This is a twitpic of the first page of a Google search result using the search terms 'TallBloke+Climategate 2.0' http://twitpic.com/7i1afx

The twitpic can be made to display full screen by hovering the mouse over the top of the picture then clicking the 'full screen' option that displays.

Time of search is shown top right of screen.

Ambit Gambit now second result, but Business Insider still top result.

Well I've read enough now to know, with absolutely no doubt, that many of the warmist "scientists" knew damn well that much that was being promoted as 95% sure, was totally wrong.

They also knew that they had virtually nothing that proved, or even confidently supported the AGW theory.

That they knew this, & continued to help governments waste billions of our money shows just what they are. I doubt there is a single skerrick of honesty among the lot of them.

I do think that a few of them did believe their cause, but were so dishonest that they would use any means to get control of the agenda, & outcome.

Anyone who believes that Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull & the rest of them have not been given "behind closed doors" briefings on the real state of climate science, & any doubtful possibility of a global warming catastrophe, or even problem, is a bloody idiot.

That we have some very nice people who post on here, who have been taken in by these barefaced liars, both in climate science & politics is obvious, & perhaps defines how nice they are.

I can only hope that they put the effort into reading this explosive stuff, see how they have been deceived, & come to a logical conclusion.

Now is the time for all those in the science community, who know damn well the whole thing is concoction, to screw their little courage into a ball, & come out & say so. If they don't they deserve to be forever damned, & "science" to be treated as a bureaucratic con, peopled by worthless nonentities.

Hasbeen

If the people of Australia are stupid enough to re elect this incompetent and deceitful mob we deserve everything we get. They never have been interested in truth so why should they start now. They endorse union money being spent on prostitutes and sit by watching boat people drown through their pig headedness. Pointless appealing to morality or truth with this mob. They have run up debt at the rate of knots and are now going to blame Abbott for not fulfilling another promise of getting the budget in surplus. Mr Abbott should not of jumped on the political bandwagon when it comes to the gw fairytale. He has also displayed dishonesty.

Well come to our new poster.
A few points of interest for you.
No well informed poster would blame Gillard the lost for a world theory on climate change.
Interesting you think the tax is impeding the growth of your tomatoes.
Mine are quite advanced want a few?
Yes most unlike summer, wounder if it will be like summer when summer gets here.
OUG mate,attention please.
It is the shadow finance minister, not Labor, who says yes they have to FIND 70 BILLION dollars in cuts.
To FUND THEIR SPENDING.
I now enter in my funny stuff book, the under standing tomatoes grow slower under a carbon tax along side curtains fade in daylight saving, cows milk less, and the Sun is to hot at bed time.
PS
My sarcasm, not closely based on truth, is some thing I stole from the temporary leader of the opposition Tony the phony Abbott.
A tip.
Watch Tony closely, you can, always, tell if he is about to lie, his lips begin to move.

So much depends upon the asking of the right question, doesn't it?

`

Here's what I think might be one such, from the TallBloke website:

"[2007] What if climate change appears to be
just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation?
They’ll kill us probably [...]
<2267> Wilson:"

The reason I seemingly cherrypick this Climategate 2.0 email is that it called to mind a multidecadal fluctuation in relation to rainfall in SE Queensland revealed in this post ( http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5616#75114 ) to the comments thread to OLO article author Peter Ravenscroft's 'What's a bone-dry city worth?' http://onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5616 , in March 2007. The actual source was an article by Peter Ravenscroft to the Brisbane Institute dated 16 February 2006, to which I provided this link:
http://www.brisinst.org.au/resources/brisbane_institute_water_crisis.html

It appears this link has become subject to link rot. The Brisbane Institute may have taken the article down. It would not surprise me if the Institute was politically pressured to do so, as the linked article may have constituted damning evidence as to the unwisdom of the cancellation of the Wolfdene Dam project in 1990 and the attempt to make the Wivenhoe flood-mitigation dam double as a storage dam, witness the January 2011 Brisbane flood.

Peter Ravenscroft's BI article contained an illustration, 'The Underlying Pattern', a graph of Brisbane rainfall 1840-2004. Government, both Federal and State, or at least the senior water supply engineers they sacked in 1990, would almost certainly have known of this multidecadal fluctuation.

Just wondering whether GrahamY can use his influence with a major sponsor of OLO to have Ravenscroft's BI article reposted, or have Peter Ravenscroft republish it on OLO ?

`

Climate change in the service of politics.

`

Brought to you by an old has-been and the bleeding edge vehicle of the blogosphere, LSS Palindromic Enterprise*, as a possible concrete example of what the TallBloke site has revealed in generality to the public at large.

`

*http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4829#128779 explains. See, I have used the Author Index!

Belly it was you who introduced Australian politics to this thread. Garum Masala's not blamed the poor tomato growth on the tax, just highlighted the view that the weather has not exactly fulfilled the predictions.

I think that you protest just a little too much.

Some are clearly using the threat of AGW to push other agenda's and are prepared to lie, intimidate and exaggerate to support those agenda's which include the wealth/poverty redistribution which makes up the backbone of that new tax that's not a tax.

Some of the deniers are just as willing to lie and intimidate to deny any possibility that mankind could be influencing the climate.

What is clear is that a lot of money is being channelled into activities which on the face of it have little likely hood of making any real difference to CO2 emissions and that there has been enough spin and lies exposed from the highest levels of "The science is settled" camp that we should be asking some hard questions and ensuring that the things we do are actually likely to mitigate the risk rather than serve the interests of those mostly interested changing the lifestyles of others.

R0ber