, why is it that mainstream press reporters get much of their information from the carefully protected and unnamed “sources”….all in the name of journalism….yet the leaking of THESE emails is somehow scandalous and the emails were “STOLEN”?
I’ve seen the emails referrred to as stolen and the leaking as theft…I guess it depends on the political views of the reporters?
Climategate facebook page is deactivated – there is a group called climategate from pajamas tv that is much easier to add than climategate as a friend – does not have as many good videos though.
No one would release information just to take the attention away from another issue, would they? My gosh, have Greenpeace and CTV been living under a rock? Have they never followed a political campaign, a celebrity trying to deflect attention from him/herself etc. etc. etc. I think they are trying to distract us from the leaked emails.
CTV comments on that page are definitely going in the wrong direction for the greentards.
Go there and add your 2c worth, sda denizens!
Validating the opinion of an eco-terrorist organization. Is this CTV’s idea of fair and balanced reporting? …no wonder television news ratings are dropping like a stone.
*Very* interesting comment by a poster on the CTV news site, in the section for readers’ comments:
Tom Lewis PhD (political science)
said
50 3
This fellow claims the “science” has been reviewed by 2500 scientists. I took the trouble to look them up (based on the names attached to the IPCC report) and found who they are VERY revealing. I found 7 climate scientists, 243 sociologists, 28 historians, 1109 political scientists (my own speciality), 2 physicists, 9 chemists, 1 vulcanologist, and the remainder being untracable as to degrees or specialties. I also found NUMEROUS references in reputable science publications where scientists (inclusing some on the IPCC review list) who repudiated the report as having been changed after their review, some who had already gone on record as having stated that this was BAD SCIENCE yet the IPCC shows them as “supporting”. I think a full investigation by both scientific authorities and the legal (police) authorities needs to be conducted. I can only conclude that this is a scientific and political fraud on a scale unseen in human history. As for the accusations by certain speakers (including greenpeace spokesmen) that those who question this issue are equivalent to holocaust deniers, that is disgusting to me personally as my father survived Bergen-Belsen.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091206/climate_emails_091206/20091206?hub=TopStoriesV2
CTV Greenpeace bitty.
The comments are running almost 100% AGAINST CTV’s spin machine.
The customers are out and out calling climate alarmism a fraud.
And yet, CTV and others keep on putting out junk. WHY ?!
Hail Mary ?
I’ve noticed that a lot of, shall we say, “denialist” (of Climategate, that is)puff pieces (Economist, WaPo, New Scientist) are being buried by the comments.
But not the G&M piece.
My father, who worked in a number of Toronto newspapers in the 20s, said you could judge a paper by the quality of the letters to the editor.
So what do we say about the G&M?
CTV, CBC, and Global (is that a network) anyway these guys have been begging for tax money for months now.
Lord the commercials are never ending.
I doubt they will say or present anything that they perceive will jeopardize their quest for bailout money.
Dear chutzapahticular, “this is a scientific and political fraud on a scale unseen in human history.” If only that were true, we’d only have one beast to slay. I will state here without equivocation that this type of fraud is both commonplace and (I think)accepted…whether out of fear or complicity I do not know.
A topical place to start is the WHO H1N1 pandemic alert and the various nation state reponses. The entire concept of modern medicine, that we are at war with pathogens is cut from the same cloth.
Anamolous findings in archaeology are routinely stuffed. The whole field of Egyptology is utter bunk
I certainly don’t pretend to understand what is really up with what is called the UFO phenomena, but something is going on, I saw three while sitting on my patio.
History is such a pile of selective deleting that I mistrust it almost entirely.
The “big bang” guys and intelligent design crew are at an impasse.
Gulf of Tonkin, 911, Pearl Harbor, April Glaspie’s comments to Saddam just prior to Kuwait, Yugoslavia….
The plasma scientists from engineering are at with the cosmologists, see thunderbolts.org.
Don’t even get me started on economic theory and central banking and observed results.
To return to where I started, I don’t beleive much of anything that I see in any mass circulation medium. In fact I’d go so far as to say that if everybody knows it’s true, it is almost certainly BS that is feathering someone’s nest
?
‘solid body’ ?
ya mean like a frozen corpse there Mr Greenpeace?
jist askin’ ….
Like the Warmist lobby at large Greenpeace just wants it Green piece.
Preferably in small unmarked bills.
What a maroon!
@Kelowna : The comments are running almost 100% AGAINST CTV’s spin machine …
Looks like they’ve closed the comment section to that artical !!
Interesting times indeed !
