Sleasy and Shady… the character of one of the “highly regarded”, esteemed scientists has shown to be, in fact, a charlatan.. a thief, and a forger. The brazen and wanton effort to defend the indefensible and savagely attack any scientist that didn’t submit to the fraud, can now be exposed for what it was…a coordinated effort by “scientists” and other vested interests whose livelihoods depend on continued “global warming” hysteria.. By keeping the hysteria high, they insured enormous funding from friends in high places who dole out the public treasury like candy.
Let’s examine the charade…
Fakegate” Blows Up in Warmist Faces
Alan Caruba — February 24, 2012
On February 16, I published “Anatomy of a Global Warming Hoax” concerning the theft of the private records of The Heartland Institute’s board meeting and the creation of an alleged forged document intended to harm its reputation as a long time advocate of the real, not fake, science that has been the basis of the global warming—now called “climate change”—hoax.
The Feb 21 issue of The Wall Street Journal published an editorial, “The Not-So-Vast Conspiracy” noting that “As for ‘the largest international science conference of skeptics’ Heartland will, according to the documents, spend all of $380,000 this year on the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change. That’s against the $6.5 million that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) costs Western taxpayers annually, and the $2.6 billion the White House wants to spend next year on research into ‘global changes that have resulted primarily from global over-dependence on fossil fuels.’” (Emphasis added)
The global warming hoax has cost taxpayers billions since it was initiated and earned the purveyors of “carbon credits” millions as industry and others paid for the privilege of emitting “greenhouse gas”—primarily carbon dioxide—as part of doing business. Currently the European Union is trying to shake down the airline industry by charging them a surtax on their emissions as they fly tourists and businessmen to that beknighted continent. Most of the exchanges that sold the credits have since closed.
The infamous “Cap-and-Trade” legislation that thankfully died in Congress was part of this scam.
We now know that the document theft was either perpetrated or abetted by Dr. Peter E. Gleick, a water and climate analyst, and founder of the Pacific Institute. A contributor to Huffington Post and prolific castigator of global warming “skeptics” and “deniers”, Dr. Gleick has admitted his part in the effort to depict The Heartland Institute, its board and its donors as part of the worldwide conspiracy to debunk the hoax.
Since 2008 Heartland has sponsored six conferences that brought together scientists and others who presented ample evidence of the absurdity that carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gases” was causing the Earth to heat up. Unfortunately for the real IPCC conspirators, the Earth entered a natural cooling cycle in 1998 and, in 2009, thousands of email exchanges between the IPCC scientists were posted to the Internet revealing their growing panic over the failure of Mother Nature to cooperate with their lies, most if not all of which were based on bogus computer models.
Even The New York Times that had trumpeted the false allegations based on the purloined documents, published a Feb. 20 article, “Activist Says He Lied to Obtain Climate Papers” reporting that “Dr. Gleick distributed the documents to several well-known bloggers and activists who support the work of mainstream climate scientists and who have documented the Heartland Institute as a center of climate change denial.”
The Times is incapable of not slandering organizations and individuals who have fought long and hard to rip the mask of respectability from the perpetrators of the hoax. The “mainstream scientists” to whom it refers are, of course, the IPCC scientists behind the hoax. “Climate change denial” is nothing less than the propagation of the truth about the hoax.
For me, the most interesting aspect of all this has been the way The Heartland Institute has responded to Dr. Glieck’s chicanery. From the moment that documents, real, altered and fake, were posted on sites like DeSmogBlog.com and others, Heartland’s president, Joe Bast, went after the then-unknown identity of the person who secured the documents threatening legal action.
When Dr. Glieck publicly admitted his part in a Huffington Post statement, Bast released a statement saying, “Gleick’s crime was a serious one. The documents he admits stealing contained personal information about Heartland’s staff members, donors, and allies, the release of which has violated their privacy and endangered their personal safety.”
The key word in Bast’s statement is “crime.” As John Sullivan, a British-based attorney and an active “denier”, author and blogger, noted, Bast said “A mere apology is not enough to undo the damage”, adding that Dr. Gleick faces being financially ruined by a civil prosecution and “is also liable to a criminal investigation as such falsification of documents is a well-known brand of white collar crime.”
Some time ago I wrote a commentary saying that some of the global warming conspirators needed to go to jail for their crimes. As events unfold, that yet may occur insofar as they were the recipients of public funding and United Nations support as the IPCC published their false “science” amidst alarmist global warming claims.
