You've got to understand that these people can't just let this go, even when caught red-handed; they are too far invested in this hoax as a reality. If it's not real, ask yourself what becomes of their reputations? Ask yourself what they would all do if Al Gore himself came on the news and said he was wrong (fat chance)? I've written about their reputations before on this blog, long before Climategate broke and proved us skeptics to be CORRECT; to admit it's all a sham and unsupportable by science or empirical evidence is tantamount to saying that their careers are shams too...and THEY ARE. This is why global warming won't go quietly...it will die a horrid death, and many careers and business interests will go down with it.
Al Gore's Oscar, Nobel Prize, and Carbon Credit business? SCAM. The "Green Fad"? SCAM. Countless claimed extinctions blamed on global warming? SCAM. Dead polar bears? SCAM. Countless atrocities blamed on global warming? SCAM. Obama's climate treatises? SCAM. Dr. Hansen's "climate work"? SCAM. Deleted climate data at the Climate Research Unit of UEA? SCAM. Prince Charles' stupid climate predictions? JUST IDIOTIC. United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their recommendations? SCAM. Liberal news media's NEAR ABSOLUTE support of global warming "consensus"? SHAM and a TRAVESTY against people they should protect. Liberal politicians worldwide who've used this as a means to strengthen their hold on power? SCAM.
This is a worldwide scam and boondoggle that involves many parties, all with different, self-serving agendas. The not-about-to-debate-anyone Al Gore-acle is like the Bernie Maddoff of climate change; he's that culpable in this total rip-off on the people and governments of the world. Congratulations world: You just let a moron con you into giving him millions, a once prestigious award, and an Oscar...all for a stupid, alarmist, error-filled PowerPoint presentation. Didn't you realize he was a doof when he said he 'created' the Internet?
There is "virtually no possibility" of a few scientists biasing the advice given to governments by the UN's top global warming body, its chair said today.
Rajendra Pachauri defended the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the wake of apparent suggestions in emails between climate scientists at the University of East Anglia that they had prevented work they did not agree with from being included in the panel's fourth assessment report, which was published in 2007.
The emails were made public this month after a hacker illegally obtained them from servers at the university.
Pachauri said the large number of contributors and rigorous peer review mechanism adopted by the IPCC meant that any bias would be rapidly uncovered.