Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

Son of Climategate

November 23, 2011, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

24 November 2011 | Permalink | comments: 6
By Hereward Fenton

After two years, the climategate scandal has erupted once again, with a new tranche of embarrassing emails from the world's top climate researchers now spreading virally across the net. The release of these emails seems timed to overshadow the upcomng Durban conference in the same way the previous release preceded the COP 2009 conference.


Chris Smith speaks with Shadow Climate Change Minister Greg Hunt about the leaked emails casting doubt on the science of climate change.

The climate science establishment  has predictably hit back with a swift and savage rebuttal:

Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Centre at Penn State University and a scientist whose name appears in several of the emails, dismissed the latest email release as “truly pathetic”. He instead said the hackers were “agents doing the dirty bidding of the fossil fuel industry know they can’t contest the fundamental science of human-caused climate change. So they have instead turned to smear, innuendo, criminal hacking of websites, and leaking out-of-context snippets of personal emails in their effort to try to confuse the public about the science and thereby forestall any action to combat this critical threat. Its right out of the tried-and-true playbook of climate change denial.”

In tonight's show Josh Jackson joins us to mull over this news and other matters of public importance.

Please enjoy!

Related Links

 

Comments

climategate 2, as big a yawnfest as climategate 1!

By sleepy on 2011 11 26 - 17:10:57

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/groping-2gb-host-chris-smith-loses-job-family/story-e6frewt0-1225809729558

You’re using right wing media scum from 2GB to perpetuate a non –story!?

Your NOT a scientist, YOU don’t have any scientific training.
YOU can’t comprehend what the scientists are telling YOU and the rest of the world.

Because it goes above your head, it is BEYOND YOUR RANGE OF UNDERSTANDING/COMPREHENSION you label it as some sort of conspiracy to tax people for a one world government.

Get REAL!

I suggest you read the IPCC reports (http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm) before commenting further on this topic; not quoting some drongo has-been shock jocks to prove your deluded point.

What can Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Centre do with a pack of morons but rebut the bullshit lies.

By Ali on 2011 11 30 - 12:47:42

So what are your qualifications Ali? On the table, now! And please refrain from kindergarten level name-calling in future, thanks.

By Hereward Fenton on 2011 12 02 - 15:54:51

The best evidence that we are really on to something is when people like Ali represent the opposing viewpoint. All Ali offers is ad hominems, appeals to authority and venomous character smears against his opponents.

For me that is proof that Ali and his embattled crew have lost the argument. Bravo!

By Hereward Fenton on 2011 12 02 - 16:02:46

I have studies physics and chemistry & math’s to university level.
I know the scientific method, it is a method developed over many years by very smart people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method  ).

Scientist of today are “Standing on the shoulders of giants”, as they say.


Everyone’s heard of Einstein’s “*theory* of relativity”, even though it explains the real world to us and has enabled man to develop the atomic bomb and put satellites into space, it does not explain everything. Until someone comes along with a better theory it’s the best explanation we have to represent the real world.

The string theory proponents have failed to demonstrate they can provide a binding universal explanation from the sub atomic level to the macro world of galaxies and the universe,& thus haven’t knocked of Einstein’s theory.

In Science observable measurements are taken, a hypothesis produced, peers scrutinize the data & hypothesis & conclusion. (http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_scientific_method.shtml )

With global warming and other science, Scientist all over the world picks apart the evidence published by their peers in their field of research.

Maybe its because they all want some glorious write up in the scientific journals, or for the fun of it, they may want the recognition of being the one who pulled apart some important paper or for some other self serving reason etc .

When the scrutinizing is done and what’s left over is still credible and can be replicated (in modeling or otherwise) it is held to be correct until such time someone can prove it wrong with more evidence.

Remember cold fusion discovery @ room temperature?

“It was the most notorious scientific experiment in recent memory - in 1989, the two men who claimed to have discovered the energy of the future were condemned as imposters and exiled by their peers. Can it possibly make sense to reopen the cold fusion investigation? A surprising number of researchers already have.”

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.11/coldfusion.html

When scammers try to pull a fast one to fool the scientific community they will get found out and exposed to be the fraud charlatans they are.

But this is done by **PEER scientist** , not some wally “Christopher Walter Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley” or 2GB right wing “pay for comment” shock jocks with an AGENDA, or sell-out paid-up scientist on the fossil fuel payroll.

