Copenhagen pigeon drop
December 16, 2009
The pigeon drop is a scam in which two confidence men—the “catch” and the “accomplice”—persuade a victim—the “pigeon”—to believe they found some money in a bag and the three of them can split it and keep it. With disarmingly rational arguments they convince the victim that everybody should contribute money from their own pocket as “collateral” until they can spend their newfound treasure.
Then they give the victim the bag of money to hold—making him feel secure—and leave. Eventually the victim gets curious, peeks into the bag, and discovers nothing but newspaper scraps, whereupon the realization finally dawns that he has been fleeced by con men.
You are the pigeon in this story so pay attention.
Almost three years ago I started this website because I was angered by the lies and shenanigans of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). My first column, on February 4, 2007, was about the IPCC’s “Fourth Assessment Report” which was obviously—to me anyway—dishonest political propaganda masquerading as science.
In the years since then I have never written on the subject again, which seems kind of odd even to me since it was the website’s instigating issue. There are two reasons I haven’t written another column about Global Warming:
Number one, everything I said three years ago has been proven correct and I thought maybe I could be the Rocky Marciano of climate change, retiring undefeated.
Seriously, there isn’t much about this subject that’s new, and there isn’t much that doesn’t sound elementary and obvious. How many ways are there to say, “The climate isn’t getting warmer, if it was that wouldn’t necessarily be a bad or abnormal thing, carbon has very little to do with it anyway, and oh by the way the Global Warming scientists are lying through their teeth?” If you honestly study the subject with an open mind—and have an IQ above 50—you reach the inevitable conclusion that Global Warming is a giant scam initiated and promulgated by people with political, not scientific, agendas.
Number two, there are people tackling the issue every day who are in better positions to address the issue than me. First on that list is Steve McIntyre with his Climate Audit website. If there was any justice in the world, or any common sense on the Nobel Prize Committees, it would be Steve McIntyre who owns a Nobel medal, not Al “Moron” Gore. The world owes Mr. McIntyre a great debt because the Global Warming scam was well on its way to fruition when this polite retired mathematician said, “Hold on a second, something about this doesn’t make sense,” and started a website where people could discuss climate statistics. Climate Audit has repeatedly exposed the Global Warming crowd and much of that exposure has revealed fraud and/or incompetence.
(So which is it, fraud or incompetence? You be the judge. Last year, James “St. James the Muzzled” Hansen, of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said it was a mistake that Siberia’s temperatures for September were entered into the NASA database as the temperatures for October. Siberia comprises the largest land area in the database, and September’s temperatures are much warmer than October’s, and the “mistake”—like all of Hansen’s “mistakes”—warped the planet’s apparent climate toward the warm side. Internet sleuths like McIntyre found the error and forced NASA to make corrections. Is it reasonable to assume that Hansen, a man whose professional career revolves around temperature data, would fail to notice that October’s numbers were exactly the same as September’s?)
On JPAttitude's Global warming page you can find a list of other websites like McIntyre’s plus my own collection of links to various articles, papers, and resources. But if all that seems too much, I beg you to look at just one thing, this series of graphs:
Temperatures from ice cores.
Please, look at them. It won’t take more than a minute and this is the easiest way to get a feel for the climate issue. I don’t think anybody can look at these graphs (which plot raw unadjusted temperature data, not the massaged and “corrected” crap used by Michael Mann, James Hansen, Phil Jones, and the rest of the IPCC clique) without realizing that Global Warming is no threat to the planet. On the contrary, you will probably come away worried about global cooling—a much more rational worry if you lean toward Chicken Little millennium-scale doomsday scenarios as a hobby.
Hey, to each his own.
Four weeks ago, computer hackers posted on the Internet 60 megabytes of emails and 100 megabytes of other information from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU), the primary repository for actual temperature readings in the world. The emails reveal fraud in temperature records, attempts to hide cooling trends, censorship of papers which contradict Global Warming theory, and collusion with other climate centers around the world to fudge the data and control the IPCC. Phil Jones, the director of the CRU, has been forced to step down while East Anglia investigates, Michael Mann is being investigated at Penn State, and the scandal has spread to climate centers around the world. Even NASA is under fire.
