Categories
Bait & Switch Climate Change Public Relations

Climategate : Paul Hudson Knew

This post is made about Paul Hudson, a BBC weatherman who penned an article sceptical about the Science of Climate Change, and promoting the perhaps pseudo-scientific views of Piers Corbyn, a weather forecaster, entitled “What happened to Global Warming” :-

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8299079.stm

Paul Hudson is also the author of a weblog post on “Climategate”, the “liberation” of years of e-mails from inside the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia.

I’m going to cut and paste the whole of his post here, because it contains information regarding the alleged crime that took place when the e-mails were removed from CRU.

I suspect that this information will be altered or removed before long, when people realise that Paul Hudson was already aware, on 12th October 2009, that e-mails were being broadcast out of CRU, as he was in reception of such e-mails which proved to be identical to those that were “acquired” last week and put in the public domain.

Paul Hudson has therefore implicated himself as being connected to the criminal behaviour of the last week, and I suggest his e-mail Inbox should in turn be made public, so that we may be made aware of who sent him e-mails that should have stayed in the building at CRU :-




ACCESSED 23 NOVEMBER 2009 : 23:30

https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2009/11/climategate-cru-hacked-into-an.shtml

‘Climategate’ – CRU hacked into and its implications

Paul Hudson | 13:07 UK time, Monday, 23 November 2009

Very busy with forecast duties right now, but I do intend to write a blog regarding the UK Climate research centre (CRU) being hacked into, and the possible implications of this very serious affair.

I will add comment on this page as soon as I can free up some time. But I will in the meantime answer the question regarding the chain of e-mails which you have been commenting about on my blog, which can be seen here, and whether they are genuine or part of an elaborate hoax.

I was forwarded the chain of e-mails on the 12th October, which are comments from some of the worlds leading climate scientists written as a direct result of my article ‘whatever happened to global warming’. The e-mails released on the internet as a result of CRU being hacked into are identical to the ones I was forwarded and read at the time and so, as far as l can see, they are authentic.

More later.




4 replies on “Climategate : Paul Hudson Knew”

I think it is someone in the high IQ society Mensa. They seem to be a nest full of sceptics. I have just been given an article from them, see below.

