If The Science Is So Settled, Why Intentionally Hide The Discussion?
Some very interesting, and disturbing, information from the Competitive Enterprise Institution’s Christopher Horner, via Watts Up With That?
Although this is seedy and unlawful at any time, it also goes in the ‘bad timing’ file. Or it’s good timing, depending on one’s perspective.
Just as a brand new book further exposes the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)(which scam I dissected here, and in more disturbing detail here), and on the heels of the weekend surprise of a 2005 memo showing President Obama’s cooling/warming/population zealot of a ‘science czar’ John Holdren is the kind of guy Mitt Romney turns to to develop his ‘environmental’ policies, we’ve exposed the Obama administration and IPCC have cooperated to subvert U.S. transparency laws, run domestically out of Holdren’s White House office.
With this morning’s Freedom of Information Act request, the explaining they have to do must begin by providing the taxpayer certain records regarding – including but not limited to user name and password – for a backchannel ‘cloud’ established to hide IPCC deliberations from FOIA. (snip)
CEI has learned of a UN plan recently put in place to hide official correspondence on non-governmental accounts, which correspondence a federal inspector general has already confirmed are subject to FOIA. This ‘cloud’ serves as a dead-drop of sorts for discussions by U.S. government employees over the next report being produced by the scandal-plagued IPCC, which is funded with millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars.
As our FOIA request details, the UN informed participants that it was motivated by embarrassing releases of earlier discussions (“ClimateGate” key among them), and to circumvent the problem that national government transparency laws were posing the group.
Well, there you have it, the UN and Obama administration are attempting to hide the correspondence around the next IPCC report. which I think we can all agree will be even more alarmist and un-scientific than previous ones. I wonder if it will include the massive greenhouse gas output from all the previous IPCC gatherings, such as the one in exotic Bali, where the attendees arrived in so many private jets that they had to deadhead the planes (fly with no passengers) to another island?
Hey, maybe the next IPCC assessment will recommend that everyone who believes that Man is mostly or solely responsible for a tiny increase in global temperatures practice what the preach. Well, you never know. One can always dream. But, besides the vast amounts of money, including US taxpayer money, that is wasted on these assessments, many politicians use them as their “Bibles” to push for idiotic globull warming legislation (on others). So, hiding the discourse is extremely troubling.
Is there a little something to this “theory”? Well, a little, as methane is certainly a much more potent greenhouse
Will Lassie be the next thing on the Climate Alarmists hit list? The eco-pawprint of a pet dog is twice
This is a fantastic way to get people to come over to the Warmist side Climate-change scepticism must be ‘treated’,