The argument that global warming is due to humans, known as the anthropogenic
global warming theory (AGW) is a deliberate fraud. I can now make that
statement without fear of contradiction because of a remarkable hacking of files
that provided not just a smoking gun, but an entire battery of machine guns.
A major person working in the area of climate change and global warming sent
me an astonishing email that said. “We must get rid of the Medieval Warm
Period.” The person in question was Jonathan Overpeck and his even more
revealing emails are part of those exposed by the hacker.
Professor Wegman showed how this “community of scientists” published
together and peer reviewed each other’s work.
The emails reveal how they controlled the process, including manipulating some of
the major journals like Science and Nature. We know the editor of the Journal
of Climate, Andrew Weaver, was one of the “community”. They organized lists of
reviewers when required making sure they gave the editor only favorable names.
They threatened to isolate and marginalize one editor who they believed was recalcitrant.
Hacked E-Mail Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Published: 2009年11月21日
Hundreds of private e-mail messages and documents hacked from a computer server at a British university are causing a stir
among global warming skeptics, who say they show that climate scientists conspired to overstate the case for a human
influence on climate change.
BBC
Hackers target leading climate research unit
E-mails reportedly from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU), including personal exchanges,
appeared on the internet on Thursday.
A university spokesman confirmed the email system had been hacked and that information was taken and published without permission.
In several of the emails, climate researchers discussed how to arrange for favorable reviewers for papers they
planned to publish in scientific journals. At the same time, climate researchers at times appeared to pressure scientific
journals not to publish research by other scientists whose findings they disagreed with.
One email from 1999, titled "CENSORED!!!!!" showed one U.S.-based scientist uncomfortable with such tactics.
"As for thinking that it is 'Better that nothing appear, than something unacceptable to us' … as though we are
the gatekeepers of all that is acceptable in the world of paleoclimatology seems amazingly arrogant. Science moves
forward whether we agree with individual articles or not," the email said.
