Special thanks to the UK Telegraph for breaking this story.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100020126/climategate-goes-serial-now-the-russians-confirm-that-uk-climate-scientists-manipulated-data-to-exaggerate-global-warming/

Climategate just got much, much bigger. And all thanks to the Russians who, with perfect timing, dropped this bombshell just as the world’s leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing us all back to the dark ages.

Feast your eyes on this news release from Rionovosta, via the Ria Novosti agency, posted on Icecap. (Hat Tip: Richard North)

A discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as “Climategate,” continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.

The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.

Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.

Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world’s land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.

What the Russians are suggesting here, in other words, is that the entire global temperature record used by the IPCC to inform world government policy is a crock.

As Richard North says: This is serial.

UPDATE: As Steve McIntyre reports at ClimateAudit, it has long been suspected that the CRU had been playing especially fast and loose with Russian – more particularly Siberian – temperature records. Here from March 2004, is an email from Phil Jones to Michael Mann.

Recently rejected two papers (one for JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it
wrong over Siberia. Went to town in both reviews, hopefully successfully. If either
appears
I will be very surprised, but you never know with GRL.
Cheers
Phil

And here at Watts Up With That is a guest post by Jeff Id of the Air Vent

And here is what one of the commenters has to say about the way the data has been cherry-picked and skewed for political ends:

The crux of the argument is that the CRU cherry picked data following the same methods that have been done everywhere else. They ignored data covering 40% of Russia and chose data that showed a warming trend over statistically preferable alternatives when available. They ignored completeness of data, preferred urban data, strongly preferred data from stations that relocated, ignored length of data set.

One the final page, there is a chart that shows that CRU’s selective use of 25% of the data created 0.64C more warming than simply using all of the raw data would have done. The complete set of data show 1.4C rise since 1860, the CRU set shows 2.06C rise over the same period.

Not, of course, dear readers that I’m in any way tempted to crow about these latest revelations. After all, so many of my colleagues, junior and senior, have been backing me on this one to the hilt….

Oh, if anyone speaks Russian, here’s the full report. (http://www.iea.ru/article/kioto_order/15.12.2009.pdf)

In journalism, as in law for that matter, the impeccable and irreproachable credibility of one's source is the #1 rule. Your whole argument will stand, or will be voraciously discarded.

Although you cannot be faulted for the enthusiasm you have shown on this topic, you are failing to meet the #1 rule with this 'russian' source my friend.

Ria Novosti is a propaganda outlet: it is not a reputable source for scientific information, or any other information.

Propaganda, whether home-made or foreign, is propaganda, and is certainly not credible.

Back to rule #1. :)

This is all nothing but a Russian ruse. They want you believe that global warming is not real and in the meantime, they are taking over the northwest passage and the artic.




http://www.cargobusinessnews.com/Nov09/arctic_jockeys.html


Global players jockey over Arctic shipping routes

By Alison Bate

On Monday, September 7, two German heavy lift ships dropped anchor at Novyy Port after a historic trip, transiting the legendary Northeast Passage over the top of Russia.

After discharging 44 cargo modules in the Siberian outpost, the MV Beluga Fraternity and Beluga Foresight sailed on toward Rotterdam with the remaining 3,500 tons of construction materials.

The ships left Ulsan, South Korea in late July; and although accompanied by Russian icebreakers for part of the journey, only met small icebergs, ice fields and ice floes on what used to be an impenetrable route.

Traditionally, these ships would have traveled from Korea through the Suez Canal, into the Mediterranean and finally the Atlantic­, roughly 3,000 nautical miles longer than using the Northeast Passage or so-called Northern Sea Route.

As commercial trips like these become more common due to global warming, the world¹s major players are jockeying for
position to exploit the Arctic for their own interests.

Geopolitical, economic and environmental issues are all at stake, not to mention changes to the way of life of those living in the Arctic. The five Arctic nations include Canada, the U.S. (Alaska), Russia, Norway and Denmark (Greenland), but other countries such as China are also hovering nearby.

