Climate Revisionism and the Church of Warming

When was the last time you ever thought you'd see liberal-leaning types defend a flawed theory much the way that conservative religious zealots defend their sometimes fanatical religious practices?

Global warming (including all of its many aliases--climate change, AGW, global climate disruption, etc.) has turned into a religion of the left. It has many of the hallmarks of a cult-like religion: the now discredited 'Bible of Warming'...the IPCC reports; the scandal-ridden professional prognosticators of the CRU, IPCC, and NASA (think Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, and many others ); the Climate Inquisition known as the "Consensus," which would love to destroy any professional scientist who dares to speak a contrary word; the coming 'Climate Armageddon,' featuring the end-times as a result of the world's love of capitalism; the 'Climate Anti-Christ,' which would be anyone of prominence coming out against global warming; the 'Climate Messiah,' which is none other than Al Gore (no disrespect intended to the real Christ of two millennia ago); a 'Climate Holy Spirit' in the form of the Green Fad that is currently ongoing (including forms of 'Climate Redemption' such as dumb global warming solutions); religious articles of faith and holy relics, such as ice cores, tree rings, and urban-island temperature measurements; predictions of things to come (simply moved forward in time when they don't come to pass...just like real religious zealots); the demand for unquestioning faith of its followers; and the false prophets and disbelievers...like me, for example. These are all elements of religion that global warming--as a political movement--now possesses.

Given that much of the 'evidence' and most 'predictions' have been exposed as bogus or just plain WRONG, you'd think it would shake the faith of climate alarmists. What occurs is that the believers REVISE predictions and expectations based on the exposed flaws of past predictions (think 'loss of snow and ice' and 'increased hurricanes'...which have been failed predictions). This is exactly what's done in religion today; this is what's done by those who love Nostradamus--make reality fit the template (i.e., make the square peg fit the round hole). Everything is REVISED to fit the template. I call it 'Climate Revisionism.' It's the reason that believers want to cast away the term 'global warming' for 'climate change' or 'global climate disruption.' That way, they can't be wrong. Any weather or climate phenomenon deemed 'unusual' can be used to fit the template, whether associated with winter (cold), summer (heat and cyclones), or somewhere in-between (thunderstorms and tornadoes).

This is a big problem for those who see human-caused global warming as an irreversible result of the Industrial Revolution's reliance on carbon-based fuels. Based on global warming theory — and according to official weather forecasts made earlier in the year — this winter should be warm and dry. It's anything but. Ice and snow cover vast parts of both Europe and North America, in one of the coldest Decembers in history.

A cautionary tale? You bet. Prognosticators who wrote the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, global warming report in 2007 predicted an inevitable, century-long rise in global temperatures of two degrees or more. Only higher temperatures were foreseen. Moderate or even lower temperatures, as we're experiencing now, weren't even listed as a possibility.

Since at least 1998, however, no significant warming trend has been noticeable. Unfortunately, none of the 24 models used by the IPCC views that as possible. They are at odds with reality.

[From The Abiding Faith Of Warm-ongers - Investors.com]

AGW Scientist: Prove Global Warming DOESN'T Exist!

In another climate science attempt to turn acceptable statistical practices in science upside-down, they now want to use a reverse null hypothesis on us 'skeptics.' What would Carl Sagan say?

Trenberth is the Climategate scientist who wrote the email stating: "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." That statement--strictly violating the stipulations in Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit--brings a whole host of other questions that I won't get into at this time very deeply. Questions like: "Didn't you guys say that the cooling is being caused by the warming?" (or) "I thought you guys said the El Nino and La Nina effects are masking global warming?" In fact, Trenberth is bluntly stating the truth to his colleagues; Mother Nature is NOT following their template, and they have no real explanation why. They've so fallen in love with their pet theory that they're attempting to dodge-and-parry any legitimate criticism to protect this politically-correct, pseudo-religious climate zealotry.

Now, he wants to reverse long-honored scientific principles, such that "deniers" and "skeptics" must PROVE that global warming DOES NOT exist, instead of he and his colleagues having to prove that it DOES EXIST. Bizarre huh? Scientists who are so enamored with their pet theories that they're willing to toss scientific convention aside in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Proves what I've said all along. Global warming is BS and it's being propped up by liberal dopes who KNOW it's BS for the sake of advancing socialism and harming capitalism.