To top it off, we also learned that the CRU threw away a century and half of actual temperature data, leaving us with only their “corrected” temperatures. Gee, that’s not suspicious, is it?
This worldwide scandal—predictably named “Climategate” (what else?)—thoroughly indicts the Global Warming theory.
I’m curious: have you even heard about Climategate? It’s a huge story, bigger than Tiger Woods’ infidelity, but if you rely upon the American mainstream media for information you know nothing about it because the Big 3 television networks—ABC, NBC, and CBS—as well as CNN and the big newspapers like the New York Times, refuse to cover it. Absolutely refuse. They don’t want you to know about Climategate because their political agenda is sympathetic to the Global Warming agenda, and you—you, the taxpayer of any industrialized first-world western nation—are the pigeon in the gargantuan con being perpetrated this week in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ah yes, Copenhagen...
Copenhagen is where the 15th United Nations Climate Conference has been underway since last Monday. Over 15,000 participants from almost 200 countries have flown into Denmark—many of them on private jets—to enjoy free hookers and discuss reducing yours and my “carbon footprint.”
(Personally, I don’t have a carbon footprint unless I step in dog poop accidentally, and I wrote a strongly-worded letter to that effect and mailed it to Denmark, but so far no response. Hopefully I didn’t offend anybody. Ever since Hamlet the Danes have been ultra-sensitive to comments about stuff that smells.)
The participants in Copenhagen and Global Warming cultists worldwide are making a concerted effort to pretend that Climategate doesn’t matter. It’s downright creepy to watch, sort of like watching Stepford wives tell you how happy they are.
Speaking for the White House, climate czar Carol Browner said, “I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real.”
2,500 scientists? She means the 2,500 scientists who, according to legend, were signatories to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report. Not to confuse our great climate czar with facts, but only 51 actually signed the stupid thing, many of the scientists counted as part of the 2,500 never supported the report’s overall conclusions in the first place, and some of them have completely reversed course since 2007, gone over to the Dark Side, and are now Global Warming skeptics.
And oh, by the way Ms. Browner, I can show you 31,000 scientists who adamantly deny that Global Warming is valid science, and over 700 skeptics actively involved in climate-related fields. But who’s counting?
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said, “I think scientists are clear on the science. I think many on Capitol Hill are clear on the science. I think that this notion that there is some debate on the science is kind of silly.”
Silly? Since when is debate on any scientific theory silly? But hey, as long as the geniuses on Capitol Hill are clear on the science, what else matters, right?
The head of the IPCC itself, Rajendra Kumar Pachauri, said, “The processes in the IPCC are so robust, so inclusive, that even if an author or two has a particular bias it is completely unlikely that bias will find its way into the IPCC report.”
“An author or two?” Are you kidding? The CRU emails reveal an international conspiracy and the conspirators are the very men who wrote the IPCC report! For God’s sake, how dare this two-bit U.N bureaucrat use the word “inclusive” when the emails show the fraudsters working to ostracize and marginalize any scientist who dared to express skepticism.
(I hate to be mean, but doggone it I have a serious question: is Pachauri the Geiko caveman?)
Boy genius Al Gore, being a former senator, has no formal allegiance to the truth, so he waded right into the fray with blatant lies. “I haven’t read all the e-mails, but the most recent one is more than 10 years old. These private exchanges between these scientists do not in any way cause any question about the scientific consensus,” he said in an interview with Slate.
Never mind that many of the emails are specifically about the lack of consensus, and the conspirators’ attempts to hide that lack of consensus. Never mind that. His most blatant lie is that the most recent email is ten years old. The most recent email was sent November 12th.
Gee, wouldn't you think the inventor of the Internet would realize that emails have dates on them? So lying about how old they are is futile?
