Why is it that whenever climate scientists get caught manipulating figures there are no repercussions? Let’s not kid ourselves. Governments around the world have splurged 100s of billions of TAXPAYER dollars on climate abatement that have been based on research that in numerous cases has been found to involve manipulation. Whichever way we cut it, fraud is fraud.
Take the financial sector as an example. There has been much malfeasance committed in the last few decades that have resulted in humungous penalties.
WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers was sentenced to 25 years based on nine counts of conspiracy, securities fraud and false regulatory filings to the tune of $11bn.
Enron’s former CEO Jeffrey Skilling was convicted on 35 counts of fraud, insider trading and other crimes related to Enron and sentenced to 24 years prison and fined $45 million.
Madoff got 150 years for his $65bn Ponzi scheme, Allen Stanford received 110 years jail for his $7bn fraud.
Yet when the scientific community commits fraudulent offences, they’re not even brought to trial.
Take the UNIPCC which was established by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Panel (UNEP) in 1988.
The Climategate email scandal in 2009 and the Climategate 2.0 in 2011 have shown far less faith internally than what is publicly admitted. They point to multiple cases of bullying dissenters, ignoring information that didn’t fit the narrative and data fudging.
NOAA was subpoenaed after Dr. John Bates, a recently retired principal scientist at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, exposes the Karl study which was used “to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy.”
Dr. Bates whistle blew on the Obama administration’s efforts to push a costly climate agenda at the expense of scientific integrity.
This was fraud. Data was manipulated ahead of the Paris summit. Developed countries committed to a minimum $100bn. The International Justice Initiative at the University of Tasmania, showed that “The total cost for developing countries to implement their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) is more than US$4.4 trillion.”
Bernie Madoff looks a rank amateur compared to the implications caused by a fabricated NOAA publication. NOAA refused to comply with initially polite inquiries to answer whistle blower claims, baselessly arguing that Congress, its employer, was not authorized to request communications from its scientists. Despite a congressional subpoena, NOAA kept ignoring its master. Some 6 months later they begrudgingly attended a committee hearing and were found out. Punishment? Nothing. Zero. Nada.
Perhaps if these same scientists were held to the types of punishment meted out to fraudsters in the financial world, their scientific publications would “cool” (no pun intended) to reveal the truth. Alas until they face significant penalties, the alarmism won’t abate (pun intended).