What Eschenbach focuses on, though, is Trenberth’s absurd demand that the “null hypothesis” on AGW theory be reversed. That is, instead of having to prove AGW exists, what people should now be required to prove that it doesn’t exist. (!)

***

Eschenbach goes on to offer a long list of things climate ’scientists’ should do if they’re ever to be taken seriously again:

Stop avoiding public discussion and debate of your work.
Stop secretly moving the pea under the walnut shells.
Enough with the scary scenarios, already.
Speak out against scientific malfeasance whenever and wherever you see it.
Stop re-asserting the innocence of you and your friends.
STOP HIDING THINGS!!!

[From Warmists: 'We can't win the game, so let's change the rules' – Telegraph Blogs]

NYT: Record Cold Caused by Warming (They're Serious)

I've been saying this for years, but try not to swallow your tongue anyway. These guys in the media (and the leftist "thinking" establishment) can't accept that they've been completely bamboozled by a climate cartel intent on global governance and global economic control. That's all this bullshit is. Average Americans know it. But the so-called 'smartest among us' are apparently the greatest morons. Every recent winter has been record setting in terms of COLD and the summers HAVE NOT been record setting in terms of WARMTH, despite predictions to the contrary! So, the shift has been to blame the cooler climate on warming in both summer and winter. Can anyone else see the imbecility of this crap besides me?!!!!

All of this cold was met with perfect comic timing by the release of a World Meteorological Organization report showing that 2010 will probably be among the three warmest years on record, and 2001 through 2010 the warmest decade on record.

How can we reconcile this? The not-so-obvious short answer is that the overall warming of the atmosphere is actually creating cold-weather extremes. Last winter, too, was exceptionally snowy and cold across the Eastern United States and Eurasia, as were seven of the previous nine winters.

For a more detailed explanation, we must turn our attention to the snow in Siberia.

Annual cycles like El Niño/Southern Oscillation, solar variability and global ocean currents cannot account for recent winter cooling. And though it is well documented that the earth’s frozen areas are in retreat, evidence of thinning Arctic sea ice does not explain why the world’s major cities are having colder winters.

[From Bundle Up, It’s Global Warming - NYTimes.com]

U.N.'s Pachuri Surprised by Scandal Outrage

These schmucks just don't get it. In one year, SEVERAL climate change scandals were revealed (see Climategate, NASA-gate, Glacier-gate, Rainforest-gate, and Netherland-gate). All of these "respectable, scientific" agencies were caught manipulating data, hiding data, destroying data, conspiring to limit legitimate scientific debate (from skeptical climate scientists), and in this case, quoting environmentalist propaganda as scientific fact (when, IN FACT, it wasn't true). The media has been in an accomplice by REFUSING to cover any of these stories.

All of these scandals prove what 'deniers' and 'skeptics' have been saying all along: global warming is a trumped-up capitalism killer. That's all it is and ever will be.

The head of the UN climate science body has admitted he was taken entirely by surprise by the ferocious public reaction to a blunder in its report on Himalayan glaciers. But he insisted the controversy had not set back efforts to secure action on climate change.

The mistake, a false assertion that the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035, exacted severe damage to the reputation of the IPCC and its head, Rajendra Pachauri. It also provided further fuel to the controversy over the emails stolen from East Anglia's climate research unit and released online a year ago today.

[From Head of UN climate body admits surprise at fury over blunder in report | Environment | The Guardian]

700 Alarmist Scientists Plan Campaign (Against 31,000+)

Apparently these schmucks have conveniently forgotten Climategate, NASA-gate, IPCC-gate--all of the climate scandals that broke over the past year and demonstrated what a bunch of shit this global warming lie is. Stay out of politics?!?! These alarmist, fear-mongering buttholes have NEVER stayed out of politics. All they've done is to seek global taxation and regulation to 'save us from ourselves.'

This is SO EASY to counter; simply enlist the THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of SKEPTICAL SCIENTISTS. Then maybe the world will get the picture that there is NO UNQUESTIONED CONSENSUS.

Reporting from Washington — Faced with rising political attacks, hundreds of climate scientists are joining a broad campaign to push back against congressional conservatives who have threatened prominent researchers with investigations and vowed to kill regulations to rein in man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

The still-evolving efforts reveal a shift among climate scientists, many of whom have traditionally stayed out of politics and avoided the news media. Many now say they are willing to go toe-to-toe with their critics, some of whom gained new power after the Republicans won control of the House in Tuesday's election.