Global Warming on Mars and Climate Change from Space

Mars Global Surveyor studied the surface of Mars from 1999 to 2006, four Martian years, this coincided with a five and a half year rise in solar activity reaching the Solar Cycle peak in 2002. During a Solar Cycle maximum the Sun irradiates 0.1 percent more energy than at a Solar Cycle minimum, for Mars this means an increase in Global temperature of 0.21 Kelvin in three Martian years. At Perihelion Mars receives 44 percent (6.8 percent for Earth) more radiation than at Aphelion as the orbit of Mars is seven times more eccentric than Earths, a 21 percent eccentricity, only Mercury and Pluto have a more eccentric orbit than Mars. Perihelion occurs during the Southern Summer and ever since the 1830s it has been noted that during warming periods a dark band appears around the periphery of the shrinking polar cap, and with dust storms being more common during this period, this has decreased the Martian Albedo from 0.16 to 0.15 and increased the Martian Global temperature by 0.65 Kelvin. This has also caused more frozen CO2 to melt and turn into gas than usual for each Southern Summer. With 95 percent of the Martian atmosphere made up of CO2 (0.038 percent on Earth) and only 0.03 percent Water vapour (1 percent on Earth). CO2 induced Global Warming is an irrelevance for Mars as the CO2 has already absorbed most of the radiation available for absorption, the surface has a 7 millibar CO2 atmosphere (0.38 millibar CO2 atmosphere on Earth) raising the surface temperature by 3 Kelvin (2.1 Kelvin on Earth, although Water vapour shares half of the CO2 absorption) making the CO2 induced Greenhouse Effect on Mars four times as strong as on Earth and confirming the irrelevance of its ability to change temperature even with significant increases in Carbon Dioxide. Man made CO2 is natural CO2 which has been fossilised for millions of years and does not have the Carbon-14 Isotope. Levels of this Isotope show that 4 percent or 15ppm of the increase in CO2 in the last 200 years is due to Man & 85ppm due to Nature, this is also confirmed by the ratio of Carbon-12 to Carbon-13 in the Atmosphere. All evidence in Ice core data and direct measurements point to changes in the temperature causing the changes in CO2 levels as on Mars, this increase being due to the 0.76 Kelvin increase in Global Atmospheric temperature over the last 200 year bounce back from the Little Ice Age. But ice core data shows that this is mainly due to the 800 year lag in the changes in deep ocean CO2 levels after the Medieval Warm Period, the ocean contains 93.5 percent of the Earths CO2. The increase has added only 0.1 Kelvin to the 2.1 Kelvin that CO2 gives to the green house effect, This means that man-made CO2 has only increased the Global temperature by 0.015 Kelvin. The Solar Cycle Amplitude and more importantly the Solar Cycle Length and the Forbush Effect being responsible for the further 0.66 Kelvin increase. The Forbush effect is were there is a decrease in cosmic rays when Solar activity is high, decreasing cloud cover and leading to the enhancement of Global Warming on the Earth, a 1 percent decrease in cosmic rays causes a 0.13 Kelvin increase in global temperature. This effect is caused by coronal mass ejections which are ten times more common during Solar maximum and have a ten day period that can be predicted four days before the event. I suspect that this comprises part of the secret “Solar Weather Technique” of Piers Corbyn and why the Weather forecasts of Weather Action are better than that of the Met Office at present. Weather from the Sun was first postulated two hundred years ago when William Herschel tried to prove the price of grain was inversely correlated with the sunspot number, which was subsequently proven, the sunspot number being low during the Dalton Minimum (1790-1820) at the end of the Little Ice Age. The sunspot number was close to zero during the earlier Maunder Minimum (1645-1715) during the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, this is also confirmed by tree rings formed at sunspot minimum which have a higher amount of carbon-14 due to the Forbush Effect. The study of Luna Earthshine shows that the Albedo of the Earth also decreased from 0.32 in 1985 to 0.29 in 1997 showing a 6.5 percent decrease in cloud cover. The Earths Albedo has since increased to 0.31 in 2009 showing that 69 percent of solar energy is absorbed, 50 percent by the Surface, 19 percent by the Atmosphere (13.3 percent by Water Vapour, 1.6 percent by Carbon Dioxide and 4.1 percent by Dust, Ozone and other gases). In the last hundred years the Earths Albedo has been as high as 0.44 and as low as 0.29 with an average of 0.36. The Albedo effects the North more than the South because the land snow zone for the south is mainly in the sea. The enhancing effects of the Albedo changes on the Earth and Mars would more than explain Global Warming on both Planets and would explain why Global Warming on other Planets is not that definite other than the finding that the changes in the brightness of Neptune correlate with the changes in the Earths Global temperature. There are also long-term future causes of Climate Change in Astronomy. The inclination of Mars varies between 35 degrees and 14 degrees over a period of 50,000 years while that of the Earth only varies between 22.1 degrees and 24.1 degrees over a period of 41,000 years, both planets are at the half way point, Mars at 25.19 degrees and the Earth at 23.44 degrees. This cycle and other changes in planetary axis and orbit produce Ice ages every 100,000 years, in periods when more ice is exposed to the Sun heightening the Albedo, which causes the cooling. The Galactic Orbit of the Solar System every 240,000 million years produces Ice Age Epochs every 120,000 million years which are caused by the Sun passing through the Galactic spiral arms increasing the level of cosmic rays and therefore cloudiness, we are at present in an ice age epoch caused by our presence in the Orion armlet. But the Final Global Warming Terror will be when the Sun turns into a Red Giant. In one billion years time the Oceans will be boiling and in five billion years time the Earth will be eaten up by the Sun, leaving Mars as the most inner Planet of the Solar System. The information above comes from many sources such as The Guinness Book of Astronomy Facts and Feats by Sir Patrick Moore, Wikipedia, Encyclopaedia Britannica but mainly from Scientific papers found on Google Scholar. This scientific subject is supposed to be more important than Evolution or Relativity but the quality of Scientific Journalism and Teaching of this subject is so poor that even School children turn into sceptics. A young lad said that the BBC reported that the Sea Level will now rise by 1.2 meters an increase on previous predictions. Which the young lad had noted down as 20 feet from the Science in a film which won Al Gore a Nobel Prize for his contribution to Climate Science. He found out that 1.2 meters is 4 feet, 16 feet less. The problem is he is unable to debate this with his teachers because he is told that the Science is settled and there will be no more debate, He is now a sceptic. All the BBC seems to do is run up to the poles at the height of summer, there has been no documentary focusing on the science rather than the politics. So I thought I should do some Scientific Journalism myself using the example set by the popular scientist, Richard Feynman “The Great Explainer”, he said “use clear thinking and clear simple presentation“. I hope that this article explains why Astronomy is the key to Climate Change and not our Carbon Footprint (Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide) and why I agree with Sir Patrick Moore that facts and observations from a growing number of different scientific disciplines are confirming that Man Made Global Warming is Bunkum. My opinion is that quangos of politicised scientists have produced a consensus that is political rather than scientific. A similar situation to what happened in National Socialist Germany and Soviet Socialist Russia, using the tactic of insult, bullying and belittling to deflect attention from the science, this has produced a majority of people thinking that there is a scientific consensus and agreeing with it despite a lack of knowledge. The main problem is the misinterpretation of cause and effect when it comes to Carbon Dioxide and Temperature. It will be quite interesting to see how all this turns out over time.

[ UPDATE : PLEASE NOTE : THIS COMMENT PURPORTS TO COME FROM realclimate.org BUT IS IN FACT FROM AN INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS FOR QWEST COMMUNICATIONS IN DENVER, COLORADO : 71.33.132.102 : THE AUTHOR OF THE COMMENT NAMES THEMSELVES AS behonest : I SHALL REPORT THEIR DISHONESTY TO http://www.realclimate.org ]

Hey Jo,

I think you are reading something into this that is not correct. Hudson obviously dashed off a quick blog post and his writing may not have been clear. He posted the next day that emails he had received over his blog post on no warming (which I’m quite sure you’re aware of!) were actually in the liberated emails and those were forwarded to him.

Read more here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2009/11/climategate-what-next.shtml

[ UPDATE : PLEASE NOTE : THIS COMMENT PURPORTS TO COME FROM realclimate.org BUT IS IN FACT FROM AN INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS FOR QWEST COMMUNICATIONS IN DENVER, COLORADO : 71.33.132.102 : THE AUTHOR OF THE COMMENT NAMES THEMSELVES AS behonest : I SHALL REPORT THEIR DISHONESTY TO http://www.realclimate.org ]

Oh yeah, I just remember. You’re that person who “convinced” the BBC’s Roger Harrabin to change his story.

Hi Jo! Who are you going to report me to? The Thought Police? O’Brien? Big Brother? Gavin Schmidt?

What crime has been committed? I’ve not provided a valid email address that I don’t wish you to have? Whatever.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.