Tag Archives: Corruption

Climate Research Unit servers hacked, e-mails made public

Story here are Watts Up With That. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

The details on this are still sketchy, we’ll probably never know what went on. But it appears that University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit has been hacked and many many files have been released by the hacker or person unknown.

This e-mail is one of the ones released:

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@[snipped], mhughes@
[snipped]
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@[snipped],t.osborn@[snipped]
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,

Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow. I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd [sic] from1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.

Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers, Phil
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit

I wonder how they will explain that.

Hot Air is reporting that CRU admits that these e-mails are genuine:

Controversy has exploded onto the Internet after a major global-warming advocacy center in the UK had its e-mail system hacked and the data published on line.  The director of the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit confirmed that the e-mails are genuine — and Australian publication Investigate and the Australian Herald-Sun report that those e-mails expose a conspiracy to hide detrimental information from the public that argues against global warming.

The Hot Air link has more very suspicious langugage.

Related posts

How unions lobby Democrats to prevent competition and raise consumer prices

This video from Reason.tv that ECM found at Big Government explains how unions destroy competition by using political contributions to Democrats. Competition is achieved when consumers like you and me have choices in the marketplace. Without choices, one company (or the government) has a monopoly, and can deliver low quality for a high price – and there is nothing you can do about it.

Here’s the video:

And here’s the blurb:

You may have heard the UPS is in quite the political fight with FEDEX. Though both are package-delivery companies, they’re governed by totally different federal labor rules. As a result, UPS’s workforce is much more heavily unionized than FEDEX’s-and more than twice as expensive.

So now UPS is trying to get FEDEX reclassified under federal law as a way of screwing a competitor.

Unions are major, major donors to the Democrat party, and they want to make sure that you have no choice at all about how you spend your money. And that includes government-run education!

And of course, removing competition is only one thing unions do to raise consumer prices – they also advocate for tariffs, which also makes you and I pay more for consumer goods. Unions are against consumer rights.

Democrats planning government regulation of more large companies

Story from Investor’s Business Daily.  (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Washington is quietly preparing a hostile takeover of Wall Street with a new bill that would put regulators in control of managing asset prices.

While all eyes are fixed on the cobra poised to strike the health care industry, a python is wending its way through Hill banking panels that would squeeze the life from the whole economy.

By Christmas, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank hopes to pass legislation that would create an uber-regulatory body called the Financial Services Oversight Council.

It would give the Treasury secretary power to pick which large finance firms are “systemically critical,” or too big to fail. He’d have the final call when the government steps in to save or unwind a troubled firm.

The bill would “essentially turn over control of the financial system to the government and seriously impair competition in all areas of finance,” says former Treasury official Peter J. Wallison. It would put the government permanently in the business of picking winners and losers, he adds, creating a kind of permanent TARP.

[…]The new regulatory agency can regulate banks, bank holding companies, insurance companies, hedge funds, finance companies and any other kind of company that might be designated too big to fail.

“The existence of these designated companies will impair competition in every market they are allowed to enter,” says Wallison, “and will force the consolidation of competitors so that markets become dominated by government-backed giants like themselves.”

Under the new regime, designated companies will not be able to finance their affiliates’ sales, putting them at a severe disadvantage against foreign competitors. GE Capital, for example, would not be able to finance GE sales of aircraft engines.

In effect, designated companies will fall under the control of the feds, unable to start new activities or enter new markets or perhaps even open new offices without federal approval. “This is a degree of political control of business that has never been attempted before,” Wallison says.

When government gets involved in business, business must turn around and direct money toward influencing politicians through political contributions. And that causes them to spend less money hiring workers and producing goods, unless they avoid the regulations completely by shipping their operations, and jobs, overseas. Democrats cause firms to outsource by interfering in the free market.

My previous post explained how government regulation of business caused the recession that Obama is prolonging right now.