Huge, Honkin' Climategate Whitewash Blames U.N.

The "reviewers" admit that the CRU "may not have used the best methods" for analyzing temperatures and "failed to store its data and keep full records," but they say no lapses in integrity? What about all the emails conspiring to omit published research from skeptical scientists? What about the emails and computer designed to 'hide the decline'? Instead, the panel attempts to shift the blame solely on the IPCC for exaggeration. So, the alarmists have no resorted to finger-pointing to save their butts.

The scientific research into historical temperature records was misrepresented by the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which failed to consider uncertainties the scientists had reported concerning the raw temperature data.

The inquiry panel of leading scientists, nominated by the Royal Society, said that the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit may not have used the best methods for analyzing temperature records. The Unit also failed to store its data and keep full records of exactly what it had done, preventing other scientists from checking all its findings.

[From FOXNews.com - Climate Scientists Cleared, U.N. Blamed for Misinterpreting Data]

Now We Have NASA-gate

Once again, we have to rely on Fox News and the British press to report these legitimate stories. Wonder why the lefty press is ignoring it? Hmmm? Anyone? Bueller?

Hansen's GISS at NASA is using the flawed data from another scandal (East Anglia) and thus making itself into another climate scandal. So, we now have three different but interrelated climate scandals: East Anglia's CRU (Climate-gate), U.N. IPCC's flawed climate report (too many "-gates" to mention), and now NASA's flawed climate data (based on CRU's climate data).

These morons represent the "consensus." The flaws are easy to see for anyone with a brain, but the Kool-Aid drinkers won't go quietly.

Not everyone is sipping the global warming Kool-Aid.

Concerns about the validity of NASA's climate research are being raised following revelations that the space agency admitted its data was less accurate than other weather trackers'. Disturbed by these reports, as well as the growing Climate-gate scandal that has left global-warming theorists reeling, Senators John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and David Vitter (R-La.) have written a letter to space agency chief Charles Bolden demanding answers.

"The American people deserve to learn the truth about the data," Barrasso told FoxNews.com, stressing the risks of basing public policy on science that remains largely undecided.

***

The letter, expressing concern with NASA's newly revealed use of data from the East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit, cites interviews with CRU's chief Phil Jones and programmer Ian "Harry" Harris, both of whom denigrated the quality of the CRU data. "No uniform data integrity, it's just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they're found. This whole project is SUCH A MESS," Harris reportedly commented.

[From FOXNews.com - Senators Demand Explanation of NASA's Flawed Climate Data]

Climategate Scientists Cleared by One-Day Panel

Is anyone surprised by this? I predicted this long ago. The reputations of the university, scientists, and politicians involved are all on the line, should the information--the proof--that this manmade global warming is nothing but trumped up nonsense (because it is) becomes common knowledge. Millions in climate research grants are on the line, and the universities directly benefit from those grants.

Two more panels to go, but they'll reach the same conclusion, even though the humiliated Phil Jones of the CRU has more or less admitted that global warming hasn't happened in 15 years and that there were global warm periods that preceded the industrial age.

And this all preceded similar scandals with the U.N.'s IPCC, where Dr. Pachuri admitted fault and political hyperbole in its Nobel-winning report, the pseudo-science of which was directly fed by Jones' CRU at East Anglia. This is A SCAM. Nothing else. And Obama continues on...

The scientific research into historical temperature records was misrepresented by the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which failed to consider uncertainties the scientists had reported concerning the raw temperature data.

The inquiry panel of leading scientists, nominated by the Royal Society, said that the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit may not have used the best methods for analyzing temperature records. The Unit also failed to store its data and keep full records of exactly what it had done, preventing other scientists from checking all its findings.

[From FOXNews.com - Climate Scientists Cleared, U.N. Blamed for Misinterpreting Data]

'Independent' Reviews: Climategate Whitewash Continues

Whitewash? Of course there's a whitewash. This thing was whitewashed BEFORE all the climate scandals of late broke. By the way, they can proclaim it a dead issue all they want...facts are facts, and they refuse to face them.