Perhaps their greatest crime was the debasement of meteorological and climate science. Beyond that, their attacks on the reputation of the brave scientists who stepped forward to refute them is the very definition of slander and liable. The New York Times, Newsweek, Time, the National Geographic, and other “mainstream” news publications will unfortunately be given a pass for advancing their lies even to this day.
The Heartland director’s meeting was devoted to a program to deal with the torrent of false teaching in our nation’s schools intended to warp the perceptions and knowledge of students regarding global warming. That, too, is part of the crime committed against a national and worldwide population that was deliberately misled.
The warmists are in retreat and for that everyone owes a great debt of gratitude to The Heartland Institute and all the others who joined in the effort to refute the greatest hoax of the modern era.
Almost exactly two years since damning email messages were released from Great Britain’s University of East Anglia showing a pattern of deception and collusion between scientists involved in spreading the global warming myth, a new batch of such correspondence has emerged that seems destined to get as little press coverage as the original ClimateGate scandal did in November 2009.
James Delingpole reported in Britain’s Telegraph Tuesday:
Breaking news: two years after the Climategate, a further batch of emails has been leaked onto the internet by a person – or persons – unknown. And as before, they show the “scientists” at the heart of the Man-Made Global Warming industry in a most unflattering light. Michael Mann, Phil Jones, Ben Santer, Tom Wigley, Kevin Trenberth, Keith Briffa – all your favourite Climategate characters are here, once again caught red-handed in a series of emails exaggerating the extent of Anthropogenic Global Warming, while privately admitting to one another that the evidence is nowhere near as a strong as they’d like it to be.
Oregon State Rep. Richardson’s Newsletter
October 10, 2011
Ending Federal Timber Payments to Oregon;
Economic Collapse of Oregon Rural Counties,
A Statewide Concern
I am Dennis Richardson, a Co-Chair of Oregon’s Joint Senate-House Ways & Means Committee, and I write this newsletter on issues of significance for all Oregonians.
If you aren’t hungry or worried about your next meal as you read this, be grateful. One of every five Oregonians is now receiving food stamps.
If you aren’t checking Craigslist for a job or sending out resumes, be thankful. Almost ten percent of Oregon’s workforce is in the unemployment line.
Somber statistics, but the real tragedy, the deepest devastation lies in Oregon’s rural counties. And it’s about to get worse, much worse.
Notwithstanding the bipartisan coalition of Oregon’s federal elected officials who are working to extend federal timber payments, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack predicted extending benefits is not likely to occur. Secretary Vilsack during his recent visit to Oregon stated that the federal program that provided as much as $253 million a year in payments to rural Oregon counties, the Secure Rural Schools Act, will not survive the Congressional super committee’s work to cut $1.5 trillion from the federal budget deficit.
If you live in an urban area and you still have a job and a home, maybe you don’t care that this will likely bankrupt at least two Oregon counties. Maybe you don’t have time to worry about rural unemployment rates that have hovered near 20 percent for almost two decades.
But if you do care, then before you leave for work or go out for lunch, take a close-up look at poverty in our state; take a moment to google Curry County or Coos County, or for that matter just view the sweeping satellite image of our state – nearly half of which is blanketed with riches, deep green forests—Oregon’s richest natural resource.
And yet these are Oregon’s poorest areas, where methamphetamine destroys already broken lives, where hopelessness evicts the young and ambitious, where urban idealism has outspent and outlawed rural initiative. Where generations of hard-working timber families once labored and thrived, depression now is a way of life.
Imagine if you lived in the midst of the natural resources necessary to save yourself and your family, and were ordered to abandon your tools, your dreams, and your community. Consider how demoralizing to be a fourth generation logger, out of work because of legal challenges to timber sales, who must stand by and watch Oregon’s forests in thick, black, carbon-laden smoke, as millions of acres are consumed in raging forest fires. It wasn’t intended to be this way.
Rural Oregonians acted in good faith and believed in their elected leaders when they helped negotiate President Clinton’s 1994 Northwest Forest Plan, but since then teams of environmental lawyers have blocked the timber sales, closed the mills, and thwarted alternative recreation plans, leaving rural Oregon underemployed and dependent on government hand-outs.
How could the urban elected officials who set the agenda for our federal forests turn away from our most plentiful renewable resource? How could they ignore our comparative advantage over other states? Who is responsible for Oregon’s rural poverty, high unemployment rate and declining income? How did this happen?
