There has always been weather

Call it Climate-gate!

And call Al Gore, Ahab.

Call me Ishmael.

I will be ashamed if my readers did not already know (as we have discussed for years) that the Global Warming Hoax was/is, as we have always know it to be, a hoax. An effort to defraud nations and assist in the tireless (and creative) leftist international movement

Or, that seems to be the general trend of the news.

One suspects this hacking had much to do with the sudden collapse of the world-wide global warming boondoggle and economic manipulation and “global management” movements that have been so wildly trumpeted by international scallywags of all stripes and ambitions.

Aren’t you glad, now, that the moron cowboy saw through it and was smart enough to keep us out of the unworkable and failed Kyoto treaty, despite worldwide pressure and ceaseless hysteria from the moronic press and joy-sucking “green business experts”?

I am.

This is pretty big news, right? So look what all three networks led with, tonight

My prediction, as I said earlier: Within ten days to a month, we’re going to hear that Global Warming has “stalled” thanks to “the global recession and measures we have already taken to save the planet.” Then, you might think (as this guy does) that these emails might be the “last nail in the coffin” but this dead thing will rise. Be prepared to hear that this good news is “temporary,” and that while we’re enjoying “a stall,” Gaia is still quite doomed, thanks to mankind, and so things can get back on to the crisis/catastrophic track, “in a moment’s notice.”

Powerline, in a must-read, calls it “bombshell” and writes:

[these emails] do not suggest that these scientists are perpetrating a knowing and deliberate hoax. On the contrary, they are true believers. I don’t doubt that they are sincerely convinced–in fact, fanatically so–that human activity is warming the earth. But the emails are disturbing nonetheless . . . [their discovery suggests] that pro-global warming scientists fudge data to get the results they are looking for.

So, we can’t trust science to give us data uncorrupted by agendas. We can’t trust the press to give us news uncorrupted by agendas. We can’t trust the government to do much of anything, purely out of service to America. We can’t trust the schools to actually teach our children the basics. Who can we trust?

Perhaps it is down to trusting ourselves as much as we dare, and trusting God even more, in the end. As our good pope, Benedict has said:

Only the Word of God is the foundation of all reality, it is as stable as the heavens and more than the heavens, it is reality.

Meanwhile, enjoy.

WELCOME: Readers of While you are here, please look around. We’re also watching a patient police officer get assaulted by a cat, sharing a delicious Pumpkin Bread Pudding recipe, reading A Tale of Two DUI’s, enjoying a video of a priest making a mockery of the film 2012, enjoying some Jolly Organ Music and figuring out that I probably won’t be podcasting, anymore.

Updates here and more here

And I will update asI find more
Ace: An Internet Uproar
Belmont Club: money scheme unlikely to end because of some inconvenient facts
Charlie Martin: Curiouser and curiouser
Watts Up With That?: The Nature Trick
Jules Crittenden: a Roundup!
Wes Smith: The hacking is a crime, yes, inexcusable. The boondoggle was, too.
Aussie press: These emails pretty damning
Big story
NYTimes: focuses on the skeptics
Slightly o/t: Obama likes himself

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Gerry

    “I will be ashamed of my readers did not know”

    ? “if/who” ?

    [Thanks...typing while putting a shawl on, because I'm so damn cold! Fixed! -admin]

  • Sid Burgess

    Great job. We have been covering this in depth all day and I am amazed at how “surprised” people are at the thought of any of this being simple lies.

    Keep it up!

    Sid Burgess
    National Director

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention There has always been weather » The Anchoress | A First Things Blog --

  • Victor

    Is this film what one might call, “Chanting The Weather”? :)

  • Mr. H

    If my weatherman has trouble predicting global temperatures in a localized area 7 days out, why should we put any credence in computer models predicting temperatures decades from now?

    The fact is that global warming ended in 1998, and we may be looking at a 10-20 year period of global cooling.

    That is, a period of cooling that was not predicted by the climate models used to push global warming. This development is only now starting to be reported in the mainstream press.

    Additional info and links can be found here and here.

    Understandably, this new data will be difficult acknowledge for those who have emotionally invested in the idea of man-made climate change. But the truth will prevail in the end.

    Hopefully we won’t irreversibly damage the global economy before enough people see the light.

    [Retrieved from spam filter where ALL comments go that contain urls that are not coded into links. Edited to admit links -admin]

  • Pingback: My Own Thoughts » Blog Archive » Right On.

  • Sherry

    What I loved was, “Scientists puzzled by global warming’s time out.” Like, it’s taking a breather but don’t stop worrying, it will be back and we’ll be talking about it as soon as the climate cooperates!

