We are all familiar with the proverb "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me".
With respect to "global warming" it is now way beyond that stage. The mainstream media have been fooled repeatedly by the so-called climate scientists to where shame is supplanted by contempt.
About a week ago we were once again inveigled by headlines and breathless pieces in the media telling us the global temperature data was out, and, yes 2010 was one of the warmest years on record. Nowadays, one would expect that everyone in the media would immediately query such pronouncements from NASA, GISS, the UK Met Office etc. with a stentorian, "How do you know?" But, of course not. There is nothing more credulous, it would appear, than western mainstream media shilling big-government causes.
We now all know that global temperature databases are corrupted beyond recovery. Let us just say the data they contain has been finessed (changed, adjusted, amended, scrubbed, blended, concatenated) to where they represent not mere lies, nor even damnable lies, but statistics!
Here is Christopher Booker, writing on his latest interchange with the UK Met Office over their "data":
Is Met Office again playing games with its weather data?
Dr Benny Peiser and Dr David Whitehouse, of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), have written to John Hirst, chief executive of the beleaguered Met Office, asking for an explanation of a press release issued by his organisation on January 20 and headed “2010 – a near record year”. This won headlines by claiming that last year was hotter than any other in the past decade.
When the two men examined the original data from which this claim was derived – compiled by the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and the Met Office’s Hadley Centre – it clearly showed 2010 as having been cooler than 2005 (and 1998) and equal to 2003. It emerged that, for the purposes of the press release, the data had been significantly adjusted.
Comparing the actual data for each year, from 2001 to 2010, with that given in the press release shows that for four years the original figure has been adjusted downwards. Only for 2010 was the data revised upwards, by the largest adjustment of all, allowing the Met Office to claim that 2010 was the hottest year of the decade.
I asked the Met Office to comment on what seems like yet another embarrassing example of juggling with the figures. It denied the charge and I shall report on its lengthily evasive reply, once the GWPF has had a more considered response from Mr Hirst. (Emphasis, ours.)
Now, we known for sure, because of the existence of the human conscience, that these "scientists" and officials at the Met Office will know that they are engaged in an orchestrated litany of lies. They will be self-aware of their duplicity. But their entire careers are at stake. Hubris has possessed them. They desperately need the headlines to bolster their precarious position and are prepared to engage in whatever charlatanism required.
In another part of their consciousness they must also know that eventually they will be found out, and exposed. It reminds us of the fraudster investment advisor who worked for ASB Bank who swindled his clients and the bank out of fifteen million dollars. Once on the treadmill of deceit he could not get off, apparently fooling his wife, his closest friends and relatives. But all the while he knew that it would end, some day. When finally caught out and exposed, he appeared relieved.
That's what we think we are dealing with now when it comes to global temperature data. Those involved are so far in the schtook they cannot get out. But they will know that in the end all that schtook is going to hit the fan.
When the mainstream media finally realise that they have been taken for a gigantic ride, watch the caterwauling begin. If there is no fury like a woman scorned, risible media finally exposed as congenitally gullible must rank a close second.
No comments:
Post a Comment