Australian Senate Reaction to Climategate Could Impact Cap & Trade in U.S.

Craig Rucker, the Executive Director of CFACT, The Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow met on December 2nd, in Brussels with Lord Christopher Monckton and discussed the Australian Senate's vote to kill the Australian emissions trading system in the wake of the Climategate scandal.

Mr. Rucker said, “the ramifications of the Climategate scandal are only beginning to be felt. In rejecting its emissions trading system, Australia has fired a shot now being heard round the world. Politicians in the U.S. weighing their vote on cap and trade and delegates attending the upcoming UN summit in Copenhagen should now realize that there is a political price to be paid for blindly following the global warming crowd.

CFACT Advisor Lord Christopher Monckton gave the following statement:

The news that the world's leading climate science institutions had been collaborating internationally for many years in a systematic and ruthless scientific and financial fraud by which they altered, suppressed, reprocessed, concealed, and conspired to destroy the data on which the world's temperature records are based has come as a wake up call to politicians previously slumbering.

The first effects are evident in Australia, where the leader of the opposition Liberal Party was removed from office when more than half of his members of Parliament voted against his declared support for an emissions trading scheme which the world now knows to be unneccesary.

The day after Mr. Turnbull's humiliating, but richly deserved defeat, the upper house of the Australian National Legislature, the Senate, voted decisively to reject the emissions trading scheme.

No longer will the world's politicians allow themselves to be misled by self-serving scientists and institutions who have been making enormous financial profits at the expense of ordinary working people by fabricating the global warming scare and by then saying that they are the only people who can make that scare go away.

Politicians worldwide who may previously have thought that there were votes to be gained by joining the global warming conspiracy should be warned first that every opinion poll shows smaller and smaller proportions of the electorate believing in this conspiracy and that the public authorities have already been called in to investigate criminal aspects of the conspiracy. Politicians should understand that they will not be immune from indictment themselves if they continue to pretend that global warming is a global crisis when it is now known that the crisis was fabricated by scientists who have proven themselves to be no better than profiteers and racketeers. The voters will not tolerate the largest tax increase in the history of human kind in the name of saving a planet which was successfully saved 2,000 years ago and does not need to be saved again.

Now that the people have been told the truth about a conspiracy to spit on the scientific method and to invent what everyone now knows to be a baseless scare, they will not vote for politicians stupid enough, or crooked enough to speak out in favor of what is simply nonsense.

The emails from the University of East Anglia show that leading scientists and scientific institutions have been profiting mightily by creating and fostering the lie that global warming is a global crisis are very closely linked to one another. They are coordinating the lie, not only by conspiring to tamper with scientific data and results so as to force them in a scientifically incorrect, but politically expedient direction, but also by denigrating both publicly and privately scientists of towering eminence who disagreed with the lie and by lobbying and leaning upon editors of learned journals to delay or even prevent publication of results showing the lie to be just that.

It can no longer be credibly said that the conspirators whom these emails demonstrate to be working very closely with each other internationally are merely an insignificant minority in the global warming debate. These are no less than the founding fathers of global warming.

The scientists included in the Climategate emails from the University of East Anglia Include:

James Hansen the scientist who kicked off the scare with testimony before Congress in 1988 by saying that temperatures would rise four times faster than they have.

Kevin Trenbirth the author of the now discredited paper of 1997 updated in 2008 pretending to show that there is a dangerous accumulation of heat energy in the atmosphere.

Ben Santer, the scientist who rewrote the main conclusions of the UN's 1995 Climate Assessment Report so as to change them from a statement that humanity was having no measurable effect on global temperature to a statement that humanity was affecting temperature.

Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia who for years refused to allow other scientists access to his computer programs and temperature data so they could check them and who, as the emails reveal, advised other conspirators that they should destroy data that had been validly requested by other scientists using the UK Freedom of information Act.

Michael Mann of Penn State University who fabricated and contrived the headline graph in the UN's 2001 climate assessment report which falsely attempted to state that the middle ages were not warmer than the present day when the scientific, historical and archaeological consensus was and is that the middle ages was substantially warmer throughout the world and that today's temperatures are not exceptional.

Tom Karl the director of the national climatic data center of the US NOAA, who compiled another global temperature record who's errors and exaggerations of recent warming have caused concern.

Gavin Schmidt who is involved in compiling the temperature record kept by NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies, a record which has repeatedly been found to have exaggerated and overstated recent warming.

Keith Briffa who has succeeded in persuading the conspirators that in order to achieve the desired result of pretending that today's temperatures are exceptionally wrong that they should rely upon the measurement of tree rings from a single tree in rural Russia.