No sooner had John McCain announced that Sarah Palin would be his running mate, the Democrat opposition research machine shifted into overdrive. They intrepid diggers thought they had struck gold in an Palin interview for the September, 2008 issue of NewsMax. In that discussion, the then-governor of Alaska, said that she did not believe climate change is caused by human behavior:
“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made,” Palin said in the interview, which was posted online Friday.AGW (Anthropogenic global warming) true believers are convinced that the earth is warming and that change in the climate is the result of human activity on the planet. AGW skeptics, however, argue that the earth has experienced alternating cycles of warming and cooling, both prior to and after the dawn of man. The warming and cooling, they say, can be attributed to variations in the sun's activity as the earth orbits around its star.
For more than a year the AGW true believers (i.e., most all liberals, Democrats and Palin-haters) have ridiculed former Gov. Palin and anyone else who doesn't adhere to their beliefs. Skeptics have long claimed that the "science" used by the true believers is in reality "junk science," and the data AGW proponents have relied upon to push their theories has been manipulate. Recent events tend to give credence to the skeptics and to vindicate Sarah Palin:
A computer hacker in England has done the world a service by making available a huge quantity of evidence for the way in which "human-induced global warming" claims have been advanced over the years.Why would they cook the data? Just follow the money. AGW has been a big money maker. Just ask Al Gore.
By releasing into the Internet about a thousand internal e-mails from the servers of the Climate Research Unit in the University of East Anglia -- in some respects the international clearing house for climate change "science" -- he has (or they have) put observers in a position to see that claims of conspiracy and fraud were not unreasonable.
More generally, we have been given the materials with which to obtain an insight into how all modern science works when vast amounts of public funding is at stake and when the vested interests associated with various "progressive" causes require a particular scientific result.
There is little doubt that the e-mails were real. Even so warmist a true-believer as George Monbiot led his column in the Guardian yesterday with: "It's no use pretending this isn't a major blow. The e-mails extracted ... could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken by them."
Nigel Lawson (a.k.a. Baron Lawson of Blaby), the former British chancellor of the exchequer, who is among prominent persons demanding a full and open public inquiry, summarized the content of the e-mails in this way:
"Astonishingly, what appears, at least at first blush, to have emerged is that (a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend; (b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data; (c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and (d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals."