[cite as: F. Bi. 2009. Climategate, where unauthorized eavesdropping is a heroic deed. Intl. J. Inact., 2:101]
Remember the Watergate scandal, in which the then US President Richard Nixon was forced to resign after being implicated in wiretapping attempts on the political opposition? Now the global warming inactivists are calling the recent cyber-attack against CRU by the name “Climategate”. Apparently they now think that unauthorized eavesdropping is a very heroic and noble deed.
In any case, the ‘independent, non-partisan’ climate inactivist groups such as the International Climate ‘Science’ Coalition and the Heartland Institute have lost no time trying to report ‘independently’ and ‘non-partisan-ly’ on the “Climategate” affair. Joseph Bast of Heartland writes:
Last week, someone (probably a whistle-blower at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, England) released emails and other documents written by Phil Jones, Michael Mann, and other leading scientists who edit and control the content of the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). […]
It is possible that the emails and other documents [leaked from CRU] aren’t as damning as they appear to be on first look. […] Looking at how past disclosures of fraud in the global warming debate have been dismissed or ignored by the mainstream media leads me to suspect they will try to sweep this, too, under the rug.
No, Joseph. They’re not damning even on first look. That’s why Bast needs to tell you what to think about the e-mails before you ‘read them for yourself’.
International Journal of Inactivism (now supplanted by Decoding SwiftHack) 
(Benzopf: No brainless trolling.)
Comment by frankbi — 2009/11/25 @ 13:21 |
As has been pointed out elsewhere, in the Watergate case, the victims of the breakin didn’t go on to be prosecuted by Nixon and his henchmen on the basis of the materials that they’d stolen. Something very like the opposite is happening in the Climategate case, but then, when denialists are involved, such topsy-turviedom is to be expected.
Comment by Lars — 2009/12/03 @ 01:38 |
This reminds me of the newly elected small-town mayor(?), back around 2003, who found that her nude photo sporting the mayor’s medallion around her neck – taken by her husband in their home, kept (only) on a home computer – had been circulated to the local news media; and the usual blowhards proclaimed that she should step down, since the gravity of the position had been compromised.
(some of this may be inaccurate; I don’t know what we’d search for, to find the news story)
Comment by Anna Haynes — 2009/12/05 @ 20:28 |
(hkyson: no spewing of talking points.)
Comment by frankbi — 2009/12/12 @ 20:12 |