Last November there was a world-wide outcry when a trove of emails were released suggesting some of the world's leading climate scientists engaged in professional misconduct, data manipulation and jiggering of both the scientific literature and climatic data to paint what scientist Keith Briffa called "a nice, tidy story" of climate history. The scandal became known as Climategate.

Now a supposedly independent review of the evidence says, in effect, "nothing to see here." Last week "The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review," commissioned and paid for by the University of East Anglia, exonerated the University of East Anglia. The review committee was chaired by Sir Muir Russell, former vice chancellor at the University of Glasgow.

[From Pat Michaels: The Climategate Whitewash Continues: Don't Believe the 'Independent Reviews' About Goings on at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia - WSJ.com]

Obama's New Climate Agency Czar Suppressed Data

The scandals relating to all things manmade-climate-change continue to mount. This new NOAA agency was just announced several days ago, and it turns out that the appointed head of the nascent agency is responsible for some data obstructionism of his own in relation to his work with the IPCC and the scientists at East Anglia, including the disgraced Phil Jones.

The scientist who has been put in charge of the Commerce Department's new climate change office is coming under attack from both sides of the global warming debate over his handling of what they say is contradictory scientific data related to the subject.

Thomas Karl, 58, was appointed to oversee the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center, an ambitious new office that will collect climate change data and disseminate it to businesses and communities.

***

But Roger Pielke Sr., a climatologist affiliated with the University of Colorado who has crossed horns with Karl in the past, says his appointment was a mistake. He accused Karl of suppressing data he submitted for the IPCC's most recent report on climate change and having a very narrow view of its causes.

The IPCC is charged with reviewing scientific data on climate change and providing policy makers and others with an assessment of current knowledge.

[From FOXNews.com - New Climate Agency Head Tried to Suppress Data, Critics Charge]

Searchable Climategate Email Database and Chronology

In the wake of the death of global warming, this is a nice site to see.

If you want to peruse all of the emails leaked in the Climategate scandal, you can go here to this new site and do just that. This information has all been made available for you via whistleblower or hacker action (no one knows for certain); this information WOULD NOT have been made available via the FOIA, as we've seen is the pattern with climate alarmists (they hide and destroy the data).

Anyway, go and search for the word "skeptic" and enjoy. You'll see just how intolerant of contrary opinion these ivory tower a-holes are.

http://www.EastAngliaEmails.com

While you're at it, Jo Nova does a great job of placing Climategate within a 30-year chronological perspective:

http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming/climategate-30-year-timeline/

Climategate: CRU's Jones Admits Science NOT SETTLED!

This is GROUNDBREAKING! This SHOULD rock the world of green fanatic alarmist believers and skeptics alike, but the question remains: Will the world media--especially the U.S. media--report on this story and its significance, or will they ignore it like they do with so many other stories that don't fit their agenda?

The humiliated Dr. Phil Jones of East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit (CRU), who is at the center of the Climategate scandal that broke just before Copenhagen's climate conference, has since resigned his position and NOW admits information that NO alarmist scientist will want public, lest we skeptics "seize on" it. LOL! "Skeptics seize on" is the new buzz phrase that all lefty news organizations like to use now in an attempt to sideline us skeptics.

Though his admission that there has been NO SIGNIFICANT WARMING SINCE 1995 is Earth-shattering, the fact that he admits that the Medieval Warm Period was possibly global (and that there were other similar pre-industrial warm periods) is tremendous. It means that one of the alarmist elites has finally said that the SCIENCE MAY NOT BE SETTLED. Did you hear that, Al Gore?!!? One of your own has spoken, after he was caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.

Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.

***

He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.

***

Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been hotter then than now.

***

But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said Professor Jones’s ‘excuses’ for his failure to share data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and ‘mates’. He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test it to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.

He added that the professor’s concessions over medieval warming were ‘significant’ because they were his first public admission that the science was not settled.