  • Pingback: Death knell of the “Global Warming” hoax? « Alaskan Orthodox Patriot

  • Greta

    This will not slow them down for a minute. Liberals do not respond to facts, but simply ignore them.

  • Sally Thomas

    Yes, that’s chanting the weather, Victor. It’s Anglican chant, which . . . sounds just like that, in four parts (though there are a variety of tones), only you generally sing things like psalms and the Magnificat and the Nunc Dimittis to it, not the weather.

    I love that clip — I’ve only ever heard it as an audio clip, not seen a video/image version.

    Great post, Anchoress.

  • kate

    Did I see palm trees in foggy Wales…?

  • dry valleys

    Left-wing agitators’ crusade on climate change

    Someone who hasn’t had his rude awakening yet, who if this is right will have to go back on himself pretty soon

    Seems to me, if indeed it is a waste of time & money, you’d better ask people at all levels of the church why they wasted time & money.

    My own view is that if the world isn’t warming, that hardly proves that mankind isn’t having a detrimental effect on the climate, or the wider environment, & it certainly doesn’t mean we can all go back to treating the planet so wantonly as if its resources were limitless.

    [I would never argue that mankind does not affect the environment, particularly in the developing countries where environmental regulations are thin. But I do tire of the unending pessimism of the environmentalists (let's face it, if they had nothing to be negative about, they would be out of business.) I mean, I can remember what LA was like in the '60's and '70's. In the US and EU our air quality is much better than it was three decades ago, and our water is healthier. That's the difference, I guess, between balanced, sane and reasonable regulations vs unbalanced, insane and unreasonably extreme regulations. I don't think anyone is suggesting that we "go back to treating the planet wantonly" but hyper-regulating humanity and sucking joy, creativity, comfort and a relative balance between perfect nature and imperfect man on the basis of hysteria, unproved "science" and hoo-hah is not the way to go. Gore and his minions are miserable people. -admin]

  • Robbins Mitchell

    I wonder if this will be enough to make anAL GOREtentive stop wetting his carbon neutral panties.

  • Joe Odegaard

    As long as we stave off the next ice age I’m OK.

  • Kathy

    Does this mean that they will voluntarily give back all their ill-gotten gains? The money that changed hands in this hoax has been astronomical! Al’s worse than a snake oil salesman.

  • wildman

    The only catastrophe concerning the farce of global warming is that we keep electing the idiots that parrot the the agenda of the even bigger idiots in the environmental movement and eco-scientists that need to fudge the numbers.

  • Dianne S.

    In ’98/99 I heard on the radio one time an announcement from the national weather service that our 26 year heat wave here in Alaska was over. They said there is a jetstream oscillation and we would be slightly colder for 26 years until it switched again. Basically during our warmer temps the fridgid air swirls around in the high arctic and Siberia deep freezing the arctic ice. When the fridgid air shifts south the ice thins and they can make their claims for man caused warming. If the weather service knows this I am sure the perps of this hoax do also. I wish our schools would quite depriving children a fact based education.

  • cathyf

    My husband brought up the thought that the hacking is very convenient. The scientists can just claim that the incriminating data, programs and emails were planted or “augmented” by the hackers.

  • Saul

    My prediction, since Global warming is recognized as a religion. These facts will have little impact.

  • http://Cox.Net Rip Heller

    Are these tenured P(piled)H(high &)D(deep)’s to be recommended for next year’s NOBEL by DR Heidi Cullen ??? BTW: These released emails could be just a tip of the iceberg.

  • dry valleys

    Yes, I take your point, and I’ve identified before some ways in which professional conservationists often object to heavy-handed government schemes.

    Especially ones which are process-driven, & yes those which obsessively focus on cutting carbon emissions to the detriment of all else can be counter-productive: I have indicated examples of this such as mass plantations of non-native trees.

    Furthermore, the state often actually goes out of its way to encourage bad behaviour- see here- I am “asquith”, which is my usual username on blogs, though I decided on a change when joining this one as I thought Herbert Asquith’s identity & while I called myself after him might not be so widely known in America.

    But I am simply thinking that the only mentions of environmental issues on here seem to be attacks on Al Gore & his chums, & if you support sensible regulations (without which we wouldn’t have had this recent improvement in air & water quality, & despite qualms I also support national parks, planning restrictions in some areas, & so on) they are not generally referred to.

    As a side note, that is a genuine picture of me in that avatar.