Ed Begley, Jr., possibly the only human in the world who can make Al Gore look smart, obviously knew what the damage control talking points were. You can watch him on Fox News screeching over and over—eight times, actually—that “peer reviewed papers are all that matters!”
Okay, Ed, calm down, grab a breath, and listen: the Climategate emails show the Global Warming conspirators preventing skeptical papers from being published, preventing skeptical papers from being included in the IPCC report, threatening publications with boycott if they published skeptical papers, and then pressuring publications which published skeptical papers anyway to fire their editors. So your hissy fit about peer reviewed papers is, well, stupid.
By the way, in spite of the cacophony of voices hysterically claiming otherwise, there are plenty of peer-reviewed papers which call into question the theory of Global Warming. I already have six of them listed on my GW webpage and that was only the ones I could understand. And I just started the list five minutes ago.
Here’s what they want to do in Copenhagen this week. They want to lower your standard of living which will force your carbon emissions to decrease. They will do this by taxing the living shit out of any person, company, or industry that uses carbon in any way, shape, or form. This won’t make a gnat’s ass worth of difference to the climate (they freely admit this) but it will require unprecedented and rigorous control of your life—something socialists and communists lust after like normal men lust after Halle Berry—and it will result in truly massive transfers of wealth to shadowy “carbon trading markets.”
Liberals like Obama and Global Warming scientists like James Hansen are playing the “catch” role in this con game. The lures they dangle are “green jobs” and a “healthier fossil-fuel-free economy” and a cleaner environment somewhere down the line—and the polar bears won’t drown. That’s the bag of money they found, and just like any good con man playing the “accomplice” in a pigeon drop, the United Nations is pretending to offer expert advice, telling you the bag of money is yours to spend if your national leaders sign a global climate treaty. That’s all. After that everybody is supposed to sit back and wait the necessary amount of time.
All they need is a little collateral from everybody—mostly from the United States, of course, the U.S. being the primary pigeon in this con game—to make sure everybody stays honest. That’s the Cap ’n’ Tax that Obama and the Democrats want to impose. Much of that money they will simply spend, because that’s what politicians do, but much of it will be transferred into the afore-mentioned shadowy Bizarro-World “carbon trading markets” where the switch will take place.
Did I mention that part? There’s always a switch in a pigeon drop. That’s how the pigeon ends up holding a bag with no money in it. Duh.
Oh, they’ll make you feel good about the whole thing. After all, New York is the investment trading capital of the world, so most of the “carbon trading” will be right here within your reach, where you can see it and touch it. You’ll feel like you are the one holding the bag of collateral, so you’ll feel secure.
Remember, that’s part of the con. Let the pigeon hold the bag.
Twenty or thirty years down the road, when you get curious, when you finally take a peek into the bag of goodies you were promised, after we’ve dumped a few trillion dollars of “collateral” into this con game, I can promise you without a shred of doubt what you will find in the bag you’ve been holding with eager anticipation.
Nothing but newspaper clippings.
From Reno, Nevada, USA
Then they give the victim the bag of money to hold—making him feel secure—and leave. Eventually the victim gets curious, peeks into the bag, and discovers nothing but newspaper scraps, whereupon the realization finally dawns that he has been fleeced by con men.
You are the pigeon in this story so pay attention.
Almost three years ago I started this website because I was angered by the lies and shenanigans of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). My first column, on February 4, 2007, was about the IPCC’s “Fourth Assessment Report” which was obviously—to me anyway—dishonest political propaganda masquerading as science.
In the years since then I have never written on the subject again, which seems kind of odd even to me since it was the website’s instigating issue. There are two reasons I haven’t written another column about Global Warming:
Number one, everything I said three years ago has been proven correct and I thought maybe I could be the Rocky Marciano of climate change, retiring undefeated.
