Climategate's "Harry Read Me" File is a Must Read!

As another pundit said: this isn't just the smoking gun pointing to the fraud of global warming, it's a mushroom cloud!

As researchers around the world report on their findings in the hacked emails from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Britain you often hear references to the infamous "Harry Read Me" file. The entire file, 247 pages long, is an encyclopedia chronicling the absolute mess that temperature records, upon which much global warming theory is based, are in.

Thanks to Monica for directing me to the following story in the Toronto Sun:

'Botch after botch after botch'
Leaked 'climategate' documents show huge flaws in the backbone of climate change science
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN
Toronto Sun
29th November 2009

...The file -- 274 pages long -- describes the efforts of a climatologist/programmer at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia to update a huge statistical database (11,000 files) of important climate data between 2006 and 2009.

The computer coding, along with the programmer's apparently unsuccessful efforts to complete the project, involve data that are the foundation of the study of climate change -- recordings from hundreds of weather stations around the world of temperature and precipitation measurements from 1901 to 2006, sun/cloud computer simulations, and the like.
...
The CRU at East Anglia University is considered by many as the world's leading climate research agency. Here's how CBSNews.com's Declan McCullagh describes its enormous impact on policymakers:

"In global warming circles, the CRU wields outsize influence: It claims the world's largest temperature data set, and its work and mathematical models were incorporated into the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 report. The report ... is what the Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged it 'relies on most heavily' when concluding carbon dioxide emissions endanger public health and should be regulated."

As you read the programmer's comments below, remember, this is only a fraction of what he says.

- "But what are all those monthly files? DON'T KNOW, UNDOCUMENTED. Wherever I look, there are data files, no info about what they are other than their names. And that's useless ..." (Page 17)

- "It's botch after botch after botch." (18)

- "The biggest immediate problem was the loss of an hour's edits to the program, when the network died ... no explanation from anyone, I hope it's not a return to last year's troubles ... This surely is the worst project I've ever attempted. Eeeek." (31)

- "Oh, GOD, if I could start this project again and actually argue the case for junking the inherited program suite." (37)

- "... this should all have been rewritten from scratch a year ago!" (45)

- "Am I the first person to attempt to get the CRU databases in working order?!!" (47)

- "As far as I can see, this renders the (weather) station counts totally meaningless." (57)

- "COBAR AIRPORT AWS (data from an Australian weather station) cannot start in 1962, it didn't open until 1993!" (71)

- "What the hell is supposed to happen here? Oh yeah -- there is no 'supposed,' I can make it up. So I have : - )" (98)

- "You can't imagine what this has cost me -- to actually allow the operator to assign false WMO (World Meteorological Organization) codes!! But what else is there in such situations? Especially when dealing with a 'Master' database of dubious provenance ..." (98)

- "So with a somewhat cynical shrug, I added the nuclear option -- to match every WMO possible, and turn the rest into new stations ... In other words what CRU usually do. It will allow bad databases to pass unnoticed, and good databases to become bad ..." (98-9)

- "OH F--- THIS. It's Sunday evening, I've worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done, I'm hitting yet another problem that's based on the hopeless state of our databases." (241).

- "This whole project is SUCH A MESS ..." (266)

The Devil's Kitchen calls this "data horribilia" and rightly so. Lorrie Goldstein concludes her piece by saying what many of us have over the years: "And based on stuff like this, politicians are going to blow up our economy and lower our standard of living to "fix" the climate? Are they insane?"

Canadian blogger Small Dead Animals has also been covering the story in detail with a number of excellent resources.

UN Digs In

Meanwhile, over at the United Nations, an organization which stands to rake in billions if the Warmers agenda for global warming is enacted, they are digging in for a fight:

Leaked emails won't harm UN climate body, says chairman Rajendra Pachauri says there is 'virtually no possibility' of a few scientists biasing IPCC's advice, after UAE hacking breach
By James Randerson
Guardian.co.uk,
Sunday 29 November 2009

[Mike's note: Would YOU trust this guy?]

There is "virtually no possibility" of a few scientists biasing the advice given to governments by the UN's top global warming body, its chair said today.

Rajendra Pachauri defended the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the wake of apparent suggestions in emails between climate scientists at the University of East Anglia that they had prevented work they did not agree with from being included in the panel's fourth assessment report, which was published in 2007.

The emails were made public this month after a hacker illegally obtained them from servers at the university.

Pachauri said the large number of contributors and rigorous peer review mechanism adopted by the IPCC meant that any bias would be rapidly uncovered.

"The processes in the IPCC are so robust, so inclusive, that even if an author or two has a particular bias it is completely unlikely that bias will find its way into the IPCC report," he said.

What absolute bunk! From the very beginning of the global warming story we've seen example after example which confirms how the UN climate panel process has been corrupted. The hacked emails simply confirm what we have known all along. This isn't about science, it's about money and power.

What we are likely to find is that the mess at CRU-East Anglia is also replicated at the other big Warmer data factories since their conclusions are all very similar. The only way to be sure is to have an open and transparent investigation of ALL the major data centers doing this work in the United States, Great Britain and elsewhere.

There is absolutely no reason to proceed with any further world plans to address global warming with this kind of doubt, corruption and incompetence on such full display!