    [Ah, I knew you were a redhead! - admin :-) ]

  • dry valleys

    I’m not though- do I look like one in that picture? Odd :)

    [Perhaps it is the way the sun backlights your hair. You're cute, nevertheless -admin]

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    L.A. air is much better now—and it began being improved long before Al Gore became an enviro-celebrity.

  • dry valleys

    Well, that’s partly because of regulations (most of which were objected to at the time) & partly because capitalist progress is such that industry & that becomes less polluting & devises ways to limit its impact.

    But we have still got problems such as building in unsuitable areas (floodplains is a big one) & so on. I do take the view that mankind is having some form of detrimental view on the climate, acidification of the oceans, deforestation, creation of things like the Great Pacific Gyre (which will hopefully be dealt with as we come to reduce our use of plastic) & so on.

    We have dealt with problems like CFCs & acid rain in a satisfactory way before. But I do think there needs to be some vague form of international agreement, as there has been before.

  • Colin

    This is completely off-topic, but…damn. I followed the link you put in the post to your old “essential Bush” post from 2006, and just…damn. Everything you said came to pass. My own side just threw Bush under the bus. They continue to blame him for Katrina, mock him, call him a “statist.” They compare him to Obama, and try to “triangulate” off of him to prove their own conservative bona fides. It just makes me sick. The left won the war of the narratives, because the conservatives never even tried to defend their own guy. They were disgusted by him, and continue to act embarassed by him.

    Reading that “essential Bush” post of yours always puts me in a bad mood, in light of the intervening events.

    Like I said, way off-topic. Sorry about that.

  • Gerry

    This idea is NOT mine, but isn’t it interesting that the people who push global warming (and global cooling 30 years ago), along with all the other “sky is falling” crackpot ideas are overwhelmingly secular?

    If you don’t believe in God …

  • Pingback: » Links to Visit – 11/21/09 Where liberty dwells, there is my country…

  • Western Chauvinist

    The MSM coverage I’ve read is just deplorable. For example, the WaPo is all about the knuckle-dragging skeptics and the illegal “hacking.” Wonder what they said about Sarah Palin’s hacker and Congressman’s son? Google “Palin hacker trial” to get an update on him from the British perspective. I wonder if they’ll be as sympathetic to the Hadley hacker who has done such a great service to the TRUTH!

    Apologies for not providing links. I’m link-challenged.

  • Pingback: I think it’s because of the poisonous brown film, Moe — Cynthia Yockey, A Conservative Lesbian

  • Joseph Marshall

    You must buy your teapots like me, extra small from Asian food markets. This teapot is so small, it won’t even hold a tempest.

    Have you ever grown a garden, Anchoress? Made fried green tomatoes? Hunted moose like Sarah Palin? Or quail like Dick Cheney? Done any serious birdwatching? Or spent much time on the trails backpacking?

    Could you tell us approximately when the first killing frost occurs on Long Island? Or what flowers are likely to be sacrificed to it. Or the average last frost date after which it is safe to plant sun loving vegetables like tomatoes and peppers, without their going dormant? Or what bird species will regularly abandon Long Island in Winter?

    Since I like to think well of you, I presume that, by and large, you haven’t and can’t. The most serious evidence for global warming [or, indeed, any other ecological danger] comes from obvious effects you can see in the biosphere if you’ve been in the habit of staying outdoors, paying attention, and remembering what you have seen for a decade or three.

    And you don’t have to be living on a small ocean atoll that is disappearing from under your feet to observe them. The atoll dweller merely lacks the advantage of being able to ignore them.

    Some say that the glory of American freedom and the American way of life is that we are free to ignore virtually anything we please.

    If you have and can do these things and are still trying to pare cheese over weather station climate data, I must confess that I would think far less well of you than I actually do.

    Why? Because someone who does these things or observes this stuff regularly and systematically should understand that, as a matter of common sense, it is the biological effects that are important and not the mountain of indirect data attempting to describe them for theoretical purposes.

    “There always has been weather”? Certainly. Where I live there have always been tornadoes on a regular basis. But what a useless thing and waste of money the development of Doppler Radar has been! All it has given us is a fighting chance of getting to the basement and not dying when our house is flattened. Why would we need that? After all, there has always been sudden accidental death, right?

    Why mess up a good thing by attempting to get out of the way?

    In the “Little Ice Age” in Europe the Irish adapted to the change in the climate by changing their major source of dietary starches from grain to potatoes. The French stubbornly persisted in trying to only grow grain and make bread, come what may.

    The French starved. Not just once, but over and over and over again in regular crop failures and famines throughout this entire period.