It’s a sad day for politically-contaminated science when politics intrudes from the wrong side, is what I’m hearing here.
Will go back to sleep now, ice age still a couple of decades away, have the sleds ready.
avast! yonder swims the white whale which the msm seeks to slay
You mean Internal Affairs was setting them up the whole time?!
Sorry- whenever someone claims something utterly ridiculous, my mind goes elsewhere.
You mean Internal Affairs was setting them up the whole time?!
Sorry- whenever someone claims something utterly ridiculous, my mind goes elsewhere.
CTV like CBC never lets the facts get in the way of a “good” story. When CTV is pressing to have a tax applied to all cable and satellite users does anyone think they will go against standing govt. policy. As always follow the money.
Wow! Story posted at 8:17. Comments – pretty much all anti-global-warming – are closed by 9:17. These folks really don’t really care much for your opinions do they? They must be trying to save money by cutting down on internet use.
CTV seems to be the worst of the lot. Even CNN is allowing at least 10% input from skeptics.
One CTV guest claimed the science is still sound, because there are plenty of other sources of data, besides the CRU at East Anglia. That’s not really true. The IPCC based its models solely on data from the CRU, who in turn based used a lot of data from NASA.
If anyone thinks NASA is an independent body, you should reconsider. They are in real danger of losing most of their funding. The shuttle program is winding down, and Mars is not a sure fired mission. They need a reason to exist, and gathering data could keep them in full swing.
Everyone involved in this has an angle, whether it be funding, investments, or business opportunities. Then there are the empty headed celebrities, who are just feeding their own vanity. They’re all in it for some sort of personal gain.
Understanding Climategate’s Hidden Decline……
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/understanding_climategates_hid.html
The true “deniers” are those people naive enough to believe Al Gore, David Suzuki, Greenpeace, etc are really in this for humanitarian reasons. Greenpeace is only interested in cheap publicity stunts, not scientific discourse. Their “political” accusation goes beyond hypocritical.
Politically motivated?! Exposing the truth is politically motivated. I swear by the great carbon god that if anyone of those greenpeeese simpering lunatics ever darken my doorstep I’ll I’ll I’ll give them a hardy boot in their species expansion devices yeah that’s it! If they have any that is.
Gee, I waited and waited for the person representing the other side of the climate change story,the counter to the Greenpeace President.Mr.Cox,but no one appeared.
Strange. I thought journalism was about balance and lack of bias.
‘However, [de Boer] defended climate change research, which has been reviewed by about 2,500 scientists, saying he thinks “this is about the most credible piece of science that there is out there.”‘
Uh-huh. Right up there with thermodynamics as “settled science”. Perhaps CTV thinks de Boer’s opinion is worth something. (Like the famous “2500 scientists” of the IPCC — good on Tom Lewis for pointing this out again.)
Meanwhile CBC is running Al Gore’s monstrosity again.
Gee, I wonder if the timing is suspect…
Can we start referring to Suzuki and co as ClimateGate deniers?
Sure, Richard Kimball might call it a distraction along the lines of the police finding the one armed man and him confessing.
“I think we all need to take a deep breath and perhaps rethink our excitement about the CRU leaks…”
Sorry, no can do. Do you know how much CO2 will be exhaled just from that one collective deep breath?
Arnie Madsen, of COURSE they want AGW to be true (12 degrees below normal in Van this morning BTW)! They want to become the Utopian Fairytale Energy Controllers for the entire world until the sun goes nova. Their motivation: money and power – period.
Scum, Fascist bastard scum, every single one of them.
I read the comments section of the article and I found this post to be the most interesting and revealing:
Tom Lewis PhD (political science)
said “This fellow claims the “science” has been reviewed by 2500 scientists. I took the trouble to look them up (based on the names attached to the IPCC report) and found who they are VERY revealing. I found 7 climate scientists, 243 sociologists, 28 historians, 1109 political scientists (my own speciality), 2 physicists, 9 chemists, 1 vulcanologist, and the remainder being untracable as to degrees or specialties. I also found NUMEROUS references in reputable science publications where scientists (inclusing some on the IPCC review list) who repudiated the report as having been changed after their review, some who had already gone on record as having stated that this was BAD SCIENCE yet the IPCC shows them as “supporting”. ”
Perhaps the Warmists should be referred to as IPCC Co-Conspirators.
Dare I note that Greenpeace has a large investment in Copenhagen?
Yes, of course I dare. In fact, I shall courageously stand against the multitude and meg millions of Greenpeace and call them self-serving bastards, lying cheats, cnutes.