This email exchange shows how the global warming regime has with full acknowledgement and intent, simply "made up" data to support their scam. As the title says --- this is only the beginning. I expect a congressional investigation will be called, and I would think criminal charges may be filed.

This scam has all the markings of Watergate, Iran/Contra, 9-11=Terrorists=Iraq, 2000 Election, 2004 Election, and Wall Streets repackaged derivatives and swaps. It was all a lie then, and it is all a lie now -------

From: Keith Briffa   k.briffa@uea.ac.uk

To: Malcolm Hughes   mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu

Subject: Re: IN STRICTEST CONFIDENCE

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:28:22 +0100

Cc:  t.m.melvin@uea.ac.uk

I understood that the chronology was published and so thought to compare our RCS version with it if we could produce it in time. We are being accused of not using that chronology in the Science paper- so then asked Anders for it. I am having to start thinking about the Yamal crap (Yamal Peninsula, tree rings and subfossil wood which shows the falsehoods of global warming).

Sorry if you thought I was doing anything without your knowledge - TO BE HONEST ALSO - I actually was not really aware that the data you were producing and that used by Sidorova were one and the same. I assume that we are allowed to use the chronology as published - are we?

Keith: At 16:50 02/10/2009, you wrote:

Dear Keith - I'm really reticent to raise something else, but must. What's going on? 21st September I got an email from Tom (Melvin) that contained the following para, among other more general discussion: "Keith has been complained at by Climate Audit for cherry picking and not using your long Indigirka River data set. Not used because we did not have the data. Please, could we have the data? We will make proper acknowledgement/co-authorship if we use the data."

I replied pretty much straight away thus: "Hi Tom - please find the Esper article in question attached. The so-called Indigirka River data set is not yet available because it has not been published. I am currently working on that with Russian colleagues, and was indeed in Switzerland the week before last to work with one of them on specifically this."

So far, no direct response to this email from Tom (Melvin). This morning I get an email from Anders Moberg, telling me that you had asked him for the "Indigirka data". I've waited a couple of hours before writing this email so as to try to be constructive. To be sure that you understand what that dataset is and is not, please read the attached 2006 Moberg corrigendum. Once again, the actual data are unpublished, in spite of having been discussed in the Russian literature by Siderova et al. A large proportion of the raw data are not yet in the public domain, and so you would not be able to critically evaluate the chronology as a possible climate proxy. Why can that not be said - adequate metadata not available, please see Moberg corrigendum?

By the way, a 600-year reconstruction is available (Hughes et al 1999, also attached), and all those raw data are at the ITRDB. As you know, it is my intention to be friendly, cooperative and open, but I'm determined to get some scientific value from all the years of work I've invested in the Yakutia work, and in cooperation with Russia in general. Releasing these data now would be too much.

Cheers, Malcolm   --

Malcolm K Hughes Regents' Professor Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research The University of Arizona 105 W Stadium Tucson, AZ 85721 USA  tel: +1-520-621-6470 fax: +1-520-621-8229  mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu  http://www.ltrr.arizona.edu/people/8   -- Professor Keith Briffa, Climatic Research Unit University of East Anglia Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K. Phone: +44-1603-593909Fax: +44-1603-507784  http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa

Malcolm K Hughes: http://www.ltrr.arizona.edu/people/8

Keith Trenberth: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/

Tom Melvin: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/melvin/

_________________________

This exchange of emails (which includes James Hansen) shows the global warming regime has actually applied pressure, manipulation, and corruption against news agencies to keep in lock-step with their agenda. Yes, evidenced from the emails below show the BBC has fallen prey to political pressure involved in propagating a scam.

From: Kevin Trenberth trenbert@ucar.edu To: Michael Mann mann@meteo.psu.edu Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:57:37 -0600 Cc: Stephen H Schneider shs@stanford.edu, Myles Allen allen@atm.ox.ac.uk, peter stott peter.stott@metoffice.gov.uk, "Philip D. Jones" p.jones@uea.ac.uk, Benjamin Santer santer1@llnl.gov, Tom Wigley wigley@ucar.edu, Thomas R Karl Thomas.R.Karl@noaa.gov, Gavin Schmidt gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov, James Hansen jhansen@giss.nasa.gov, Michael Oppenheimer omichael@Princeton.EDU  

Hi all,  

Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low. This is January weather (see the Rockies  baseball playoff game was canceled on saturday and then played last night in below freezing weather). Trenberth, K. E., 2009: An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth's global energy. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability,1,19-27, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.06.001. [1][PDF] (A PDF of the published version can be obtained   from the author.)

The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate. That said there is a LOT of nonsense about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation). People like CPC (Climate Prediction Center) are tracking PDO on a monthly basis but it is highly correlated with ENSO. Most of what they are seeing is the change in ENSO not real PDO. It surely isn't decadal. The PDO is already reversing with the switch to El Nino. The PDO index became positive in September for first time since Sept 2007.  Click Here