The Canadian Navy’s Commander of Maritime Forces Pacific discussed these thorny issues at the recent Association of Canadian Port Authorities conference in Prince Rupert, B.C.

Rear Admiral Tyrone Pile said that while Canada’s government has pledged to build more ships and increase its Arctic
infrastructure, very little has actually happened. Meanwhile, Russia is investing billions of dollars into its Arctic ports infrastructure, as well as its military capability.

“We (Canadians) aspire to be an Arctic nation, but Russia is,” he said. “Why are we not paying attention to the Arctic?”

China is also engaged, renting space from Norway for a permanent ice weather station in the Arctic, sending research ships for the last eight years, and now developing icebreaker ships.

In the U.S., Sen. Lisa Murkowski from Alaska is also concerned and has introduced a bill, the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment Implementation Act of 2009, to improve shipping safety and include funding for navigational aides, vessel tracking, oil-spill
response, search and rescue capabilities and icebreaking escorts.

At the Prince Rupert conference, Pile showed pictures of the Arctic icecap in 2001 and 2007, noting that one-third of the ice had disappeared in just six years, Of the three possible shipping routes, the Northern Sea Route over Russia would be the first one to truly open up, he suggested.

The second route, through Canada’s Northwest Passage, opened up for the first time in 2007, but its potential is a bit of a red
herring, according to Pile. “It’s difficult to get through; more like a backroad detour,” he said. The third route, the Trans-Polar, will be the last to open up.

Pile said the Arctic is also attracting attention because of its vast untapped amounts of oil, gas, gold, zinc, and other minerals. A U.S. Geological Survey report in 2008 estimated that the Arctic has about 13 per cent of the world¹s undiscovered oil; 30 per cent of the undiscovered natural gas; and 20 per cent of the undiscovered natural gas liquids. More fish are also likely to migrate north, due to global warming.

Pile didn¹t discuss the legal issues, but ownership of the Arctic waters is hotly disputed, and a fascinating race against time is under way.

Under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), each country controls resources up to 200 nautical miles offshore, but its territory can be expanded if it can prove that underwater ridges and rock formations are connected to its continental shelf.

Russia, Norway and Denmark have already made submissions, while Canada has until 2013 to submit its scientific data. The U.S. has not signed on to UNCLOS, but is working with Canada to locate the outer edge of the North American continental shelf.

For the second summer in a row, scientists on board the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Healy have been mapping the Arctic seafloor with their counterparts on board the Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker Louis S. St-Laurent.

Despite working together, the two countries are at odds over who owns the Northwest Passage. Canada claims that the seasonal shipping lane is internal Canadian waters while the U.S. and others argue that it is an international strait. The U.S. and
Canada also disagree on how the border should extend into the ocean between Alaska and the Yukon.

However, while some Canadians view the U.S. as a danger to their sovereignty, Pile doesn¹t see it that way. “We will present our views, but we aren¹t going to go to war over that,” he said in an interview. “It’s in both our interests to work together in the Arctic.”

Thanks '1956'!!!

From my post above yours, I was going to follow through with the obvious 'MOTIVES' behind Russia plan's in general, and Ria Novosti's propaganda in particular, vowed at derailing the climate change consensus.

And here you were, having done it better than I would have myself.

Yup. There's more out there on this too. Global warming/climate change will de-stabilize the world and we will probably end up in a few wars over this.

This was posted on an Alaskan Freight Shipping News site:



Canada asserts sovereignty over Northwest Passage

Northwest Passage through the Arctic Archipelago. Both Canada and the United States plan to increase their military presence in the Arctic. Canada´s Prime Minister stated that his country will "assert our sovereignty" over what the United States claims as international waters. Canada will spend 7.4 billion on eight new ships to patrol the region while the U.S. Navy is expected to also add to its fleet in the Arctic.

