On 11/26, UK Met Office says 'no global warming' in past 10 years (meaning no American cash) then on same day says, wait, we change our minds

All of a sudden in the middle of a "climate summit" in Mexico that is really a "get the cash summit" of jet setters and thugs demanding the US kill itself faster, we hear the UK Met Office has miraculously discovered they must re-work all their alleged temperature data from the past decade, and amazingly it will show the world is even hotter than they thought (as US government offices may do as well). Meaning Americans are even worse and must pay even more billions to 'poor' countries. MLB promotes this idea condemning Americans by promoting NRDC and carbon offsets purchases.

• The UK Met Office said on its website also on 11/26/10,

that global warming has actually decreased in the past 10 years

• (in a very shy way so no one would notice):

"In the last 10 years the rate of warming has decreased..."

• Reference, 11/26/10, "Scientific evidence is Met Office focus at Cancun," UK Government Met Office

Then gathers reporters and tells them they're coming up with new numbers to show global warming has increased:

• 11/26/10: "World may post warmest year as UK Met Office adjusts past decade of data," Bloomberg News, Alex Morales

"World temperatures in 2010 may be the warmest on record, the U.K. Met Office said, as it plans

• to calibrate a decade of data to account for newer sensors.

The average temperature for the year through October shows 2010 will be one of the two warmest years in a series that

• goes back to 1850, said Vicky Pope, head of climate science at the Met Office."...

This cannot be possible. As the scientists have said, historical data has been destroyed. No one has the data, it cannot be checked. In any case, none of the raw data we are told of today has been independently verified, that is, it is considered 'proprietary.' it all emanates from government concerns with huge financial interests not least the fact that organized crime is doing very well in the climate industry and wants more.

• Government employees say hand over the food off your childrens' plate and make it snappy.

(continuing, Bloomberg): "Scientists at the agency are preparing to revise data since 2000 to adjust for

• a new method that masked some of the rising temperature trend, she said....

“There’s a very clear warming trend but it’s not as rapid as it was before,” Pope told reporters yesterday in London....“We’ve effectively underestimated the rate of warming over the past decade,” Palmer said. A new series will be published at an as yet unspecified date,

• according to the Met Office."...(This isn't science, it's a right out in the open heist which only got this far because most people in the US didn't know, were too busy, couldn't have dreamed this was going on. ed)

11/19/09, "Climatologists baffled by global warming time-out," over 10 years, Der Spiegel, by G. Traufetter

• "Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years.
• Some attribute the trend to a lack of sunspots, while others explain it through ocean currents."...

2/14/10, "ClimateGate U-Turn as scientist at centre of row admits: there has been no global warming since 1995," UK Daily Mail, J. Petre

• "He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming,

although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend."...

Scientists from UK Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research (part of the UK Met Office) and East Anglia (of UN Climate Report and ClimateGate)

• in March 2000 said kids won't ever get to see snow in the UK again.

David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately,

• British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes - or eventually "feel" virtual cold."...

3/20/2000, "Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past," Independent UK, Charles Onians (photo below 11/26/10, car towed in UK in snow, BBC)

• Which is fine but this "science" was used to make US government policy and demand billions in 'reparations' from middle class taxpayers.

• If that isn't a crime, I'd like to know what is. ed.

• Above Hillary Clinton at Copenhagen in 2009 said the US (wage earners) would help gather $100 billion a year to help 'poor' countries with climate problems by 2020.

• Above picture ran 11/24/2009 in BBC article leading up to Copenhagen, saying

civil war in Darfur was due in large part to global warming (which was due to industrialized nations).

• (9/6/10, BBC reports there is of course no connection between climate and war in Africa, but hatred, violence, cash and emotional attachment have already settled in).

11/20/09, Right before the Copenhagen global warming conference in December 2009, the

• US National Academy of Sciences said global warming exists and

• increases risk of civil war in Africa.

• Above Sudanese diplomat di-aping at Copenhagen global warming conference saying that lack of climate 'financing' would lead to
• 'holocaust' and incineration in Africa.

9/6/10, BBC, "Climate shifts 'not to blame' for African civil wars," by M. Kinver"Climate change is not responsible for civil wars in Africa, a study suggests.

• It challenges previous assumptions that environmental disasters, such as drought and prolonged heat waves, had played a part in triggering unrest.

Instead, it says, traditional factors - such as poverty and social tensions - were often the main factors behind the outbreak of conflicts.

• The findings have been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in the United States.

"Climate variability in Africa does not seem to have a significant impact on the risk of civil war," said author

• Halvard Buhaug, senior researcher at the Peace Research Institute Oslo's (Prio) Centre for the Study of Civil War....

He added that it was not too hard to find examples of where

• politicians were publicly making the link

• between the projected impact of climate change and the associated security risks.

Margaret Beckett, when she held the post of British Foreign Secretary,

• tabled a debate on climate change at the UN Security Council in 2007.

Ahead of the gathering, the British delegation circulated a document that warned of "major changes to the world's physical landmass during this century", which

• would trigger border and maritime disputes.

In his paper, Dr Buhaug questioned the findings of research that appeared in PNAS in November last year.

The 2009 paper suggested that climate had been a major driver of armed conflict in Africa, and that future warming

• was likely to increase the number of deaths from war.

US researchers found that across the continent, conflict was about 50% more likely in unusually warm years....

"My article points to the fact that there has been

too much emphasis on single definitions of conflict and single definitions of climate.

"Even if you found that conflict, defined in a particular way, appeared to be associated with climate,

• if you applied a number of complementary measures - which you should do in order to determine the robustness of the apparent connection -

then you would find, in almost all cases,

• the two were actually unrelated."

Dr Buhaug explained that there were a variety of ways to define what constituted a civil war....

• "I tried quite a few different and complementary definitions of conflict," said Dr Buhaug.

He found that that there was a strong correlation between civil wars and traditional factors, such as economic disparity, ethnic tensions,

• and historic political and economic instability.

"These factors seemed to matter, not so when it came to climate variability," he observed....

When it came to politicians and policymakers, many of the adopted positions were

• "speculative", he added."...

"Although satellite temperature measurements have been available since 1978, most global temperature analyses still rely on data captured from land-based thermometers, scattered more or less about the planet. It is that data which NOAA receives and disseminates – although not before performing some sleight-of-hand on it.

• Smith has done much of the heavy lifting involved in analyzing the NOAA/GISS data and software, and he chronicles his often frustrating experiences at his fascinating website. ...

But given the plummeting number of stations, and the likely disregard for the latitude,

• elevation, or UHI of such neighbors,

it’s no surprise that such “homogenizing” seems to always result in warmer readings."...

• from "CRU was but the tip of the iceberg" 1/22/10

We would be nuts "to surrender our freedoms, our economic growth, and even our simplest comforts to duplicitous zealots before checking and

• double-checking the work of the prophets predicting our doom
• should we refuse. "
• Marc Sheppard, American Thinker, 1/22/10

P.S. US carbon emissions fell 6.9% in 2009 due to the recession. We are dying, but not fast enough for them. (stated about half way into Reuters article). ed.

via Climate Depot

Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon