What are we supposed to make of this info?

From: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>

To: ray bradley <rbradley@geo.umass.edu>,mann@virginia.edu, mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu

Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk,t.osborn@uea.ac.uk

Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow.
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 Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land  N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.

Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit
Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences
Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich
Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK

According to Wiki, Phil Jones “is a climatologist at the University of East Anglia, notable for maintaining of the time series of the instrumental temperature record ; this work figured prominently in the IPCC TAR SPM.”  It was the IPCC Summary for Policymakers of the Third Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was the basis for not only the IPCC and Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize, but is the guts for “An Inconvenient Truth“, as well of course, as the basis for Obama’s Cap and Trade program.

So far, not a single one of them has addressed the fact that the basis for all their claims is a fraud.  Obama is ready to tax the air you breathe based on this fraud and not one Democrat is willing to question what’s happened.