Seriously, there isn’t much about this subject that’s new, and there isn’t much that doesn’t sound elementary and obvious. How many ways are there to say, “The climate isn’t getting warmer, if it was that wouldn’t necessarily be a bad or abnormal thing, carbon has very little to do with it anyway, and oh by the way the Global Warming scientists are lying through their teeth?” If you honestly study the subject with an open mind—and have an IQ above 50—you reach the inevitable conclusion that Global Warming is a giant scam initiated and promulgated by people with political, not scientific, agendas.
Number two, there are people tackling the issue every day who are in better positions to address the issue than me. First on that list is Steve McIntyre with his Climate Audit website. If there was any justice in the world, or any common sense on the Nobel Prize Committees, it would be Steve McIntyre who owns a Nobel medal, not Al “Moron” Gore. The world owes Mr. McIntyre a great debt because the Global Warming scam was well on its way to fruition when this polite retired mathematician said, “Hold on a second, something about this doesn’t make sense,” and started a website where people could discuss climate statistics. Climate Audit has repeatedly exposed the Global Warming crowd and much of that exposure has revealed fraud and/or incompetence.
(So which is it, fraud or incompetence? You be the judge. Last year, James “St. James the Muzzled” Hansen, of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said it was a mistake that Siberia’s temperatures for September were entered into the NASA database as the temperatures for October. Siberia comprises the largest land area in the database, and September’s temperatures are much warmer than October’s, and the “mistake”—like all of Hansen’s “mistakes”—warped the planet’s apparent climate toward the warm side. Internet sleuths like McIntyre found the error and forced NASA to make corrections. Is it reasonable to assume that Hansen, a man whose professional career revolves around temperature data, would fail to notice that October’s numbers were exactly the same as September’s?)
On JPAttitude's Global warming page you can find a list of other websites like McIntyre’s plus my own collection of links to various articles, papers, and resources. But if all that seems too much, I beg you to look at just one thing, this series of graphs:
Temperatures from ice cores.
Please, look at them. It won’t take more than a minute and this is the easiest way to get a feel for the climate issue. I don’t think anybody can look at these graphs (which plot raw unadjusted temperature data, not the massaged and “corrected” crap used by Michael Mann, James Hansen, Phil Jones, and the rest of the IPCC clique) without realizing that Global Warming is no threat to the planet. On the contrary, you will probably come away worried about global cooling—a much more rational worry if you lean toward Chicken Little millennium-scale doomsday scenarios as a hobby.
Hey, to each his own.
Four weeks ago, computer hackers posted on the Internet 60 megabytes of emails and 100 megabytes of other information from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU), the primary repository for actual temperature readings in the world. The emails reveal fraud in temperature records, attempts to hide cooling trends, censorship of papers which contradict Global Warming theory, and collusion with other climate centers around the world to fudge the data and control the IPCC. Phil Jones, the director of the CRU, has been forced to step down while East Anglia investigates, Michael Mann is being investigated at Penn State, and the scandal has spread to climate centers around the world. Even NASA is under fire.
To top it off, we also learned that the CRU threw away a century and half of actual temperature data, leaving us with only their “corrected” temperatures. Gee, that’s not suspicious, is it?
This worldwide scandal—predictably named “Climategate” (what else?)—thoroughly indicts the Global Warming theory.
I’m curious: have you even heard about Climategate? It’s a huge story, bigger than Tiger Woods’ infidelity, but if you rely upon the American mainstream media for information you know nothing about it because the Big 3 television networks—ABC, NBC, and CBS—as well as CNN and the big newspapers like the New York Times, refuse to cover it. Absolutely refuse. They don’t want you to know about Climategate because their political agenda is sympathetic to the Global Warming agenda, and you—you, the taxpayer of any industrialized first-world western nation—are the pigeon in the gargantuan con being perpetrated this week in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ah yes, Copenhagen...
Copenhagen is where the 15th United Nations Climate Conference has been underway since last Monday. Over 15,000 participants from almost 200 countries have flown into Denmark—many of them on private jets—to enjoy free hookers and discuss reducing yours and my “carbon footprint.”