Due to global warming and the melting of the arctic ice, the Northwest Passage, through the Arctic, offers an attractive alternative to the Panama Canal, saving commercial thousands of miles between Asia and Europe. The Arctic is also estimated to hold nearly 25 percent of Earth´s undiscovered oil and natural gas.

The Northwest Passage runs from the Pacific through the Bering Strait, north of Alaska and east to the Atlantic Ocean.

In journalism, as in law for that matter, the impeccable and irreproachable credibility of one's source is the #1 rule. Your whole argument will stand, or will be voraciously discarded.

Although you cannot be faulted for the enthusiasm you have shown on this topic, you are failing to meet the #1 rule with this 'russian' source my friend.

Ria Novosti is a propaganda outlet: it is not a reputable source for scientific information, or any other information.

Propaganda, whether home-made or foreign, is propaganda, and is certainly not credible.

Back to rule #1. :)



If your standard is rule #1, then the MSM can't be trusted either, as it breaks this rule routinely.

They said AGW is not real, not GW. Warming is cyclical and beyond our control as Earth is a closed system.

So what's your point?

Yeah,
A few years ago I posted a thread on here about Canada warning the US Navy not to intercede into their territorial waters.
The US was up in the NW Passage surveying for oil.

The biggest losers in a UN climate treaty are the Energy Companies. Most scientist, I believe, follow ethical scientific reporting. However, there are always a few who are willing to sale their reputations and ethics for the right price.

Fail to see your point about MSM ???

If it the source of my post that you question, I invite you to read this insightful article from 'FP' (FOREIGN POLICY is published by the Slate Group, a division of Washington Post - Newsweek Interactive, LLC, reputed as highly credible)

http://neteffect.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/05/09/kremlins_quest_for_pravda_20


In the meantime, here is the excerpt supporting the comment I made: 'Ria Novosti', a propaganda machine:

'... However, the Kremlin's spin doctors seem to have learnt their lessons in last year's war with Georgia. This is the only way to explain a recent decision by the Russian government (article in Russian) to increase its spending on propaganda - most of it on the international level - bringing its total investment in propaganda-related activities to 1.4 billion USD, which is a 33% increase compared to last year. The increase looks even more staggering in the sector of online-only media : their budgets would grow by whopping 75%. Who said Russia was suffering from the financial crisis?

Much of this money would go to the Kremlin's news strongholds like "RIA Novosti" and "ITAR-TASS, who would see their budgets almost double...' (end of excerpt)

If that is not the basis for a propaganda machine, ... don't know what would be.

Sounds like the Russian version of Media Research Center.

L. Brent Bozell III is the founder and President of the Media Research Center, which calls itself a conservative media watchdog organization; and founder and former President of the Parents Television Council, which his Townhall.com biographical note describes as "the only Hollywood-based organization dedicated to restoring responsibility to the entertainment industry."

"In June 1998, Mr. Bozell launched the Conservative Communications Center (C3) to provide the conservative movement with the marketing and public relations tools necessary to deliver its message into the 21st century. C3's online news division, the Cybercast News Service at www.CNSNews.com, has become a major internet news source with a full staff of journalists in its Washington, DC metro bureau, and operates bureaus in London and Jerusalem, with other correspondents around the world," his biographical note states.

"Bozell is a nationally syndicated writer whose work has appeared in a wide range of publications.

Bozell is Executive Director of the Conservative Victory Committee (CVC), "an independent multi-candidate political action committee that has helped elect dozens of conservative candidates over the past ten years. He was National Finance Chairman for the 1992 Buchanan for President campaign, and Finance Director and later President of the former National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC). He currently belongs to the Council for National Policy (CNP) and sits on the Board of Directors of the American Conservative Union (ACU)," his biographical note states.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Brent_Bozell

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/Discoveries/2009/1010/biggest-news-youve-never-heard-earth-isnt-warming