[From Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Mail Online]

Journal NATURE Calls for Climate Science Reform

Of course, the AP article insists that the first IPCC report is sound, but that's if you believe the data coming out of the CRU at East Anglia, a major contributor to that report. We've seen that the CRU has its own share of problems, such as destroyed data that can NO LONGER be verified or studied by peers and purposefully blocking skeptical climate scientists from prestigious publications. This means that the first report that the AP proclaims as "sound" is likely bullshit too. I know it is, because it's the report with the erroneous "hockey stick" graph that has since been proven wrong because it omits the Medieval Warm Period. Why omit that MWP? Because it doesn't fit the template of a steady-state baseline followed by precipitous warming.

WASHINGTON -- A steady drip of errors in the top report on global warming -- and the erosion they are causing in public confidence of the science behind it -- have some scientists calling for drastic changes in how future United Nations climate reports are done.

A push for reform being published in Thursday's issue of the prestigious scientific journal Nature comes on top of a growing clamor for the resignation of the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The work of the climate change panel, or IPCC, is often portrayed as one massive tome. But it really is four separate reports on different aspects of global warming, written months apart by distinct groups of scientists.

[From FOXNews.com - Top Science Journal Calls for Climate Science Reform]

Climategate Cover-up: PSU Professor Cleared by University Panel

Dr. Michael Mann, the professor responsible for the famous (and erroneous) “hockey stick graph,” has been cleared of wrongdoing by a PSU panel that had been appointed to investigate Professor Mann’s involvement in the Climategate scandal, after his email correspondence was found among the emails from East Anglia’s CRU.

Interesting that Dr. Mann has brought in hundreds of thousands of dollars in climate research grants to Penn State University. Remember. Follow the dollars to find the rat; dollars are usually at the heart of EVERTHING that’s fishy.

But the findings and, more importantly, the focus have set off a wave of criticism accusing the university panel of failing to interview key people, neglecting to conduct more than a cursory review of allegations and structuring the inquiry so that the outcome -- exoneration -- was a foregone conclusion.

On Friday, Rep. Darrell Issa, the ranking Republican on the House Investigations Committee, charged that the Penn State's failure to settle all the charges and called into question professor Mann's work. He is demanding that all grants to the noted scientist be frozen.

Mann, according to published reports, has gotten a grant almost $550,000 in stimulus money to study climate change and is part of a nearly $2 million grant to Penn State to study the impact of climate change on various diseases.

[From FOXNews.com - Penn State Probe into Mann's Wrongdoing a 'Total Whitewash']

Phil Jones Thought of Suicide: Climategate

Interesting that he did not think of suicide when he was engaging in unethical behaviors like manipulating data to support global warming theory, colluding with other alarmist scientists to block journal submissions from skeptical scientists, ignoring FOIA requests, and destroying baseline data (used in the aforementioned manipulations).

THE scientist at the centre of the “climategate” email scandal has revealed that he was so traumatised by the global backlash against him that he contemplated suicide.

Professor Phil Jones said in an exclusive interview with The Sunday Times that he had thought about killing himself “several times”. He acknowledged similarities to Dr David Kelly, the scientist who committed suicide after being exposed as the source for a BBC report that alleged the government had “sexed up” evidence to justify the invasion of Iraq.

[From I thought of killing myself, says climate scandal professor Phil Jones - Times Online ]

Climate Scientists Eat Their Own: Climategate

This SHOULD make the world wake up and take notice. Science is not the be-all-end-all of modern life. Science itself is benign--a wonderful thing. But people who do science bring their own buried biases, ideologies, and beliefs, which, left without the supervision of ethical restraint, affords the opportunity for science to run amok and become something that wasn't intended. Politics--whatever the ideology--masquerading as science is NOT SCIENCE. Very simple. Just check out Carl Sagan's views on this very subject in his Baloney Detection Kit.

