There’s a consensus among the scientific community that.......

We should lie, steal and cheat our way through life to prove our points.

Remember when creating a hypothesis AND testing it, was part of the scientific method? Well, that’s all in the past (you scientific simpletons) thanks to idiots like Al Gore and Don Shelby. Nowadays, those in the scientific community prefer to create a hypothesis and focus on proving it's correct. This is a bit trickier, being that the facts and the data might not always coincide with what you think is true. It creates situations where the ALL KNOWING SCIENTISTS, may have to actually go back and form new hypotheses. This is very irritating because it forces them to do much more work, and also tends to send government grants to other scientific institutions--the ones that are proving that the end is near. So, the clever scientist decides that they are not wrong, the data is wrong. This is the sad state of our scientific community. They are no longer unbiased researchers looking for answers to the mysteries of the universe. They are a combination of political rats and idealogs, scrounging for every penny of grant money they can get their grubby little fingers on. They don't even ask the questions anymore, they just come up with solutions that inevitably benefit them and/or their political party of choice.

Global Warming for example, has now reached the point of absurdity. We are only weeks away from the Climate conference in Coopenhagen and yet, the science of global warming has never looked more assinine. Last Thursday, a story came out describing how computer hackers had obtained 160 megabytes of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. These e-mails involved communication among many scientific researchers and policy advocates all across the world. In these E-mails, some of the most widley renouned climate researchers are caught red handed exagerating data, hiding conflicting data, and attacking dissent among their peers. And by the way, all of these emails should have been acvailable to the public by the freedom of information act.

The e-mails specifically points out:
1) Conspiracy and collusion in exaggerating warming data
2) illegal destruction of embarrassing information
3) organized resistance to disclosure,
4) manipulation of data
5) private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

Heres a taste of some of the emails and what was discussed.
Manipulation of evidence:
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.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:
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.

Suppression of evidence:
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):
Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….

A long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process: How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.
“This was the danger of always criticizing the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.” “It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”

You see people, it's actually very simple. You have a group of people who benefit financially from the scam that is man-made global warming. Politicians and scientists depend on this scare tactic for grants and financial support (See Al Gore--Worlds 1st Carbon Billionaire). They need this issue to be a reality. Then you have their supporters who are as emotionally invested in climate change as any religious zealot. They believe that everything stated about global warming is a fact because they are emotionally invested in it. But how far can the world continue to let this issue go unchecked? It has been an admitted lie from day one. The Hockey stick theory was wrong and thrown out by the scientific community. James Hanson has admittedly falsified data to increase awareness. Al Gores Movie is now banned from schools in Britain for containing 12 factual errors in regards to global warming. The IPCC Computer models are way off on warming trends, and have been off by as much as 300 % at any given time. This entire issue is based on a long trend of lies that simply do not add up to anything meaningful. How long is it going to take for people to wake up on this issue? Last night I heard Don Shelby talk about this, and his defense of this series of lies was --- “Isn’t it enough that the leaders of the world believe it”?---- More fascist words were never spoken. When you hear anyone tell the masses to shut up and blindly do what they are told; thats when you turn and run for your life. Shelby is probably just happy that his emails weren’t exposed.

Global warming is a fraud. So are the supporters of it. The debate should be over on this issue, with the world recognizing its been duped. Instead, we'll probably spend trillions of dollars ensuring massive blackouts and restrictive travel.