The Copenhagen Climate Jamboree is over.

[1] Many politicians claim that important agreements were reached.  Those that say so are predominantly from developed nations, while politicians from underdeveloped nations are generally unhappy that nothing in the agreements resulted in firm commitments for having the developed nations atone for their climate debt by transferring wealth from the developed nations to the under-developed nations.

The agreement that is being touted is in the main that,

• Future global temperature increases will be limited to 2 degrees Celsius.
• Initially, $30 billion a year are to be transferred to underdeveloped nations, with that amount of money supposedly increasing a few years down the road to $100 billion a year, so as to assist underdeveloped nations with the financial effort required to cope with the consequences of rising global temperatures and sea levels.

It seems that the Copenhagen Climate Summit did not deal with the vital facts that,

1. No thermostat exists that permits the controlling of global temperature fluctuations.
2. No floodgates exist that permit the controlling of sea levels.

Those are relatively minor shortcomings.  It is of far greater importance that, other than on the side-lines, at the Copenhagen Climate Summit there was a complete lack of any discussions relating to the causes of changes in global temperature trends.  Of even greater importance is the total lack of any discussion at the Climate Summit of the lack of proof that changes or acceleration of climate changes are truly man-made.

The 15,000 to 20,000 delegates to the Copenhagen Climate Summit had their minds firmly made up: the globe is warming, the warming is catastrophic, and it is man-made. No facts to the contrary could possibly confuse the delegates to the Climate Summit.

Nevertheless, all along, for years already, and increasingly so during the past few years, solid evidence had been provided by hundreds of credible and reputable climate scientist from more than 40 nations that shows that,

• While for the last nine years the Globe has been experiencing a cooling trend, [2] the atmospheric CO2 level has been steadily and inexorably on the rise (the minuscule portion of which that is man-made is the alleged culprit of the alleged run-away global warming).
• There is no proof that CO2 causes global warming. While the absence of evidence is not valid evidence of the absence of proof, there is evidence that global increases in temperature precede global increases in atmospheric CO2. It follows that increases in CO2 levels are most likely not the only or even major reason why there have been fluctuations in global temperature.
• While the man-made portion of CO2 emissions is minuscule (0.038% of the atmosphere), it cannot be and has not been ascertained that it has a noticeable influence on global temperature trends.
• The global temperature increase of about 0.6 degrees Celsius during the 20th century is [3] a relatively small and almost imperceptible hiccup at the end of intervals spanning thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or millions of years.

Contrary to that evidence, the IPCC — the instigator of the climate hysteria with which the Copenhagen Climate Summit occupied itself — persists in intensifying the climate of hysteria by using biased, manufactured trends of rising temperatures that were undoubtedly and deliberately created to mislead not only the public but the decision makers who are trying to alleviate the manufactured public fears the IPCC had created.

The reality (of the climate fears that the Copenhagen Summit tried to address) is that what little global warming existed during the 20th century is natural, much less than temperature rises during previous warming periods even throughout recorded history, and therefore had to be greatly exaggerated, so as to enable the IPCC to manufacture concern.

Much of the main-stream media now states that [4] the Copenhagen Climate Summit failed to produce a concrete consensus on what needs to be done to keep the feared global-warming crisis from happening.  That failure hardly matters.  The best solution to a non-existent problem is to have the courage to do nothing. Common sense tells us that we should not try to fix things that are not broken, but with the incessant and escalating propaganda fueling the growing climate hysteria, common sense went out the window a long time ago.

It should be of far greater concern that the Copenhagen Summit failed to provide proof that its primary concern, the fear of run-away global warming, is justified.

For a good number of years now, many bloggers unearthed evidence of temperature-data tampering with respect to many locations in the world.  [5] John Daly (unfortunately deceased in 2004) was one of the earliest involved in those efforts.  Since those early efforts by John Daly and his collaborators, there are now many others who try their best to bring out the truth about the state of climate science, measurements and reconstructions (e. g.: Anthony Watts with [6] his surface-station project and [7] his blog,  Stephen McIntyre and [8] his climate-audit blog, and Christopher Monckton of Brenchley at the [9] Science and Public Policy Institute — check also this [10] summary of the quality and impact of Christopher Monckton’s work).

The Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (UK) is the creator and custodian of adjusted data used in support of the fears manufactured by the IPCC.  The CRU’s global temperature data (and the tactics used to bias that data) are an influential and controlling part of other important temperature data sets  — for example, those produced and published by GHCN (the U.S. Global Historic Climate Network), NOAA (the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and NCDC (the U.S. National Climatic Data Center).

On Nov. 17, 2009, evidence emerged that shows that the data tampering identified by [5] John Daly and his collaborators has been ongoing for at least ten years and is endemic in the climate-warmist community centering on the IPCC.  [12] The resulting climate scandal, dubbed Climategate, originated with the publishing of more than a thousand e-mails involving about a dozen climate researchers out of 26 or so affiliated with the IPCC.  The centre of interest of those e-mails and related files involves Phil Jones, the head of the CRU.  [13] He has now stepped down, while a commission investigates the activities of the CRU.

The [14] e-mails at the root of the climate scandal show a systematic and successful effort to fudge temperature data — world-wide, so as to exaggerate warming trends. Equally deplorable, the e-mails also show collusion in deliberate tampering with the peer-review process, to keep out dissenting voices.

The climate scandal served to intensify the efforts of many parties trying to create a climate of openness, transparency and objectivity in the scientific community using temperature records for climatological research. The climate scandal provided stimulus and motivation for critical examination of instances of CRU data-tampering activities.

The CRU tactics appear to have affected temperature-data records throughout the world.  Amongst the major areas of interest are the Pacific Islands, New Zealand, Australia, and Russia.  The links identified in the following will lead to more details on those areas of evidence of tampering with temperature data records.

How to exaggerate global warming

1. [15] Of Jet Exhaust and Airport Thermometers, Feed The Heat
   December 15, 2009 by E.M.Smith
2. Investigate Magazine
   [16] NZ’s NIWA accused of CRU-style temperature faking
   November 26, 2009
3. [17] The Smoking Gun At Darwin Zero
   December 8, 2009
   by Willis Eschenbach
4. Institute of Economic Analysis
   How warming is made.
   The case of Russia.
   Author: N.A. Pivovarova
   Editor: A.N. Illarionov
   Moscow
   December 2009
   ([18] PDF file, 3.1MB)