    There is never any guarantee that obvious, regular, systematic, and horrible failures will persuade fools to reevaluate their cherished opinions.

    Are you having mashed potatoes for Thanksgiving? I am.

  • Lindy Michaels

    Before we get too heady with the truth coming out, those of us who want to stop the GW scam for good need to find a great class action lawyer and sue the bastards. Once it is in the court system …. In Re Al Gore and John Does 1 through 1000, defendants… it cannot be swept under the rug, and pursuant to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Daubert, the science must be tested, replicated and confirmed.

    Talk will not stop the money train, litigation will.

    Remember, that is the tool of the environmentalists. Use it.

  • Andrew

    I’ve been studying the global warming hoax for many years and I hope these recent developments will open a lot of eyes around the world.

    You are truly fortunate to have been linked from Lucianne. That’s a feather in your cap.

    Have a great week!

  • Maureen

    While I would hope that these documents will be a slap up the side of the head of governments that have wasted billions on this farce I don’t think it will. Besides the upcoming Copenhagen climate conference has nothing to do with global warming – it has to do with a huge transfer of cash from the developed world to the developing world in payment for the guilt (as defined by the liberal left) of the developed world because we have done something to harm the developing world (I personally think that most of the harm to the developing world has been done at the hands of their own tyrants and thugs, but ….). What will happen to all that cash that will be taken from your and mine bank account is anyone’s guess (I suspect much of it will be in the personal bank accounts of the aforementioned tyrants and thugs, but again I digress). Now that global warming has been proven to be a farce, some other cause will be created to justify the huge transfer of wealth.

    Now don’t get me wrong – I think there are lots of things we can do for the environment on a personal level, and the developing world does need help, but wholesale transfers of wealth is not it.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    Valley, there may have been objections to some of the regulations at the time, but they were passed. There are always objections, to anything, in the first stages, when it’s still being proposed. That’s just the way it works in a free society.

    “Vague” agreements are worse than useless—they have to be specific; and who are we supposed to be agreeing with, internationally? The Kleptocrats, at the UN? Russia and China, which have their own problems with pollution (and are totalitarian societies?) Middle-Eastern oil shieks, who have their own agenda? Africa, which faces war and severe internal problems? Asia, which probably won’t like restrictions on
    its economy?

    If, as you point out, capitalism has already solved many pollution problems, maybe we should rely on it, instead.

    By the way—on what evidence, exactly, do you base your view that it’s mankind whose responsible for the things you mention, and not, say, Mother Nature herself? And how is cutting back on plastics going to alleviate these problems? (You may be right, I’d just like to know what you base this on.)

  • dry valleys

    Well, I employed the word “vague” deliberately, to suggest that I may not agree with any given thing that greens do- I will scrutinise & either agree with or disagree with any international agreement that comes up.

    I have agreed that businesses can make themselves more efficient & less polluting, as old heavy industry disappears to be replaced by more efficient manufacturing. But there will always be a need to, for example, prohibit dumping wastes in inappropriate ways as some businesses will always want to do so in absence of regulation.

    I am receiving, constantly, reports on these lines, of regulations being deployed badly, which makes government & developers equally at fault. Furthermore, one thing you always come back to is large-scale immigration, which makes these things necessary in the first place as it swells a population that would otherwise be slowly declining.

    You do have to tread a fine line between over-zealous & often counterproductive regulation & an absence of constraints on what some people would do, in national parks & so on.

    I pay especially close attention to environmental matters & I in fact tend, as a result, to be relatively anti-statist. I see why people get put off “green”- you can see in that link an obsessive focus on carbon emissons, which is also used by people such as

    As for my specific references to plastic, it is fairly undeniable that huge-scale use of plastic is an environmental problem, as in this (which surely American conservationists will have picked up on). So it’s really a short step from this, to saying that using less plastic would be a relief for these unfortunate creatures.

    There are accordingly a lot of companies which reduce the amount of, often unnecessary, packaging they use. I welcome any efforts to develop biodegradeable plastic & to reduce use of carrier bags, which in fact causes only the slightest hint of inconvenience.

    Regarding Asian countries. They are where we were in previous centuries, so they probably will be more polluting, but will become less so, especially because they are more aware than the caricature of their position often served up to us suggests.

    They are making gestures of some kind, but that’s more than western governments did at a comparable time when they were already causing pollution of their own waterways & acid rain in other parts of the world. Something like this wouldn’t have occured when the reservoirs were being constructed in Britain to supply industrial cities.

