Weather of Mass Destruction – and a Missing Human Fingerprint

After the series of inquiries on Climategate: The commons Science and Technology, Muir Russel, Oxburgh, Penn State, and others, each of which “vindicated” those involved. There’s more than a hint of suspicion of something fishy and underhand, a suspicion not just confined to the sceptics! Even some defenders of the CRU were suggesting  involvement by the secret service. For example, Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), blamed Climategate on a fiendish Russian plot:

“It’s very common for hackers in Russia to be paid for their services,” he told The Times.
“If you look at that mass of emails a lot of work was done, not only to download the data but it’s a carefully made selection of emails and documents that’s not random at all.
“This is 13 years of data and it’s not a job of amateurs.”

Missing Fingerprints

Of course the key to the global warming scam is whether or not the “human fingerprint” on the climate exists:

CLIMATE scientists hit back at the sceptics today with new research they claim uncovers the “fingerprint” of man-made global warming.
Researchers working like detectives investigating a crime compared real observational evidence with data from computer simulations to see how they matched up.

They concluded there was an “increasingly remote possibility” of human influence not being the chief driver of climate change.

(Western Morning News)

The sceptics readily accept that perhaps as much as a third of the small change in temperature in the 20th century can be attributed to mankind, but what happens when people try to find the true global warming “human fingerprint” in terms of real effects of a changing climate?

As it happens, the project’s initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. “In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years,” atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder. “So we were surprised that none of the three major indices of climate variability that we used show a trend of increased circulation going back to 1871.” In other words, researchers have yet to find evidence of more-extreme weather patterns over the period, contrary to what the models predict.

Source: Wallstreet journal

The climate isn’t the first time we’ve had this missing human fingerprint nor the first time we have seen a series of highly suspicious inquires each appearing to vindicate those involved but never once allaying public suspicion. Remember Iraq? The inquiries by the Commons foreign affairs select committee, the parliamentary intelligence and security committee, Hutton, Chilcot as well as UNSCOM, UNMOVIC, the ISC, the FAC, the ISG, the CIA (Economist)
Nor is it the first time that the lack of fingerprints seems ready to blow the whole thing about. Because today it was reported that campaigners for a full inquest into the death of government weapons inspector David Kelly have handed a new dossier to the Attorney General Dominic Grieve. (BBC)(AOL News). The files contain fresh information about the absence of fingerprints on items found near his body in woods close to his Oxfordshire home in 2003. How could someone commit suicide without leaving fingerprints? And there were other suspicious circumstance:

The mystery surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly deepened yesterday after the detective who found his body claimed he didn’t see ‘much blood’.
The revelation by Detective Constable Graham Coe casts further doubt on the Hutton Report’s verdict that the Ministry of Defence scientist died of blood loss after slitting his wrist. (Daily Mail: Detective raises questions over Dr Kelly’s death)

Each and every time we had an inquiry on Iraq we were told that it would be definitive and get to the truth, but now after all these years, the one thing we know is that no British Inquiry will ever get to the truth over Iraq.

Weather v. Weapons of Mass destruction

And the similarities between Climategate and Iraq run deeper:

The public are sick and tired of seeing exaggeration used to “sex up” a situation, creating an atmosphere of fear in order to manipulate us. We saw it with Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), and now we see it in global warming. (submission to House of Commons Science and Technology committee inquiry on Climategate)

Each had the hallmarks of  deception based on the evidence of the overwhelming consensus of “experts” which in the case of Iraq proved to be non-existant, and in the case of the climate we’ve seen no warming since the IPCC reported in 2001 that we were going to see a minimum of 0.13C rise per a decade over the next century. Other similarities speak for themselves:

Iraq-gate

In Iraq, the overwhelming consensus amongst the experts was: that there were WMD, the threat was “real & imminent” and, the public was told the evidence was “unequivocal“. We were being told one thing in public by a campaign using the fear of WMD to sway public opinion, whereas in private experts like David Kelly were far from convinced.

“SIR WILLIAM EHRMAN:In terms of chemical and biological, particularly through the spring and summer of 2002, we were getting intelligence, much of which was subsequently withdrawn as invalid, but at the time it was seen as valid, that gave us cause for concern,

… March 2002: the intelligence on Iraqi WMD and ballistic missiles is sporadic and patchy.”

How did Parliament and the public come to be so misled as to the certainty of WMD? Why did those against the Iraq war have to disprove the negative: to provide proof that every location in Iraq, where facilities for WMD might have been installed, had been searched?

Climate-gate

The world’s climate is warming due to mankind or so the public are being told. The threat, again, is real and imminent, the evidence unequivocal. The onus is on opponents to disprove man-made global warming not the experts to prove it.

Given that global warming is “unequivocal”, to quote the 2007 IPCC report, the null hypothesis should now be reversed, thereby placing the burden of proof on showing that there is no human influence (Kevin Trenberth)

The public are being fed a daily diet by the likes of the BBC, of sexed up weather stories intended to force through a political imperative that requires a fear of climate change. How can the hurricanes, droughts, fires, famine be described except as: Weather of Mass Destruction?
The truth, we learnt in November 2009, was that the public face of this well orchestrated campaign, is very much at odds with private reservations:

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.” (Email: Kevin Trenberth to Michael Mann, October 2009)

Private, “sporadic and patchy” evidence, being publicly spun as “unequivocal” the similarities are obvious, we even had Prof Jones of the CRU claiming to be “suicidal” (Dr Kelly). The real “human fingerprint” we should be questioning, is not the climate, nor those surround the sad death of Dr Kelly, but the fingerprint of the UK “establishment” by whose action the words: “british” and “inquiry” have become a joke.