cur-mud-geon: anyone who hates hypocrisy and pretense and has the temerity to say so; anyone with the habit of pointing out unpleasant facts in an engaging and humorous manner
The hackers who penetrated the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) have done quite a service, or so it would seem.
The e-mails that have now been available for some two weeks show a select group of researchers who appear to have rigged the data they used to create the impression that global climate change is man-made and can, therefore, be controlled by man.
These researchers apparently have been able to keep bad news, critical science, out of the media by coming together to profess that global climate change was indeed real and was indeed caused by man. They belittled any contrary opinions and/or denied contrary opinion being published in the "learned journals" that were driving the bus over the global climate change bluff. It appears the researchers weren't beyond drawing conclusions that were relatively or totally unsupported.
The impression that has been created, the questions that have been raised by the unauthorized release of these e-mails, could very likely mean the end of any significant U.S. citizen support for the United Nations' effort to create a treaty to follow on the heels of the Kyoto Treaty when it expires in 2012.
There is still a significant problem, however, and that problem carries the initials of "EPA". The Obama Administration's Environmental Protection Agency is run by Carol Browner and she is anything but cowed by the e-mails that were released. To the contrary, Ms. Browner is rushing to lay on layers of administrative actions that will still create a "green" response that seems unwarranted.
The so called "science" seems to be fraught with holes but that isn't going to deter this Administration's EPA from pushing the rule set it just knows is right for us all. The science is anything but airtight but the EPA isn't about to let the lack of established and proven science get in the way of regulations run wild.
Our country is doing itself a great disservice by knowingly placing the millstone around its economic neck, to the detriment of all of us, in the name of environmental reform. We owe the Chinese a significant amount of money today that we've borrowed from them to finance our government's push into deeper and deeper debt. The idea that we will further hamstring the economy and the taxpayers by dumping ill-conceived and unnecessary regulations on top of this injury is simply difficult to comprehend.
Maybe the CRU e-mails that lay out the apparent deceptions that have run rampant in this "scientific" quest to justify a concept will begin to take a toll on the less-than-well-intentioned effort by our EPA and its enablers in the Administration. Maybe, after all, the common sense of the American people will prevail and the "we know more than you do" researchers will be put in their place.
There will be no Copenhagen Treaty for the U.S. and there should be none. The Kyoto Treaty should be left to expire without a new version being created to take its place. This should continue unless and until actual scientific research, open and proved beyond any doubt, is finally made available to us before such a travesty is simply shoved down our throats.
The idea that these e-mails are myth and shouldn't be thoroughly discussed in the mainstream media is ridiculous. Every "real" news organization ought to be all over this topic like white on rice; the absence of such a "real" media outcry to date suggests that it has also been among the accomplices, and it just may suggest that the "real" media knew full well that this was not "proven" science. At best, it suggests a media that wasn't interested in confirming that the science was proved beyond a reasonable doubt before we began to cripple our economy by not drilling for oil, and by creating a mythological "carbon marketplace".
The mainstream media should have been more aggressive in demanding proof from former vice president Al Gore as he began touring the world stages with his Power Point slide show. It is interesting to note that he has never engaged in a meaningful debate; that seems to suggest he didn't have the necessary facts to support his position in such a venue. There is more than sufficient blame to go around, but this is the time for saner minds to prevail. Let us hope that happens, and that it happens soon.
Congress should rein in the EPA and do so now.