    I have not made any great study of dams but I am led to think they are simply bad news that gets worse & worse as time goes by. So they might be ruing the Three Gorges dam & perhaps this one might come to naught.

    As someone whose interest in the environment comes from early exposure to & pleasure in nature, I have “inborn” mistrust of those who propose technology as the answer to everything. Some people would be happy if the whole countryside were carpeted over & covered with buildings, if they didn’t emit CO2, & driven over by cars, so long as they’re electric. Which of course spits in the face of my idea of conservation.

    Personally, furthermore, I have witnessed for some years the sceptics pouncing on anything (remember “The Great Global Warming Swindle?”) they could excitedly claim as refuting AGW once & for all, so I can be excused for having my doubts as to whether it’s all over now, & here & here

  • dry valleys

    The link in the 6th paragraph was meant to go here- readers can google “Great Pacific Gyre for more.

    This is the most disturbing thing because the problem happens far from where it was caused. Anyone can see that tipping bleach into a river, killing fish, can be prevented by no longer tipping bleach (or industrial pollutants) into the water. But this, as with acid rain before it, is different.

  • Pingback: Climate Research Center Hacked — Man-Caused Global Warming Likely To Be Massive Hoax | 'Okie' on the Lam

  • Missi

    The whole “green” movement has been focused on the wrong things. Yes, we should be looking for alternatives to petroleum- because petroleum puts us at the mercy of whackjobs in the middle east. Energy independence should be the watchword, not “carbon neutrality”. If we happen to make the air and water cleaner in the process, so much the better, but goal one should be getting the Saudi noose off our collective necks. Why don’t the environuts ever think of that? It’s a win-win situation; they get to blather about greenhouse gases and we get to put money into alternative energy. Funding all this climate non-science has given us no tangible return; time to put that money to much better use.

  • Maureen

    Missi – writing from Canada the job that environmentalists have done on the Alberta oil sands is criminal. First – rather than use unstable mid-east oil, the US has a true and loyal ally in Canada and we have a with a vast amount of oil that is relatively easy to get to (unlike any oil that might be under the polar ice cap). The Alberta oil sands still have decades and decades of oil and the Saskatchewan oil sands next door are only just being explored. Secondly, the environmentalists have lied repeatedly about the effects of the oil sands on health – the Dr. that promoted the high rates of cancer in communities around the oil sands has had his ‘results’ overturned by the Alberta Cancer Board and has been reprimanded by his licensing body. Furthermore, the areas of the oil sands that were extracted during the 1970′s have been fully restored as will the areas that are currently producing, but not now because those areas are still producing. But you would never know that from the lies that environmentalists have produced.

    Having said all that – yes we do need to look for alternative sources of energy, however I doubt that is solar or wind power – both which will require huge tracks of land to produce the type of energy to sustain our economy. I personally like nuclear power, which of course Canada is the world’s supplier of uranium.

  • Gerry
  • Rhinestone Suderman

    Valley, as one who’se studied history, I confess I’m suspicious of people who idealize nature, adn see nothing but evil in technology, or industrialization. The life of a medieval peasant was, frequently, brutal and short; that of someone in ancient times was probably worse, especially if they were slaves, or poor working class people. And even wealthy nobles frequently died young, felled by diseases we don’t even think about anymore. And famines could devastate whole populations.

    It’s nice to take pleasure in nature, but it’s also nice to have food, medicine, housing and work that doesn’t involve people having to till the soil from dawn to dusk, and die at age 40 and an ecnonomy that’s not dependent on slaves.

    I don’t see why technology can’t be used to solve problems of a technological nature—which is, essentially, what problems concerning pollution are. (I’m a bit puzzled as to why you’re so certain dams must be bad news; honestly, shouldn’t you study them, before coming to such a sweeping conclusion? You still might think they’re bad, but you’d have something to actually base your belief on.)

  • Pingback: The End of the Beginning « Temple of Mut

  • Pingback: Save the Polar Bears, Save the Prostitutes: Global Warming Hoax Escalates « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  • Pingback: Climategate: Rush Limbaugh on Global Warming Hoax & Three Siberian Tree Rings… There Is No Global Warming « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  • Pingback: The Embarrassing Global Cooling Cover-up… Obama & “Climate Gurus” Still Going Full-Speed Ahead « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  • Pingback: Global Warming Scam: Scientific Data in “Hockey Stick” Graph Bogus, Uh, ‘Fudged’ (video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  • Pingback: ClimateGate’s Lies and Deception to Hide the Decline: The Heat’s On, Dump the Data! « Frugal Café Blog Zone