By ali on 2011 12 02 - 18:03:53

The lying rodent john howard has thrown his support behind pilmers new - “book”

some very learned responses at this link.
http://www.aussmc.org/2011/12/rapid-reaction-ian-plimer-launches-new-book-on-climate-change-–-experts-respond/

it may come to pass that a tax on carbon, is in fact nothing more than a scheme for the rich to get richer, and a lousy way to cobat climate change, but to pretend that means that the climate isnt changing, is laughable in the face of all the evidence.

its as a ridiculous proposition as it is to say that all you need to bring a 47 storey steel framed skyscraper down at freefall ecceleration to collapse into its own footprint is a box of matches.

it might not be impossible that all the worlds experts on climate are in collusion to present a fraud to the world - youd have to ask why though, but i doubt, any amount of cash incentives, or other forms of persuasion, could convince mother nature to lend her hand on the scheme by way of record breaking extreme weather events in everything from droughts, floods, cyclones etc and everything in between.

By sunshine on 2011 12 13 - 11:41:06

Enter comments below, then click Submit:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Listen Live

Recent Comments

Leonard Clampett,

can you point out where anyone around here wrote or somehow conveyed the opinion “that governments can, and will, do no wrong”? The fact that contrails can persist and spread doesn’t have the slightest impact on the morality of governments ...

Do you doubt the basic mechanism of cloud formation that I summarized exists? Then please explain where I got it wrong - or the University of North Carolina that I linked to - or all my flight teachers and the text books for the exam - or all the guide books about clouds.
Be specific, don’t just say “misinformation” without giving any reason. By all means, show some actual “scrutiny”, along with references.

Of course I could have introduced dry and saturated lapse rate, condensation nuclei and many more sophisticated details, but that does not alter the principal mechanism of rising, cooling and increasing RH.

By the way, your credentials are not helping, I’m afraid - at least as long as you display a basic misunderstanding of central processes like combustion or supersaturation (which you claim doesn’t even exist).

By Josh on 2014 09 27 - 07:31:30
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Thanks mate, greatly appreciated.

By Hereward Fenton on 2014 09 24 - 22:27:31
From the entry 'Introducing Professor Garth L Nicolson: pioneering researcher on mycoplasmas'.

I know you don’t buy it, but the whole thing seems very much manufactured. Even the footage and the stories.
Anyways, great work as always. Keep on this topic. I believe it is the defining moment for the future of the middle east. 

I am about to subscribe smile  For the years of your hard work.. Well done mate..

By Shaun on 2014 09 24 - 17:53:41
From the entry 'Introducing Professor Garth L Nicolson: pioneering researcher on mycoplasmas'.

I don’t believe the ISIS propaganda Shaun, but I do believe these are real people dressed in black who are killing lots of innocent people in Syria. This is not a fiction. Cheers.

By Hereward Fenton on 2014 09 24 - 16:31:57
From the entry 'Introducing Professor Garth L Nicolson: pioneering researcher on mycoplasmas'.

I am drawn back to read further nonsense every time I receive a note to advise that somebody has responded to a relevant post. Rosa Koire Speech about Agenda 21 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-qLUQlmBk4 When you read and hear commonsense it makes you think. For Hereward Fenton and the other government shills on this site who insist that governments can, and will, do no wrong, compare the Agenda 21 list of goals to the 8 steps of Carl Marx listed in his Communist Manifesto. None of the claims by Josh or others regarding “lingering” chemtrails stand up to scrutiny so far. Josh’s simplistic dreams about cloud formation and “lingering” contrails are just that. I note some claims about wanting a pilot to comment, but apparently my comments as an Airline Transport Pilot of 14,000 hours and Aircraft Maintenance Engineer do not suit his misinformation, or outright ignorant, position. When the realisation hits these people, I wonder if they will understand what is being done to us all in the name of the New World Order?

By Leonard Clampett on 2014 09 23 - 17:22:21
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Cris,

you ask: “Why are there so many of these trails when rain is likely or predicted?”

Very good question, and one that should be answered before assuming all kinds of bad things.

Approaching fronts are the most frequent cause of rain. During their approach, they lift the current air mass. Lifting always means cooling (see “lapse rate”), and cooling means rising the relative humidity because cooler air can hold less water vapor. So even while containing the same absolute amount of water, cooling air approaches the point where the relative humidity reaches 100%.

This is the “dew point” - at that moment you get clouds because the water vapor condenses.