On Monday, the American Geophysical Union, the country's largest association of climate scientists, plans to announce that 700 climate scientists have agreed to speak out as experts on questions about global warming and the role of man-made air pollution.

[From Climate science: Climate scientists plan campaign against global warming skeptics - latimes.com]

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]

NASA Climate Data Inferior to Climategate Data, Space Agency Says

So much for James Hansen's GISS data and the NOAA data that predicts gloom and doom on a monthly basis; we've already seen multiple instances where this data has been proven untrustworthy.

Scandal-ridden UEA CRU data is 'more accurate' than the data invalidated by the Climategate scandal.

It doesn't take a scientist to look at this mess and discern that it's nothing but a political propaganda campaign and witch hunt against all scientists not willing to go along with the imaginary "consensus."

NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched Climate-gate data.

E-mail messages obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that NASA concluded that its own climate findings were inferior to those maintained by both the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) -- the scandalized source of the leaked Climate-gate e-mails -- and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.

The e-mails from 2007 reveal that when a USA Today reporter asked if NASA's data "was more accurate" than other climate-change data sets, NASA's Dr. Reto A. Ruedy replied with an unequivocal no. He said "the National Climatic Data Center's procedure of only using the best stations is more accurate," admitting that some of his own procedures led to less accurate readings.

[From FOXNews.com - NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits]

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]

U.N. Panel: Need Climate Fund Tax

Not disgraced enough after all of the scandals that have rocked the U.N.'s IPCC , the U.N. is ready to get back to socialism to cure capitalism's evils. Fortunately, most people are moving on and ignoring this scam.

BONN, Germany – Carbon taxes, add-ons to international air fares and a levy on cross-border money movements are among ways being considered by a panel of the world's leading economists to raise a staggering $100 billion a year to fight climate change.

British economist Nicholas Stern told international climate negotiators Thursday that government regulation and public money also will be needed to create incentives for private investment in industries that emit fewer greenhouse gases.

[From UN panel: New taxes needed for a climate fund - Yahoo! News]

U.N. Climate Chief Apologizes Again, Refuses Resignation

This was from a story back in March 2010. Weird that the U.N. recently asked for new climate taxes AFTER this disgraced schmuck said they wouldn't ask for taxes anymore.

The outspoken chairman of the U.N.’s climate change body is to adopt a neutral advisory role and has agreed to stop making statements demanding new taxes and other radical policies on cutting emissions.

[From FOXNews.com - Embattled U.N. Climate Chief Apologizes Again, Won't Resign]

'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]

Hide the Decline

Speaks for itself. Read more here.

No Cap And Trade

This is a must-visit site. FACTS, not FICTION, on climate change. Specifically, check out this page and read all the "smoking emails" you'll need to understand for yourself the level of this scam (which the media still refuses to acknowledge):

http://www.NoCapAndTrade.com/climategate/

[From No Cap And Trade » Home]

"Attacks" on Climate Research Attacked

I'll see your 250 scientists and raise you about 31,000 more SKEPTICAL scientists. Sorry guys, but the cat is out of the bag with all the scandals. And NOTHING YOU CAN DO could prevent catastrophe, even if there was a catastrophe...and there isn't.

(Reuters) - More than 250 U.S. scientists on Thursday defended climate change research against "political assaults" and warned that any delay in tackling global warming heightens the risk of a planet-wide catastrophe.

[From Scientists decry assaults on climate research | Reuters]

IPCC Acknowledges Climategate?

So, the IPCC has “acknowledged Climategate”? I sincerely doubt it. Anyway, since they’re arranging their own review, one has to wonder how “unbiased” it will actually be? Here’s a prediction that will come true: Regardless of any critical findings by any panel that “independently” reviews the IPCC, I GUARANTEE you that this review panel will say, in effect, “This is in no way meant to imply that manmade CO2 DOES NOT cause warming. The vast majority of scientists still feel it does.” There WILL BE some statement to that effect in the review report, because these morons have all staked their reputations on making certain that manmade global warming is unquestioned.

That’s where the train comes off the tracks. Whatever they do with this review panel, it’s all window-dressing meant to “damage control” against the climate scandals and recent freezing weather. Sorry IPCC, but the cat is out of the bag. Americans now know that you are lying bungholes. I would call you scumbags, but that would be a disservice to bags of scum.