During the 1980s and 90s timber revenues from federal forests in rural Oregon counties plummeted. Well-funded “eco-elites” [If this term offends you, see Note below.] shut down Oregon’s timber harvests by obtaining federal court rulings over the endangered species listing of the spotted owl. More than 100 mills closed. Thousands of family wage jobs were eliminated, drying up incomes and businesses in small mill towns across our state. Annual timber harvests now hover at around 10 percent of levels associated with a more thriving Oregon. Ironically, Oregon’s population of spotted owls continues to dwindle.
Faced with economic disaster from the loss of timber harvest revenues, rural counties turned to Congress for a solution. Rather than correcting the misuse of the Endangered Species Act, Congress approved the Secure Rural Schools Act, which temporarily supplanted the lost income that once funded rural schools, government, and other essential services.
Instead of continuing to fund county services from timber harvest revenues, rural counties were paid hundreds of millions of dollars in federal welfare payments.
The counties were ordered to develop alternative economic plans. Having achieved their goals of making Oregon’s rich forests of renewable timber legally off-limits and unavailable to be managed or harvested, Portland’s urban eco-elites promptly turned their backs and abandoned the counties to fend for themselves with meager resources.
For the past decade, politicians and the environmentalists have allowed rural Oregon counties to deteriorate and become ever more dependent on government handouts. Now, in the face of massive federal deficits, nobody wants to defend any longer what are essentially welfare payments to counties in 40 states.
Portland and Oregon’s other major cities should wake up. The last federal timber welfare payment checks are being issued, and they will mark the end of the primary source of revenue to some of Oregon’s rural counties. There will be consequences felt in Portland, Salem and Eugene from the bankruptcy of Oregon rural counties. As the urban eco-elites watch placidly from the sidelines, they should realize this rural economic meltdown will financially affect their schools, their county services, and their tax rates. State government is already being asked to intervene. What will be the cost and how should we respond?
The solution is clear. Ignoring Oregon’s vast timber resources is a failed policy and must be reversed. Democrat leaders now must “man-up” and face their coalition of environmental supporters and say, “No more lawsuits. Our neighbors are suffering; our rural communities are collapsing; our rural counties must be saved. We must moderate our forest policy.”
Action is needed now. Words are not enough. The federal government controls 53 percent of Oregon land, and rural counties depended on effective and productive management of those resources. They have been abandoned and betrayed.
The truth stares rural folks in the face day and night. There are no alternatives. There is no replacement economy. There is only the forest—one of the richest, greenest, fastest growing forests in the world.
There is only one solution – it’s vast, green, and sustainable. Oregon needs a new forest timber policy. The particulars of a new Oregon timber policy must be hammered out between the state and federal government. It is not working to have the future of Oregon’s rural counties controlled three thousand miles away in Washington, D.C.
What should Oregon’s new timber policy look like? One proposal is to place control of Oregon’s federal forests with the counties in which they are located. In addition, to provide funding to Oregon’s revenue-starved timber counties Oregon’s Congressional Representatives Peter DeFazio and Greg Walden have proposed offering long-term leases on up to 1 million acres of Oregon’s federal timber land that is currently managed by the Federal BLM. A third idea is to have Oregon’s federal forests placed in a trust with Oregon assuming management and control of the timber assets.
Regardless of the final terms of the new Oregon timber policy, safeguards must be included that will stop the use of our federal courts as an eco-elitist weapon against responsible timber harvesting.
The time has come to reopen Oregon’s forests in a responsible manner. The time has come to reclaim our bounty, our birthright, and rebuild Oregon’s natural resource-based economy. The economic future of both rural and urban Oregon depends upon it.
P.S. If you have comments to share, please do so at: www.oregontransformation.com
P.P.S. Thanks to the Editors for publishing this article in the October 9, 2011 edition of The Oregonian.
NOTE: It is difficult to find an acceptable term for those environmental/ecological activists whose focus is on maintaining pristine forests regardless of the economic consequences or the forest conflagrations such policies may cause. Since those included in the term “eco-elites” were likely to be offended by any appellation I might use, this one will have to do until I can find a more suitable term. Suggestions are welcomed.
Oregon Transformation: The Oregon Transformation Project (OTP) continues to serve as a clearing house for ideas to help promote Oregon’s economic recovery. With the right ideas and enough concerned citizens to help implement them, we can rebuild a robust private sector, which is essential to maintaining Oregon’s quality of life. OTP has just released a new T.V. commercial to help recruit interested Oregonians in joining OTP’s visionary efforts. If you are interested in seeing it, Click here.
To hear real Oregonians tell their stories, and to sign up for OTP’s weekly Flashfacts, please visit www.oregontransformation.com.
