Climategate Scandal, An Inconvenient Data Dump … They Threw Away Data that Predictions of Global Warming are Based Upon

File this one under complete and total fraud. How many scientists do you know throw away their original raw data that makes up and supports their hypothesis? Hmm? They were for providing the raw data before they realized they threw it all away.

Classic … the scientists accursed of manipulating climate change data have done a U-Turn and now stated that they will publish the data. The fact that the scandal and the story will not go away has forced the information to be released.

In a statement welcomed by climate change sceptics, the university said it would make all the data accessible as soon as possible, once its Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had negotiated its release from a range of non-publication agreements.

There just is one small issue … They destroyed the data. Yup, that is correct. The data behind the science that formulated global warming is gone. This is becoming absurd and pointing to a major conspiracy and fraud.

University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw data that went to predict global warming. Can everyone just admit that man made global warming is a fabricated fraud! CRU, UEA’s Climatic Research Unit, stated, “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.” You have got to be kidding!

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

No one would destroy such data unless it was “Inconvenient” data to the global warming agenda. More on the data purge from Small Dead Animals.

• Connolley co-author: “Unfortunately we have deleted all the NetCDF files…”
• “Unprecedented” Data Purge At CRU

I second the disbelief of Stop the ACLU in how could one not be able to store this data. How simple is it to do data storage in this day and age? For God sakes, you could have rented a POD. There is no way any one could justify not keeping the raw data that was used to develop global warming models and only maintain the manipulated data. What scientists would do this as typical protocol? So much for the baseline data to compare to.

The destruction of data and the data dump should go over well during Congressional hearings. Politicians always love of good paper shredding of documents.

Tiger Hawk’s comments say it the best when it comes to the issue of man made global warming and what we are supposed to believe. We are supposed to believe these folks because they said so?

So, basically we are being asked to restructure the entire economy of the planet on the say-so of a few “scientists” whose work cannot be verified or even reconstructed. Is there any intellectually honest person who thinks that is a good idea?

There is no good reason to destroy raw data, especially when the entire science of global warming is based upon said data. What a hoax these people have tried to perpetrate on the world.

We like to call it an “Inconvenient” data dump, the Jawa Report refers to it as a Convenient Ruse.