(Personally, I don’t have a carbon footprint unless I step in dog poop accidentally, and I wrote a strongly-worded letter to that effect and mailed it to Denmark, but so far no response. Hopefully I didn’t offend anybody. Ever since Hamlet the Danes have been ultra-sensitive to comments about stuff that smells.)
The participants in Copenhagen and Global Warming cultists worldwide are making a concerted effort to pretend that Climategate doesn’t matter. It’s downright creepy to watch, sort of like watching Stepford wives tell you how happy they are.
Speaking for the White House, climate czar Carol Browner said, “I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real.”
2,500 scientists? She means the 2,500 scientists who, according to legend, were signatories to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report. Not to confuse our great climate czar with facts, but only 51 actually signed the stupid thing, many of the scientists counted as part of the 2,500 never supported the report’s overall conclusions in the first place, and some of them have completely reversed course since 2007, gone over to the Dark Side, and are now Global Warming skeptics.
And oh, by the way Ms. Browner, I can show you 31,000 scientists who adamantly deny that Global Warming is valid science, and over 700 skeptics actively involved in climate-related fields. But who’s counting?
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said, “I think scientists are clear on the science. I think many on Capitol Hill are clear on the science. I think that this notion that there is some debate on the science is kind of silly.”
Silly? Since when is debate on any scientific theory silly? But hey, as long as the geniuses on Capitol Hill are clear on the science, what else matters, right?
The head of the IPCC itself, Rajendra Kumar Pachauri, said, “The processes in the IPCC are so robust, so inclusive, that even if an author or two has a particular bias it is completely unlikely that bias will find its way into the IPCC report.”
“An author or two?” Are you kidding? The CRU emails reveal an international conspiracy and the conspirators are the very men who wrote the IPCC report! For God’s sake, how dare this two-bit U.N bureaucrat use the word “inclusive” when the emails show the fraudsters working to ostracize and marginalize any scientist who dared to express skepticism.
(I hate to be mean, but doggone it I have a serious question: is Pachauri the Geiko caveman?)
Boy genius Al Gore, being a former senator, has no formal allegiance to the truth, so he waded right into the fray with blatant lies. “I haven’t read all the e-mails, but the most recent one is more than 10 years old. These private exchanges between these scientists do not in any way cause any question about the scientific consensus,” he said in an interview with Slate.
Never mind that many of the emails are specifically about the lack of consensus, and the conspirators’ attempts to hide that lack of consensus. Never mind that. His most blatant lie is that the most recent email is ten years old. The most recent email was sent November 12th.
Gee, wouldn't you think the inventor of the Internet would realize that emails have dates on them? So lying about how old they are is futile?
Ed Begley, Jr., possibly the only human in the world who can make Al Gore look smart, obviously knew what the damage control talking points were. You can watch him on Fox News screeching over and over—eight times, actually—that “peer reviewed papers are all that matters!”
Okay, Ed, calm down, grab a breath, and listen: the Climategate emails show the Global Warming conspirators preventing skeptical papers from being published, preventing skeptical papers from being included in the IPCC report, threatening publications with boycott if they published skeptical papers, and then pressuring publications which published skeptical papers anyway to fire their editors. So your hissy fit about peer reviewed papers is, well, stupid.
By the way, in spite of the cacophony of voices hysterically claiming otherwise, there are plenty of peer-reviewed papers which call into question the theory of Global Warming. I already have six of them listed on my GW webpage and that was only the ones I could understand. And I just started the list five minutes ago.
Here’s what they want to do in Copenhagen this week. They want to lower your standard of living which will force your carbon emissions to decrease. They will do this by taxing the living shit out of any person, company, or industry that uses carbon in any way, shape, or form. This won’t make a gnat’s ass worth of difference to the climate (they freely admit this) but it will require unprecedented and rigorous control of your life—something socialists and communists lust after like normal men lust after Halle Berry—and it will result in truly massive transfers of wealth to shadowy “carbon trading markets.”