Stay informed about Oregon Legislature: To keep up on what is going on at the Oregon Capitol and in District 4, please subscribe to my newsletters by email and YouTube, like my Facebook page, and follow me on Twitter for regular updates.
As Citizens of Oregon, we are concerned with our local government being a member of ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability. ICLEI prior to 2003 was known as The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. For political reasons, the organization name was changed to diminish the obvious United Nations roots. ICLEI has morphed their identity into what is now called Local Governments for Sustainablility . ICLEI / Local Governments for Sustainability is an “NGO“.
Why should this matter to you? ICLEI is one part of the effort by the United Nations to implement Agenda 21 . It is the practical application of the self described Socialists and Communist inspired “Earth Charter“… the strategy to use “environmentalism” as the excuse for the exchange of personal liberty for Statist control and domination throughout the globe.
Agenda 21 is a 40 chapter document which is a means of taking away your personal property under the auspices of environmental initiatives- without Congressional approval. It is a Trojan horse and we, as concerned citizens of Oregon, should stand together and contact our County Commissioners, Mayor’s, City Council’s and other agency’s determined to press Agenda 21 mandates on our local communities. We must contact all State, County and City officials to voice our concerns that they are involved with ICLEI, UN Agenda 21, and Sustainable Development. It is an outgrowth of the radical “Earth First” movement.
We are NOT against saving energy and other environmental/conservation issues-Oregon Citizens have been saving energy and supporting conservation programs LONG before ICLEI’s inception.
GOL’S MISSION STATEMENT: To restore Constitutional governance at the local level in Oregon.
“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”
Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, l992
Strobe Talbot was referring to Agenda 21. Read factual background and disturbing, substantiated efforts to impose Agenda 21.. a plan funded by George Soros and similar “Globalist” interests.
Here is an example from Austin, Texas. Testimony re: Agenda 21 (Council hears testimony, and imposes the ordinance anyway)
The Wildland Project
It is vital to understand that the Wildlands Project is just one of many elements of control that are being put into place by global socialists to control the population. Relocation of wildlife, large wilderness and roadless areas, and the relocation of populations into “sustainable communities” are all a part of the goal of implementing Agenda 21, or the United Nations Agenda for the 21st Century.
Born out of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Agenda 21 serves as the comprehensive blueprint for achieving “sustainable development”. It’s many tentacles are being put into place by the agencies of the U.S. government such as the State Department, the Department of Energy, the Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife, Bureau of Land Management, etc. It is also being aided along by countless non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
It’s important to note that though the planners are bypassing congress in their implementation of the plan, it can be stopped at the state and local levels.
The Agenda 21 document contains 40 chapters which address issues that range from controlling water, land, air, and minerals, to policy recommendations for disposal of toxic and hazardous wastes, to technology management and transfer. There are many other facets of the program including managing the role of women and children, and the role of indigenous people in the process.
In short, it is an all-encompassing, revolutionary plan for controlling the entire population of earth, marketed under the slick packaging of environmental and ecological necessity.
One only has to read the first couple of chapters to begin to get the sense of the socialist roots of the plan. It calls on all “developed” countries, such as the United States, to come to the aid of “developing” countries. In other words, the playing field is to be leveled. The rich, industrialized countries will help fund the destitute, impoverished countries, transferring the technology and wealth necessary to achieve sustainable development.
It is the obvious opinion of these global marxists, that humans are the scourge of the earth. They contend that we are destroying everything around us. If we are not stopped, they lament, future generations will be doomed to live in world-wide poverty, while not being able to enjoy a vast eco-system, clean air, clean water, etc.
In other words, your human activity must be significantly curtailed, or — to be more blunt — every aspect of your life must be controlled, with a heavy hand, to ensure that you are not going to jeopardize the earth’s blessings for future generations.
Ironically, the very essence of the program will rob future generations of their ability to enjoy the fullness of the earth and its resources, if its architects are successful in achieving their goals. It is the goal of these designers to place a large majority of the earth off limits to human beings, with the population being crammed into sustainable communities, where nearly everything a resident needs will be within a 5 mile radius (so automobiles will be unnecessary).
It will also rob future generations of their ability to own and control the land, which is the foundation of all individual liberty.
Already, we are seeing massive areas of land being placed under restrictions called “conservation easements”, “scenic byways”, “protected areas”, “biosphere reserves”, “wildlife refuges”, etc. The names are varied and plentiful, but the result is always the same: More government control; less human freedom.
This brings us back to rewilding, or as they call it “The Wildlands Project”.