Scientists sometimes like to portray what they do as divorced from the everyday jealousies, rivalries and tribalism of human relationships. What makes science special is that data and results that can be replicated are what matters and the scientific truth will out in the end.

But a close reading of the emails hacked from the University of East Anglia in November exposes the real process of everyday science in lurid detail.

Many of the emails reveal strenuous efforts by the mainstream climate scientists to do what outside observers would regard as censoring their critics. And the correspondence raises awkward questions about the effectiveness of peer review – the supposed gold standard of scientific merit – and the operation of the UN's top climate body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

[From Climate change emails between scientists reveal flaws in peer review | Fred Pearce | Environment | guardian.co.uk ]

Amid Glaciergate, Climategate Revelations Continue

Almost daily now, we're seeing new revelations in the IPCC scandal involving glaciers (Glaciergate), but it's surprising that the 2009 scandalous revelations about the "prestigious" Climate Research Unit in the U.K. are still being made public. The global warming religion orthodoxy goes onward, but some of the zombies have been shaken loose from the grasp of these zealot climate priests.

It is difficult to imagine a more bizarre academic dispute. Where exactly are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China?

But the argument over the weather stations, and how it affects an important set of data on global warming, has led to accusations of scientific fraud and may yet result in a significant revision of a scientific paper that is still cited by the UN's top climate science body.

It also further calls into question the integrity of the scientist at the centre of the scandal over hacked climate emails, the director of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU), Dr Phil Jones. The emails suggest that he helped to cover up flaws in temperature data from China that underpinned his research on the strength of recent global warming.

The Guardian has learned that crucial data obtained by American scientists from Chinese collaborators cannot be verified because documents containing them no longer exist. And what data is available suggests that the findings are fundamentally flawed.

[From Strange case of moving weather posts and a scientist under siege | Environment | guardian.co.uk ]

Phil Jones, the beleaguered British climate scientist at the centre of the leaked emails controversy, is facing fresh claims that he sought to hide problems in key temperature data on which some of his work was based.

A Guardian investigation of thousands of emails and documents apparently hacked from the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit has found evidence that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed and that documents relating to them could not be produced.

Jones and a collaborator have been accused by a climate change sceptic and researcher of scientific fraud for attempting to suppress data that could cast doubt on a key 1990 study on the effect of cities on warming – a hotly contested issue.

[From Leaked climate change emails scientist 'hid' data flaws | Environment | guardian.co.uk ]

Scientist at the heart of the 'Climategate' email scandal broke the law when they refused to give raw data to the public, the privacy watchdog has ruled.

The Information Commissioner's office said University of East Anglia researchers breached the Freedom of Information Act when handling requests from climate change sceptics.

But the scientists will escape prosecution because the offences took place more than six months ago.

The revelation comes after a string of embarrassing blunders and gaffes for climate scientists and will fuel concerns that key researchers are too secretive and too arrogant.

It will pile pressure on the director of the university's climate change unit, Professor Phil Jones, who has stood aside while an investigation is carried out, and make it harder for him to return.

[From New scandal as 'Climate Gate' scientists accused of hiding data from global warming sceptics | Mail Online]

Climategate Scientists Hid Climate Data

More evidence coming out about these charlatans. I guess the liberal press will turn all this around against 'skeptics' and 'deniers' somehow. LOL! Don't forget that, now, the data is all DESTROYED. Convenient huh? And we were going to let these guys drive political and environmental policy FOR THE ENTIRE PLANET.

The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.

The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming.

[From Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data - Times Online ]

Gore Lies: Climategate Emails '10-years Old'

And in reality, the most recent, damning email was from November of 2009, so we have TEN YEARS OF ACADEMIC AND SCIENTIFIC FRAUD AND LYING, not to mention Al Gore's continued lies (he lied three times about the email dates in this very interview).

Of course Gore falisifies the record. His entire climate career (not to mention his lies on other pet projects) is a one giant falsification.