Liberals like Obama and Global Warming scientists like James Hansen are playing the “catch” role in this con game. The lures they dangle are “green jobs” and a “healthier fossil-fuel-free economy” and a cleaner environment somewhere down the line—and the polar bears won’t drown. That’s the bag of money they found, and just like any good con man playing the “accomplice” in a pigeon drop, the United Nations is pretending to offer expert advice, telling you the bag of money is yours to spend if your national leaders sign a global climate treaty. That’s all. After that everybody is supposed to sit back and wait the necessary amount of time.
All they need is a little collateral from everybody—mostly from the United States, of course, the U.S. being the primary pigeon in this con game—to make sure everybody stays honest. That’s the Cap ’n’ Tax that Obama and the Democrats want to impose. Much of that money they will simply spend, because that’s what politicians do, but much of it will be transferred into the afore-mentioned shadowy Bizarro-World “carbon trading markets” where the switch will take place.
Did I mention that part? There’s always a switch in a pigeon drop. That’s how the pigeon ends up holding a bag with no money in it. Duh.
Oh, they’ll make you feel good about the whole thing. After all, New York is the investment trading capital of the world, so most of the “carbon trading” will be right here within your reach, where you can see it and touch it. You’ll feel like you are the one holding the bag of collateral, so you’ll feel secure.
Remember, that’s part of the con. Let the pigeon hold the bag.
Twenty or thirty years down the road, when you get curious, when you finally take a peek into the bag of goodies you were promised, after we’ve dumped a few trillion dollars of “collateral” into this con game, I can promise you without a shred of doubt what you will find in the bag you’ve been holding with eager anticipation.
Nothing but newspaper clippings.
From Reno, Nevada, USA
December 17, 2009 - For the last year I’ve spent far too much time reading and researching the foundational bs of the liberal establishment. Before that, I was running a business and employing 20 or so people in a sucessful engineering firm. The CRA and the FED took care of that, and now I have lots of time on my hands. I’m astonished at the mind numbing level of ignorance on the left side of the political equation. Was no one paying attention in class or did [they] only take courses in French Literature and Feminist Philosophy? In the not to distant past, we tended to push these morons to the edge of the herd where they were consumed by predators before they could breed. I fear that before long, we will have to count on the efficacy of the 2nd ammendment to save us from oblivion. - Engineer of Record, Georgia
December 17, 2009 - You wrote: “one, they are all dated well into December, weeks after Climategate started”
False. The story broke circa November 20; the first article on CBSNews.com appeared a day later: [broken link] And this staff-written one appeared three days later, on November 24, hardly “well into December”: [D.M.'s personal blog]
You wrote: “two, they are all CBS Internet sites and blogs”
This is also false. The link I sent you was to a CBS Evening News segment. You can tell because, well, it says “CBS Evening News” at the top of the page: [link to CBS.com video] And this also was a CBS Evening News segment:[link to another CBS.com video]
In other words, you were wrong to say that CBS didn’t cover this story, wrong to say as you backpedaled that the coverage was only “well into December,” and wrong to say (again, backpedaling) that the coverage was only online. But will you actually apologize? - D. M., San Francisco
December 17, 2009 - “Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first ‘carbon billionaire,’ profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in...” ~The New York Times You say it’s about control, and I agree. Money and control go hand-in-hand. Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi and many others including several green companies are “investors” in global warming. The amount of money they stand to gain is insurmountable. The fact that they have the power to institute goverment policies, while standing to gain so much financially is criminal. - Samantha, Michigan
December 17, 2009 - No, it wasn’t boring at all. I don’t always read long posts because I have a short attention span. Yours kept my interest. - Deb, Missouri
December 16, 2009 - “...because the Big 3 television networks - ABC, NBC, and CBS - as well as CNN and the big newspapers like the New York Times, refuse to cover it.” Ah, yes. Networks like CBS “refuse to cover it.” Of course. Absolutely. You're entirely right. [list of links to CBS news websites] - D. M., San Francisco
December 16, 2009 - Epic post. What is the name of your blog? Is it JPAttitude? I'd like to put it on my blogroll. - Deb, Missouri
J.P. replies: Global Warming especially makes me feel the frustration. I don’t mind the obvious leftwing phonies like Hansen and Mann and Gore—there will always be such people. The frustrating part is the number of so-called scientists and academics who have fallen for the scam. All it takes is a high school education and a couple hours of reading to see how absurd the whole idea is.
