Chris Horner’s Presentation Exposes Evasive Behavior And Deception By The IPCC, Circumvention Of FOIA Laws

Chris Horner made a great presentation at the European Institute For Climate and Energy’s (EIKE) 4th Climate Conference, Munich, in November, 2011. A must-watch, recently posted video!

Hat-tip: Reader DirkH

Horner starts by focusing on the real aim of the green movement, which is to make energy expensive, and so we have to expect fuel poverty in the future to go up. Horner says, “Green jobs will mean pink slips, red ink, and dark times.”

At the 6:40 mark, Horner zooms in on the IPCC, transparency, and the FOIA.

Horner reminds us that the FOIA is an act designed to allow the taxpayer “to know what the government is up to”. But for the IPCC and climate scientists, it represents a real problem that obstructs “the cause”. So the IPCC proceeded to exempt itself from FOIA law and even acted criminally to skirt it, “organising a campaign to obstruct and to delete records” and “creating safehouses to evade FOIA laws,” Horner says.

First (10:10 mark) they used excuses for not disclosing the records, claiming they were “personal, lost, deleted“. In the UK, the excuses were even “getting absurd”. They “organised an effort to delete e-mails”, in a “very deliberate, very thoughtful” way. It “wasn’t rash”. “They really didn’t want these things out.”

At the 21:00 minute mark, Horner sums up the scientists reluctance to release documents, and their scheme to destroy records.

There was an admitted, agreed, written campaign to delete e-mails, to get around, to circumvent FOIA. So that is legally, deliberately and lawyerly drafted.”

Horner said, “The e-mails exposed the Team for the reasons pointed out. They were politicising, they were perverting peer-review. They were perverting the IPCC process. And they were creating falsely tidy stories.” For what? “For the Kyoto cause.”

The inquiries conducted to exonerate the Climategate scientists were whitewashes. They were designed not to find any wrongdoing.

At the 24-minute mark, Horner tells how the IPCC records are public records and how the IPCC was actively dodging FOIA obligations.

FOIA has always been a thorn for the IPCC scientists, who, as Horner shows, had plenty to hide. Much effort was expended to circumvent FOIA requirements.

Horner explains the more recent tactics at the 33.50 mark. For example senior officials were given “handles” to conceal their identities. They ran third party activist websites to make it appear they had support. They set up safehouses at non-governmental websites to circumvent FOIA laws and to keep taxpayers from gaining access to documents.

John Holdren took control of the IPCC process after the president had been innaugurated. Horner shows an IPCC letter from IPCC official Thomas Stocker, who wrote that FOIA problems “require urgent attention in order to meet the challenges of modern methods of working and communication and given the experiences during and since AR4.” He then suggests establishing a “closed electronic discussion fora”.

By October 8, 2010, Horner shows in a slide that “IPCC’s Stocker had in fact already established a ‘closed electronic fora’ for WG1 evading e-mails and national FOI”.

Horner then says the IPCC enlisted to Obama Administration to create offline, non-governmental electronic fora, while stonewalling requests for records. He says:

So the White House Office of Science and Technology policy led a government-wide effort to enable the UN to pull this off, expressly to frustrate national FOIA laws.”

Horner concludes that “there will be fallout, there will be a price to pay. It is the institutions of science that are going to suffer the most.”

By now the readers will ask: “For what?” The answer is: “the cause”.

What is “the cause”?

Recall what Horner said at the beginning of his presentation. As societies get richer, they become more focused on keeping things clean and orderly.

I’ll expand on Horner’s assertion, and add that once a certain level of affluence is reached, the advanced society begins to get individuals who turn radical and intolerant, and eventually view the poor masses as excess population and as a threat to the planet. Think of Holdren, Ehrlich and Schellnhuber who have in one way or another expressed that the ideal human population on the planet is around a mere billion, or less.

Is this “the cause” that these individuals are really alluding to? Indeed some do view the green movement as the latest final solution.

11 responses to “Chris Horner’s Presentation Exposes Evasive Behavior And Deception By The IPCC, Circumvention Of FOIA Laws”

  1. Doug Proctor

    It is beyond difficult to imagine someone holding that the current population is too large without having figured out where the cuts should be. It would be beyond foolish to think that all groups are equal to the cull if you want a technological world in which all share: at present only a portion are upper-first world. Even if you decided on a per-capita, present-day representation, you would be unable to fix the cut. Much of the world would have to be brought “up” to the Green ideal before they could take their proportionate place.

    The Greens, Hansens, Gores seem to make idealistic statements about a concrete event while claiming to be both practical and reasonable. Just like Suzuki and his plea for us to reduce our energy use and carbon “footprint”, while leaving things like air travel and air conditioning undiscussed (For just the rich? would David and Al have to travel economy and car pool? both give up vacation homes?).

    The strategy lacks tactics: you cannot win any war except that of the TV ratings when you have no plan except to say “We have met the enemy and he isn’t us.”

  2. DirkH

    Not an honest bone in the CAGW movement left.

    That makes it so hilarious when someone like Nordhaus refers to the IPCC’s “authority”; Horner and Donna Laframboise show conclusively that there actually is no authority there; it is ALL fakery.

  3. DirkH

    BTW, TWO signs that the EU has reached the end of its wind/solar politics:

    First, the decision of the EU court that the EU commission may not set the number of carbon credits for Poland.

    Second, EU gets a gas spot market!
    http://www.europeanenergyreview.eu/site/pagina.php?id_mailing=264&toegang=d6baf65e0b240ce177cf70da146c8dc8&id=3631
    Russians are angry! Medvedev threatens to only deliver gas when the price is high. Well, that’s exactly how a market works – you’re a supplier, you’re not happy with the price, you don’t offer.

  4. Ulrich Elkmann

    “Green roots in brown soil”: not really a surprise here – it is one of those “open secret” (“they might have known, had they wanted to”): it’s all there in the books, but of course not mentioned by the partisans and fellow travelers (and ost of the true believers have never seen any mention of it.)
    English readers might be interested in the books by Anna Bramwell:

    Bramwell, Anna; Blood and Soil, Richard Walter Darre and Hitler’s ‘Green Party’, Kensall Press, Buckinghamshire, 1985.
    Bramwell, Anna; Ecology in the 20th Century, A History, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1989.
    Bramwell, Anna; The Fading of the Greens, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1994.

    See also:
    http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html

    German readers could start with the chapter on the “green wing of the NSdAP” (pp. 112-17) in “Grüne Utopien in Deutschland” (Green utopias in Germany) by Jost Hermand, Fischer Taschenbuch 10395, Frankfurt 1991.

    1. DirkH

      The usual auto censorship keywords of wordpress… sorts your posts into the spam folder automatically. My comment vanished initially as well. I just rely on Pierre to regularly check the bit bucket…

      1. Ulrich Elkmann

        Thanks, Dirk. Clarke’s Third Law in action: “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”. You only see that that includes goblins, but you don’t see where they hide out eating your message.

  5. Bernd Felsche

    More failures in Germany’s energy market:
    http://www.lz.de/aktuelles/aktuelle_meldungen_aus_der_region/6567461_CDU_Kauf_der_Netze_von_E.ON_birgt_Risiken.html

    E.On is in the red to the tune of billions. They’re trying to sell off subsidiaries but potential buyers appear gun-shy and question the motives.

    Except for the Greens and Left who’ll spend whatever money they can reach in somebody else’s pocket. http://contrary2belief.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/21st-century-thrift/