Could those carefully vetted journalists who are allowed an audience with the Great Green Guru please - for once - confront him with his exaggerations, distortions, fake evidence and absurd predictions? I’ve done this myself over this issue, and can guarantee you will get a far funnier and more interesting reaction than another of his sermons. You may also get something rather closer to the truth.

[From Climategate: Gore falsifies the record | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog]

Ostriches Fall Back On Tainted Climategate Data

There hasn't been warming since 1998 (according to their baseline), and yet we're being told this will be the warmest decade on record?!?

Someone is full of BS, and I don't think it is the climate skeptics; it's the scientists whose reputations are on the line, and their not going to go down without a fight.

"The e-mails, however, demonstrate that a cabal of supposed 'cream-of-the-crop' climate scientists were indeed successful in getting editors of journals that had published contrarian views fired and that they conspired to boycott journals that did not bend to their wishes -- therefore ensuring that such views would not be adequately represented in IPCC Assessment Reports," Sensenbrenner wrote.

But supporters of putting curbs on fossil fuel emissions say that despite the questionable nature of the e-mails, they don't undermine the science, and point to the latest data from the very agencies wrapped up in the scandal.

[From FOXNews.com - Sensenbrenner to Tell Copenhagen: No Climate Laws Until 'Scientific Fascism' Ends]

It's the Sun, Stupid (again)

You needn't be a climatologist to understand the statistical problems with manmade global warming theory. To say the last 200 years are the warmest in Earth's history (or equally disturbing assertions such as this decade is the warmest ever--laughable), it means you have to accept THEIR baseline--the level or range considered to be 'normal' that can then be used to show dramatic shifts--either up or down--in the data. Remember, the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and humans have existed for a "gnat's length" comparatively. The Industrial Revolution--the genesis of the blame period that lasts until present day--was just about 200 years ago.

Finally, to acquire the baseline of normalcy, data (of which 150 years worth has now been deleted by the CRU at East Anglia) must be manipulated to account for numerous variables. So, they take 30 years of satellite observations, tree ring data, current day temperatures, and so on (each with their own potential measurement problems or SOURCES OF ERROR) and use computer models to produce the baseline of 200 years through which they claim to show we humans, through our modern ways, are heating the Earth to the breaking point. Never mind that they can IN NO WAY account for all the variables in the complex climate system. We can't even do it now with 100% certainty when predicting a hurricane's landfall point; we can only supply a probable range. We can't even accurately predict weather five days out, even with our technology and arrogant so-called 'brainpower.'

But the climate alarmist-scientist establishment doesn't want you to remember the Medieval Warm Period. They once produced graphs for the IPCC that omitted this period and tried to dream of ways to extricate it from history. You see...the Medieval Warm Period, where life really prospered before the follow-on mini ice age, is an INCOVENIENT TRUTH to climate alarmists.

The Sun. We are currently in a cooling trend on Earth that is measurable. The Sun, consequently, has some of the lowest measureable activity in recent history. Coincidence? That's hard to swallow.

The paper highlights a few scientists, including Professor Henrik Svensmark, a physicist at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen, who said the recent warming period was caused by solar activity.

Svensmark said that the last time the world experienced such high temperatures, during the medieval warming period, the Sun and the Earth were in a similar cycle.

Professor Nils-Axel Morner, a geologist from Stockholm University, said sea-level rise has also been exaggerated by the "climate alarmists" using computer models.

He said observational data from lake sediments, coast lines and trees show sea levels have remained stable.

[From Global Warming Caused by Solar Radiation, Argue Some Scientists - Biology | Astronomy | Chemistry | Physics - FOXNews.com]

Smoking Code of Climategate

Have you been suckered by the liberal excuses on Climategate that the 'hacked' emails have been taken out of context? Well, here's a skeptical scientist's breakdown of computer code hacked from the CRU of East Anglia University at the same time that shows how a computer model was manipulated to produce the 'hockey stick' graph showing a large uptick in temperatures. Remember, the supposed hacker didn't just 'steal' emails; they swiped a lot of files, including this script or code file.

