Climategate: How "scientists" falsified results, manipulated data, withheld data and sabotaged the work of real climate scientists

Fifteen years ago, leaked emails revealed that representatives of the climate hysterical scene disguised as "scientists" (including Philip D. "Phil" Jones, Michael E. "Mike" Mann, James E. Hansen) were working together to falsify "results", manipulate, conceal and ultimately destroy data, and sabotage and suppress the publication of the work of real climate scientists.

In this way, they tried to portray our current climate optimum, which brought humanity an explosion of prosperity and progress in the form of the Industrial Revolution after the centuries-long misery of the Little Ice Age, as historically unprecedented and therefore catastrophic. None of this is true!

If the claims of these impeccable ideologues were true, they would not have had to cheat and violate existing laws. Anyone interested in the hair-raising details of this scandal will find a small selection of press reports from that time below. The press in the Anglo-Saxon countries was particularly active in the investigative work, while local journalists reported reluctantly and in a very abbreviated or distorted manner, always trying to gloss over or trivialize the large-scale fraud or even to deny its existence completely. A good introduction to the topic is provided by a retrospective Focus article, which can be found at the top of the page. [1 – 12]

Anyone who is wondering why the German media, despite "Climategate", still provides a platform for the climate alarmist milieu and continues to systematically and contrary-to-factly deceive their audience will probably find a recently published study enlightening, which shows that the overwhelming majority of German (pseudo-)journalists are Greens or Leftists. [13]

Their behavior over the years since then clearly demonstrates that members of this professional group are not trustworthy - in fact, they continue to behave in exactly the same way as the Climategate protagonists of the time, by notoriously lying and deliberately omitting facts that are important for classification. Attentive subscribers to this site may have noticed the name Michael E. "Mike" Mann at the beginning: He is the creator of the notorious misrepresentation of the climate hysteria movement, the so-called "hockey stick."

"Creator" is an apt description in this respect, because his creation has been repeatedly exposed by high-quality scientific publications as the bizarrely false result of either incredible incompetence in the application of statistical methods (keyword: principal component analysis) or criminal intent. His program produces "hockey sticks" even when fed with specially prepared random data.

Recently, he has sabotaged the work of serious climate researchers in the most despicable way by initiating and orchestrating defamation campaigns against them by left-wing media such as the British Guardian; he is of course aware that he could never stand up to them on a professional level. For the sake of simplicity, we refer you to the relevant article on this topic. [14, 15]

The complete, annotated collection of Climategate emails can be found at [16].
Link [17] leads to an article that deals with the significantly warmer and in some cases considerably more rapidly occurring climate optima of the past.

Sources:
[1] – 10 years ago: «ClimateGate».
What happened? On November 19, a link to a Russian server appeared on the relatively insignificant climate skeptic blog "Air Vent". The server contained files that unknown persons had copied from the server of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. Over 3000 internal emails and 72 files were suddenly publicly available on the Internet. It was quickly assumed that they had been hacked. The real scandal, however, is not the data theft, but the content of the emails, the authenticity of which has since been confirmed by the institute's director, Phil Jones.
He has since resigned from his post. In the emails, prominent climate researchers discuss how they deal with critics, how data sets are changed to fit the official theory, and how critical journalists should be boycotted.
An outcry then went through the Anglo-Saxon press. The Washington Times' editorial, under the headline "The Global Cooling Cover-up," stated: "The Climategate revelations have exposed an unprecedented coordinated attempt by academics to distort research results for political purposes."
[...]
German scientists from the government-affiliated Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, such as Stephan Rahmstorff, who appears several times in the emails, play key roles in the IPCC.
Apart from the "Welt", no national newspaper in this country has devoted itself to the scandal in any detail. There is only occasional mention of a hacker attack and some unfortunate wording, which does not prove anything.
The explosive nature of the case is due to the enormous importance of the British institute. Climate Research Unit (also known as Hadley CRU) is one of only four institutes worldwide that provide the IPCC with "official" temperature data.
An email from none other than the director of the institute, Phil Jones, has become sadly famous. In it, he writes to a colleague: «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 from 1961 for Keiths to hide the decline.» In German: «I have just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temperatures to each (data) series for the last 20 years... to hide the (temperature) decline.»
The excuses of the global warming faction: The quote was taken out of context. A trick does not necessarily mean something bad, it is more of a scientific trick that is being used. And what is meant by "hide the decline" cannot be explained. However, there are essentially only two translations for "hide": concealing and hiding. That could be the headline not only for the Watergate affair, but also for the ClimateGate affair. A good portion of the emails are about making data disappear.
https://www.focus.de/wissen/klima/klimapolitik/skandal-um-manipulierte-daten-klimagate_id_1900259.html

[2] - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-15840562

[3] – Climategate U-turn as scientist at center of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995
– Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing
– There has been no global warming since 1995
– Warming periods have happened before – but NOT due to man-made changes
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

[4] - https://www.thetimes.com/article/archive-the-great-climate-change-science-scandal-xqj6k086psk

[5] – Climate change data dumped
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.
https://globalgrind.com/153656/climate-change-data-dumped-times-online/

[6] – Tricked? Climate researcher Jones resigns from office
https://www.welt.de/wissenschaft/article5404435/Getrickst-Klimaforscher-Jones-laesst-Amt-ruhen.html

[7] – Investigation of stolen emails – climate researchers illegally suppressed information
https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/untersuchung-geklauter-e-mails-klimaforscher-unterdrueckten-unerlaubt-informationen-a-674578.html

[8] – Leaked climate change emails scientist 'hid' data flaws
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/01/leaked-emails-climate-jones-chinese

[9] – Dramatized representation – Hans von Storch on the Copenhagen climate summit, hacked data and the battle between climate sceptics and alarmists
https://www.spektrum.de/news/dramatisierte-darstellung/1015637

[10] – Climategate – The Smoking Code, part 2
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/05/the-smoking-code-part-2/

[11] – Allegations Surface Regarding NASA Climate Data Manipulation
https://nasawatch.com/earth-science/allegations-surface-regarding-nasa-climate-data-manipulation/

[12] – Climategate, the sequel: How we are STILL being tricked with flawed data on global warming
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11367272/Climategate-the-sequel-How-we-are-STILL-being-tricked-with-flawed-data-on-global-warming.html

[13] – According to the long-term study "Journalism and Democracy" 2024, 41 percent of the 525 journalists surveyed in Germany said they were close to the Greens. The second highest value, 23 percent, goes to the answer "no party". This is followed by the SPD (16 percent), the CDU (8 percent), the Left (6 percent), the FDP (3 percent), another party (2 percent) and the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) with one percent.
https://www.welt.de/kultur/medien/article254239436/Studie-Unter-Journalisten-kommen-die-Gruenen-auf-41-Prozent-AfD-taucht-gar-nicht-auf.html

[14] – Topic Hockeystick:
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=835705545409419&set=a.571379211842055

[15] - https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/think-of-the-implications-of-publishing?utm_source=publication-search

[16] – Complete, partly annotated collection of Climategate emails (as PDF):
https://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/greenhouse-science/climate-change/climategate-emails.pdf