In the wake of errors, cover-ups and scandal, top United Nations officials will announce Wednesday a review of its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Ban Ki-moon, the U.N. secretary general, and Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the IPCC, are set to announce that the InterAcademy Council (IAC), an organization representing scientists from around the world, will head up the review.

[From FOXNews.com - Acknowledging Climate-Gate, U.N. to Announce Review of Climate Panel]

Continuation of The End of Global Warming Religion

The news keeps coming, even as most mainstream news organizations REFUSE to touch these tidbits of reality. They're making their own reality--one of bullshit.

Climate alarmists conjured a world where nothing was certain but death, taxes and catastrophic global warming. They used this presumed scientific certainty as a bludgeon against the skeptics they deemed "deniers" -- a word meant to have the noxious whiff of Holocaust denial.

All in the cause of hustling the world into a grand carbon-rationing scheme. Any questions about the evidence for the cataclysmic projections, any concerns about the costs and benefits were trumped by that fearsome scientific "consensus," which had "settled" the important questions.

Jones: Key climatologist softening claims.

A funny thing happened to this "consensus" on the way to its inevitable triumph, though: Its propagators have been forced to admit fallibility.

[From 'Warming' meltdown - NYPOST.com]

It has been a bad—make that dreadful—few weeks for what used to be called the "settled science" of global warming, and especially for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that is supposed to be its gold standard.

First it turns out that the Himalayan glaciers are not going to melt anytime soon, notwithstanding dire U.N. predictions. Next came news that an IPCC claim that global warming could destroy 40% of the Amazon was based on a report by an environmental pressure group. Other IPCC sources of scholarly note have included a mountaineering magazine and a student paper.

Since the climategate email story broke in November, the standard defense is that while the scandal may have revealed some all-too-human behavior by a handful of leading climatologists, it made no difference to the underlying science. We think the science is still disputable. But there's no doubt that climategate has spurred at least some reporters to scrutinize the IPCC's headline-grabbing claims in a way they had rarely done previously.

Take the rain forest claim. In its 2007 report, the IPCC wrote that "up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation; this means that the tropical vegetation, hydrology and climate system in South America could change very rapidly to another steady state."

[From The Continuing Climate Meltdown - WSJ.com]

Jo Nova Responds to New Scientist's "Denier-gate" Story

Alarmists at the New Scientist, sensing their reputations are in big trouble following all the recent mounting scandals (including Climategate), have decided to respond by creating "Denier-gate" out of thin air (as if they hadn't done that years ago). However, Jo Nova does a phenomenal job of parrying the ad hominem attacks against climate skepticism by turning the tables on the global warming cultists. She keeps bringing them back to the fundamental question: Is CO2 in its current quantity within our atmosphere warming the planet? Let's talk evidence, not "debate's over," not bluster, swearing, name-calling, etc.

The answer from alarmists is: "DENIER!! How can you question the CONSENSUS? The debate's over!" Get the picture? Where is the scientific debate?!? Without the name-calling?

And spot the appearance of the mythical “HUGE body of evidence”. Can anyone at New Scientist find that one mystery paper with empirical evidence showing that carbon causes major warming? Just ONE? That’s major warming, not minor. And that’s empirical, i.e., by observation, not by simulation.

This is the paragraph where New Scientist proves it has become Non Scientist:

“If we are going to judge the truth of claims on the behavior of those making them, it seems only fair to look at the behavior of a few of those questioning the scientific consensus. There are many similar examples we did not include. We leave readers to draw their own conclusions about who to trust.”

Alarm bells are ringing from Galileo’s grave. We’re trying to figure out if the world is warming due to man-made carbon right? New Scientist’s method is not to look at the evidence, but to look at the behavior of the sceptics. Did you see the black hole of ad hominem that this once esteemed journal just stepped into? Logic and reason were reduced in a flash to a naked singularity. Follow its reasoning through the black hole, and you don’t emerge on the other side.

Did you see the black hole of ad hominem that this once esteemed journal just stepped into?

Who to trust indeed? Let’s trust people who can reason, and scientists who don’t hide their data. It doesn’t matter how “sceptics behave”; it matters whether the data can be independently analyzed and interpreted; whether the conclusions are robust. But, since the data is g-o-n-e , no one can verify anything. So in a way, it does come down to “trust”: In the new quasi-religious form of science, you have to trust those who hold the global data. Isn’t postmodern “science” an awful lot like the old religions?

[From New Scientist becomes Non Scientist « JoNova]

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]