If you've had any computer programming courses, this stuff will make more sense to you, and you'll see what the author is talking about.

NOTE: This is an actual snippet of code from the CRU contained in the source file: briffa_Sep98_d.pro

1;
2; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
3;
4 yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
5 valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75   ; fudge factor
6 if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,'Oooops!'
7
8 yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)

What does this Mean? A review of the code line-by-line

[From Climategate: The Smoking Code « Watts Up With That?]

U.N. Ostrich, Ban Ki-moon

Climategate damage control continues.

Sorry Moonie, but there is DEFINITELY doubt...IF you ask the right scientists. If you ask your corrupt partners in the IPCC, prominent members of which are at East Anglia University's CRU and responsible for this corrupt data and for obstructing skeptical scientific opinions, they'll stick to the party line and say man is STILL responsible. If you ask liberals and environmentalists throughout the world, you'll get the party line--humans are responsible. If you ask REAL scientists trying uphold scientific standards and ethics (in line with Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit), you'll see that THERE IS DOUBT WHETHER HUMANS ARE CONTRIBUTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE.

Why would scientists need to lie and make up stuff if there was NO DOUBT?!?

I'm telling you...humans are mere gnats to this great planet; we are NOT causing the Earth to heat up or cool off with our pathetic fart gases, water vapor, and CO2.

UNITED NATIONS, Dec 8 (Reuters) - U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday that emails leaked from a British university have done nothing to undermine the United Nations' view that climate change is accelerating due to humans.

"Nothing that has come out in the public as a result of the recent email hackings has cast doubt on the basic scientific message on climate change and that message is quite clear -- that climate change is happening much, much faster than we realized and we human beings are the primary cause," he said.

[From Reuters AlertNet - Human role in climate change not in doubt-UN's Ban]

Climate Alarmist Calls Skeptic 'Asshole' on BBC

Not much to say here...speaks for itself. Watch the videos. So-called climate scientists who preach fear DO NOT WANT TO DEBATE. Just like Al Gore doesn't want to debate. If there's debate then they'll be exposed even more. Hey Cooper (CBS blogger)...don't you think it's finally the skeptic's turn to be a NUDNIK? We've been told shut up and swallow this BS since 1998 (and even before that with the 70s cooling frenzy). Finally, someone comes on television to debate, and the skeptic hands the scientist his lunch, IMHO.

And what does the scientist do? Why, he resorts to name-calling, of course. This is what children do when they're cornered in a lie.

One day after reports that Britain's Met office intends to reexamine 160 years' worth of temperature data, emotions over what's now being dubbed "Climategate" are getting more raw by the day.

During a live television faceoff hosted by the BBC, Marc Morano, a former communications director of the U.S. Senate Environment Committee and now an editor with the Web site Climate Depot squared off against Professor Andrew Watson of the University of East Anglia in eastern England. It didn't take long before the two got in each other's face and Watson became increasingly annoyed with Morano's loud interruptions. He finally lost it by the end when the anchor thanked the participants.

[From Tempers Flare In Climate Change Flap - Coop's Corner - CBS News]

U.N. Hides 'Greening' Information

So, it seems to me that we've seen very recent examples of a university (and their colleagues), NASA, and the U.N. hiding information on climate change and the Green Fad. Their accomplices in the U.S. Congress decide to go after the email leakers, while their media accomplices decide to ignore Climategate altogether or simply dismiss it. Smell any rats yet?

The United Nations, which has been telling the world that it must cut back dramatically on its greenhouse gas emissions, has finally decided to practice what it preaches. But the world body isn't coming clean on the full costs of its self-greening effort with the member states who foot the bill.

After Fox News began asking questions about a pilot project that aims to start that process, the documentation concerning the greening effort abruptly disappeared from the U.N. Web site where it had been stored.

[From U.N. Deletes Documents, Won't Come Clean on Costs of Greening World Offices - United Nations - FOXNews.com]