Now when a plane comes by and passes through the lifted moist air, shortly before the dew point is reached - then it is obviously much more likely to create a contrail because the conditions for trails are a lot better than usual, and it continuosly contributes water vapor (from the fuel combustion) along its path which adds to the existing humidity, triggering a trail and probably the start of a haze layer.*

This phase may last several hours, especially with warm fronts.

There is a nice schematics of “lifting mechanisms” on this page from NC State University.

Your next question is not quite reasonable. Why should anyone have to prove the non-existence of ongoing geo-engineering? It’s clearly required to prove its existence in the first place before making accusations. Innocent until proven guilty, right?

Patents are no evidence for anything. It’s easy to get one, you don’t have to build anything or even show that your invention actually works.

I’m sure there is a lot of rot that must be stopped. I just don’t think it’s where you assume it is.


* Footnote: the whole thing gets a bit more complicated when ice comes into play.

By Josh on 2014 09 23 - 04:15:04
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Hi Josh
I don’t need any more evidence. I need answers.
Why are there so many of these trails when rain is likely or predicted?
How about the people at the helm, the political minitures, sign documents at their own unlimited commercial liability saying the there is no Geoengineering happening? Lets see if they have the guts to do that. If not, why not? Is something being hidden? Why are there near 150 patents for chemical weather remediation? Lots of whys and you wish to dampen the fire of resistance. I guess fluoride and vaccinations are no problem either?
The rot must be stopped and it won’t be by sitting on our hands.
Selah
Cris

By Cris on 2014 09 20 - 19:23:32
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

weather patterns are changing, something scientists have predicted would happen for quite a while.

How is that relevant in the debate about persistent contrails?

By Josh on 2014 09 20 - 17:24:10
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Cris,

before initiating a petition, you want to be sure that the issues you list are real.

What you need is a sample from a contrail, taken in the presence of witnesses, analyzed in a lab to show all components contained. Pointing to Youtube videos as evidence will not be enough. How do you know that the video creators got it right?

The original meme of Chemtrails is that any trail that is not short-lived must be something else, and that persistent trails are something new. As shown before, both of these are wrong assumptions.

It’s just a matter of the favorable atmospheric conditions, and has been observed since the first airplanes were able to reach high altitudes.

So why assume that persistent contrails are something evil in the first place?

By the way, HAARP and weather modification (rain making) were stacked upon the first claims only later. However, cloud seeding is known since the 1940s and has never been a secret or been applied on a larger scale.

HAARP had interacted with the ionosphere which has no influence on the troposphere far below (where the weather happens). It is being dismantled right now.

What’s left are countless images and videos of contrails, sun dogs, haze layers. Would you accept if officials tell you these are all effects of tiny ice crystals?

If not, then what would you be prepared to accept?

By Josh on 2014 09 20 - 17:22:38
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Tom Jones: Thank you for taking the time to read my post. You are correct when you say that the term ‘anti-semite’ is the wrong way to address the issue of Jew hatred. The semites comprise of four ethnic groups, including Jews, Arabs, Phoenicians and Armenians, yet somehow it’s been branded as Jewish. It’s a little bit like the word gay, meaning happy. It means happy but because it has been popularised as relating to homosexual people, now people think that before it’s intended meaning. Semite evokes thoughts of Jews, regardless of its history.

Wikipedia defines thought crimes as “....an occurrence or instance of controversial or socially unacceptable thoughts.” It would be punishable in the movie 1984, but I think we’d be hard pressed to see it happening in a free nation like Australia. On the other hand, I don’t think you can fairly say that words and speech are harmless. After all, Hitler forged the third reich with words. Words put millions of people in gas chambers and caused a war affecting the entire world. Had he been thrown (and kept) in jail, it is doubtful such a catastrophe would have happened. This flip flop wearing camera wielding big mouth obviously doesn’t have the political cunning of Adolf, but it was clear in his films that he intended to collect followers to harm Jews in unknown ways. But he did mention his will to throw them in work camps - sensitive huh? Brendan was intending to use words to villify and harm a particular group of people, that happened to be Jews and that is why he was jailed.

So no, I don’t think three years of maximum security confinement is a suitable prison term for him, unless it cured him of his prejudices and will to be a public menace.

antisemite: of all the Jews I’ve met, it seems they are more ‘anti-stupid’ than anything else. But nobody said you have to like them, just that in Australia the rule is live and let live, so follow the law at least.

By Jakob on 2014 09 19 - 01:55:56
From the entry 'Meet Brendon O'Connell, Australia's first political prisoner'.

Categories