December 17, 2009 - You wrote: “one, they are all dated well into December, weeks after Climategate started”
False. The story broke circa November 20; the first article on CBSNews.com appeared a day later: [broken link] And this staff-written one appeared three days later, on November 24, hardly “well into December”: [D.M.'s personal blog]
You wrote: “two, they are all CBS Internet sites and blogs”
This is also false. The link I sent you was to a CBS Evening News segment. You can tell because, well, it says “CBS Evening News” at the top of the page: [link to CBS.com video] And this also was a CBS Evening News segment:[link to another CBS.com video]
In other words, you were wrong to say that CBS didn’t cover this story, wrong to say as you backpedaled that the coverage was only “well into December,” and wrong to say (again, backpedaling) that the coverage was only online. But will you actually apologize? - D. M., San Francisco
J.P. replies: First of all, don’t send me links in a second email and pretend you sent them in your first email. Your first email was full of links dated in December, as I stated. Second, it’s kind of humorous that you conflate your own personal blog with CBS Evening News. As much as your mother may love you, you are not CBS Evening News, D.M., and neither are videos posted on CBS.com. Even when they say “CBS Evening News” at the top of the page it doesn’t mean that they ever appeared on CBS Evening News with Katie Couric. “CBS Evening News” is a brand, and they slap it on everything they can attempting to make a buck so they can pay Katie’s ridiculous salary. (It’s a futile attempt, by the way, but understandable.) I stand by my statement until you show me a video of Katie herself talking about the story... or even intoducing a segment on the story. THAT would be CBS Evening News covering Climategate, capiche? Video posted on the Internet for apologists to point to, and personal blogs written by you are not equivalent.
December 17, 2009 - “Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first ‘carbon billionaire,’ profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in...” ~The New York Times You say it’s about control, and I agree. Money and control go hand-in-hand. Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi and many others including several green companies are “investors” in global warming. The amount of money they stand to gain is insurmountable. The fact that they have the power to institute goverment policies, while standing to gain so much financially is criminal. - Samantha, Michigan
J.P. replies: The only question I have about Al Gore is whether he’s stupid and greedy, or just greedy. Does he really believe the idiotic stuff he spews to journalists?
December 17, 2009 - No, it wasn’t boring at all. I don’t always read long posts because I have a short attention span. Yours kept my interest. - Deb, Missouri
December 16, 2009 - “...because the Big 3 television networks - ABC, NBC, and CBS - as well as CNN and the big newspapers like the New York Times, refuse to cover it.” Ah, yes. Networks like CBS “refuse to cover it.” Of course. Absolutely. You're entirely right. [list of links to CBS news websites] - D. M., San Francisco
J.P. replies: That’s a mighty long list of links, D.M., but two things which make my point all over again: one, they are all dated well into December, weeks after Climategate started; and two, they are all CBS Internet sites and blogs, not CBS Nightly News with cutsie pie dum-dum Katie Couric. I guess I should have been more specific: the mainstream media is not covering Climategate in their regular mainstream venue. I also got a kick out of your first link because CBSNews.com interviews Michael Mann, one of the conspirators in this fraud, as though his viewpoint about the seriousness of the scandal is objective. That’s called spinning, not journalism.
December 16, 2009 - Epic post. What is the name of your blog? Is it JPAttitude? I'd like to put it on my blogroll. - Deb, Missouri
J.P. replies: That’s a good question. JPAttitude is what I call it, so why don’t we go with that? (Obviously I didn’t think through the whole name thing when I started a website at “JPAttitude.com” and splashed “Conservative Resources” across the top.) Thanks for the compliment, by the way. That was a compliment, right? You weren’t insinuating that it was long and boring?
